Scientific

[katiefoolery]

It takes me forever to catalogue periodicals. In the past hour and a quarter, I've done three. This will seem even more unbelievable when I tell you I'm basically adding their barcode to an existing record and altering a few details. In reality, it should take me about two minutes to do each magazine, including the stamping and various sticking-on of things that takes place during processing.

So how does a six minute job extend into a seventy-five minute one?

Because they're so damn interesting, that's why. Because as I turn over sections of pages to put the school stamp on them, I'm more than likely to come across a fascinating article on how Mrs Carlill discovered that carbolic smoke doesn't prevent the insidious and deadly Russian 'flu or how engineers are having to work out how to evacuate an entire skyscraper before they even design it. Yesterday, a most fascinating article told me that the more active your brain is, the less likely you are to suffer from the effects of dementia and Alzheimer's disease.

Actually, that's probably the reason I've become even more interested in reading these articles: I find them fascinating, I learn things and I'm training my brain to resist an attack Alzheimer's in the dim and distant future.

And yet, if you'd told me last week that I'd be considering packing up the library's entire collection of New Scientist in a box and taking them home, I would have thought you were slightly mad. Judging it by its title and cover, I'd never have thought it was the magazine for me. That just goes to show you that not only should you not judge books (or magazines) by their cover, you should leave the title out of it too.* Because New Scientist is fascinating. I can't believe I've been missing out on these incredible stories for so long.

The moral of this story is that we should all consider doing something different, even if we're not sure it's for us. We'll never discover something that's absolutely wonderful if we stick to things we think we'll like.



* This could make it incredibly difficult to choose books in the future.

Comments

[the-kaytinator.livejournal.com]

Well, I'd LIKE to go out and do something new. I just don't think it's my scene, though...

[katiefoolery.livejournal.com]

Ah, but you never know when you might meet an Andy and have an opportunity to play with guns.

And now I've made you sound like a bit of a psycho. Perhaps it's best you stay at home. Unless there's an Ober.net meet on.

[disturbed-kiwi.livejournal.com]

New Scientist is great.

And it may mean you are interested in this:
http://syndicated.livejournal.com/new_scientist/

[katiefoolery.livejournal.com]

Thank-you muchly for that! I've added that feed with great delight.

[snarkymonkey.livejournal.com]

Once again, you're inspiring, Katie. =3 But your argument is exactly why I decided to teach myself Japanese a year ago. Just couldn't resist the challenge. XD

And I would be a horrible person to have on staff at a library. I'd never get a thing done as I'd keep reading. And I was a volunteer for a few years. And I read. A lot. =3

[katiefoolery.livejournal.com]

There's so much temptation around, though. I'm not made of stone. I have weaknesses. On the up side, at least I can claim I was doing research for the students. How will I know what book is right for them if I haven't read them all in the first place?

Actually, I want to go and join a writing group, even though it will be full of scary people I've never met before. Who knows - maybe it'll be great.

[flippyfrog.livejournal.com]

I love New Scientist. I don't get to read it as much as i used to, but it used to be my default mag when i had a few hours to kill in the library. There's always something interesting in there. They used to keep a stack of them in front of my bio room in college, and a few extra next to my seat. good time killing stuff

[katiefoolery.livejournal.com]

I had no idea it was so fascinating. All the articles are accessible and they're actually interesting. I'm still amazed about the whole thing.

[frohike.livejournal.com]

I love New Scientist. I don't get to read it as much as i used to, but it used to be my default mag when i had a few hours to kill in the library. There's always something interesting in there.

Ditto. They've recently rearranged the local library, and I can't find the latest New Scientist issues. And I don't want to ask the staff because they are scary.

[bunhusband.livejournal.com]

I told you all school librarians do is sit around all day reading....


Told you so

Whats for dinner, and dont forget to tape X-Play please:):)

Cya l8r

[katiefoolery.livejournal.com]

It's not reading, it's research. :P

[naelany.livejournal.com]

of course, part of the appeal couldn't be that it makes your job a bit more interesting and nice, over all ^_~

[katiefoolery.livejournal.com]

But only when New Scientist comes in. It's one perk in an othewise completely boring job.

Still, it's better than nothing. :)

[naelany.livejournal.com]

lol

[cat-eyes-el.livejournal.com]

I'm really annoyed at one of our school librarians right now. One of our family friends just started year 7 at my school (her Mum, btw, is an english teacher at my brother's old school and G, like me, had basically read the entire primary school library by the end of grade 5 and she reads all of the books her Mum is teaching) and she went to borrow this book out of the library and when they noticed she was a year 7 they wre like "You can't read that, you're a year seven!"

It was probably the evil librarian.

Also, I need more books. I don't have time to read blubs on books in the library, someone tell me what to read!

[katiefoolery.livejournal.com]

In the librarian's defence, she wouldn't know the student very well yet and it's possible the book had scenes in it that she couldn't legally allow a twelve or thirteen year old to read. The rules are very strict. We're not even allowed to show M-rated videos to students under fifteen unless we get a signed permission form from their parents.

I work in a junior library now, but when I worked at Doncaster, we had some books that were reserved for seniors only, usually because of their themes or because there were explicit scenes in them. We had a great student who'd read the new books and warn us if a book needed to be restricted. There were very few books that were, though.

Perhaps your friend could get their parents to write a note to the librarians, asking them to be allowed to read books at a higher level? If the librarians know that the student is mature and has permission from their parent, then they'll put a note on their record and allow them to borrow whatever they like... unless there's a good reason.

Unfortunately, schools have to be very strict on these things, because the consequences can be very pricy indeed.

[cat-eyes-el.livejournal.com]

It wasn't that kind of book, it was just like sorta dark or something. I've never actually encountered any books that they wouldn't let the students read. At age 13 my english teacher sent me to get out The Handmaid's Tale and the Librarians didn't know he had told me to and didn't questions anything about it.

I know they don't show movies to you when under 15 (although that english teacher showed us Aussie Rules in year 8 and then later was talking to another english teacher who was saying she wouldn't even show it to her year 11s and he was like "Whoops...") but I've never heard of them with books before.