Comments on: Service Response Discussion: Commons

By: Cheri Remington

Cheri Remington — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 17:40:49 +0000

There is a concept known as “The Third Place” that was described by Ray Oldenburg in his monograph, The Great, Good Place. In my opinion, this is a very close description of the sort of community libraries wish to develop. The third place is the place, other than home and work where people congregate and feel at home.

By: Jean Langley

Jean Langley — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 15:15:26 +0000

To play devil’s advocate, if “Commons” can be interpreted as a dining room or campus square, then “Community Center” has connotations of ping pong tables and pool tables. I actually liked the word “Commons,” but it may not have meaning in all parts of the country and in bigger communities. (In New England, a town commons does evoke the idea of people coming together.) “Village” anything — no. “Public Spaces” is better, but connotes outdoor areas (though libraries do have them) and areas without purpose. I like the word “community.” How about “Community Place?”
While I’m quibbling about semantics, the general public doesn’t seem to get what we mean by “virtual.”

By: PLA Blog » Blog Archive » PLA Service Responses discussion summary, plus deadline extended

Fri, 20 Oct 2006 19:26:49 +0000

[...] Commons (6 comments) [...]

By: Martina Kominiarek

Martina Kominiarek — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 02:34:43 +0000

Community Center is easy to understand and conceptualize and open-ended enough to incorporate activities that relate to this role, including informal use of the library as a destination, formal programming, outside meeting room use, and electronic community-building. We don’t want to be too fuzzy in any service response but it seems valid that any activity that results in the gathering of like-minded people for interaction would fit. I am not sure that our role as a place for solo quiet study fits here (but also not sure where else it would fit.) Most conversations I’ve had with both library professionals and community members about the term “Commons” have been to define the meaning of the term as an end goal and by the time we’ve defined it there’s not enough time left to figure out what it means as a library service (i.e. a means to an end).

By: Metta Lansdale

Metta Lansdale — Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:19:21 +0000

I encourage the use of the term “Community Center” as the contemporary view of the public library. My experience is that this is coming from the public library customers. It articulates the sense in my view that people see (or would like to see) the library as a comfortable place to visit fairly frequently and run into their friends and neighbors.

What should be included in this service response?
A combination of programmatic services will respond to this view of the library. Permanent and rotating art displays, including quality products of the local art community; music in concert and as background; programming for all ages; loosen restrictions against coffee and snacks in the library; community read programs.

Providing e-mail accounts may have lost its relevancey with the wide availability of internet service providers and many quality free e-mail account availability.

By: Laura Bramble

Laura Bramble — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:14:10 +0000

I’m not sure that commons or community center connotes the idea of the library as a place for civil discourse and a safe place to exchange ideas. There needs to be an active or programming element – not just spacial connotation. I like the Chicago Public Library’s idea of the library as a bridge to and for the community – providing for exchange of ideas and information between community members and organizations. This could be both within and outside our buildings and virtual as well.

By: George H. Scheetz

George H. Scheetz — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:43:46 +0000

“Commons” is a more developed (and expanded) version of the original Library Role of “Community Activities Center,” in which “The library is a central focus for community activities, meetings, and services. It works closely with other community agencies and organizations to provide a coordinated program of social, cultural, and recreational services.”

I prefer the name “Community Center” for this particular Service Response, because the connotation (by which I mean the most widely understood associated meanings) of “Commons” is something quite different from the definition of this Service Response.

Perhaps the most commonly understood meaning of “Commons” is “a building or hall for dining, typically at a university or college,” when in fact the name of the Service Response is intended to imply a village commons (“a tract of land, usually in a centrally located spot, belonging to or used by a community as a whole”), albeit in a library building.

While I appreciate the idea of a “Commons,” I believe that the name “Community Center” will speak to more library customers (patrons, users, guests, clients).

Finally, the meaning of “Community Center” certainly can encompass the virtual community as well as the physical community.

By: Jim Hardt

Jim Hardt — Wed, 04 Oct 2006 22:33:05 +0000

Commons is fine if it includes peace and quiet, where the public may read undisturbed.

By: Marianne Kotch

Marianne Kotch — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 16:04:34 +0000

“Commons” has a collegiate connotation that doesn’t appeal to the general public. “Community center” seems to make more sense to citizens involved in planning processes. Library buildings are important public spaces and vital to community landscapes. Yet the virtual aspect of this service response is becoming increasingly important. A term that can incorporate the physical and virtual would be useful.