💾 Archived View for gem.acdw.net › page › 2020-12-02.%20Cans%20for%20Fines%20drive captured on 2023-07-22 at 16:22:11. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The library is about to start its annual "Cans for Fines" drive, where we forgive a dollar's worth of overdue fines per can of food donated for the Food Bank. I think I've got a thousand words' worth of thoughts about this, let's give it a go!
A disclaimer: These thoughts are mine. They are necessarily deeply steeped in the American Southern culture and norms, because that's where I'm from and where I live. YMMV.
Another disclaimer: This entire blog post should have a giant [citation needed] slapped on it. The facts I will so confidently state have been largely hearsay, and though I believe them, it's possible they're not completely true.
Multiple studies have been done that prove library fines are not effective, either in convincing patrons to return books in a timely fashion, or in generating meaningful revenue for a library. I think the budget item for Fines is something like one tenth of one per cent of income for most libraries; it might even be less. Because of this, many libraries across the country have done away with fines entirely, except in cases where the loaned item has been lost (when it's not really a fine, so much as an invoice, and one which I think makes much more sense -- otherwise people *could* start stealing books from the library). Of course, *our* library has stead-fastly continued to collect fines, despite all the push-back against doing so; the same is true for probably the majority of libraries in the US as of this writing.
I personally don't like fines because I think they contribute to a negative stereotype about the library as being run by stuffy know-it-all types who really stickle for the Rules, no matter how myopic and arbitrary. I rankle against this description, because I am not any of those things, except maybe a little bit of a know-it-all (see my "Another disclaimer" paragraph, above, specifically the phrase "confidently state" -- I'm aware it's a problem). I think a Library should be a public compendium of knowledge and a gateway to that knowledge, and furthermore that all knowledge should be free in all senses of the word. I think library fines do little more than keep people who would otherwise visit the library to make use of its treasures out, which actually aids big bookselling corporations (cough, Amazon) into selling more books. Library fines also keep books from returning to the library, because once somebody has a book out for so long, they generally decide to keep it (free) rather than return it (not free).
See also: Prison-industrial complex, welfare demonization, refusal to provide public healthcare, etc. etc. etc.
For whatever reason (I have a Specific Idea, which comes pretty much wholesale from my reading of /The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism/ [Weber]), America has this obsession with punishment. If you do something Wrong, by God, you'd better be Punished for it, and hard and long, both to make sure you never do it again and to serve as an example that others won't follow down your ill-begotten footsteps. The thing is, it's been shown again and again that punishment of this nature is absolute trash for keeping you or anyone else from wrongdoing in the future, and in fact can exacerbate recidivism rates.
Okay, I'm going a little far afield here from library fines. But they're a part of it -- we can't just "let people get away" with having a book for Too Long, because ... well, because it's Against the Rules, and What Would We Be If We Didn't FOLLOW THE RUELSLSELSSDLSDKJFSPDOIFUa;kjsdnfas
(Can you tell I don't hold that opinion in high esteem?)
Funnily enough, the Rules seem to stop applying if you're rich enough or famous enough or Good enough, whatever that means (usually rich and/or famous and/or a man and/or white). For more, see Weber's book. It's really quite good.
I don't even think it's That Much of a Secret that the Food Bank makes deals with area vendors to make their dollar stretch way further than your dollar. In fact, I would assume that food banks would want to advertise that fact -- giving them cash is much more effective than giving them cans. I just saw an article today (of course I can't find it now) that reiterates that fact -- and I feel like I see it every year.
If you really want to help the hungry in your area, give the Food Bank cash or a check. Cans of food can spoil, they're not necessarily what people need, and they're super heavy! So annoying t0 carry.
It's the same problem college-aged kids and office mates have each year at the holiday season: many would be happier, and better able to utilize, simple gifts of cash. Instead, the culture of gift-giving mandates that we put in a lot of stress and grievance thinking of, purchasing, and gifting useless or unneeded tchotchkeys, trinkets, and pajamas to each other. I think it's gotten so bad because of the relentelss desire of the Profit Gods ... but it's much older than that, I think. Personalized gifts made sense when they were homemade, and when we knew intimately everyone we gave gifts to. Anymore, we give gifts to many more people, many of whom we don't know that well. Cash should be normalized as a gift.
I'm going to be honest -- I started writing this about two weeks ago, so I've forgotten much of what I was talking about. Anyway, Food Bank Good. Cans Bad. I wish the library would just *donate* all fines collected in December to the Food Bank, but that makes no one feel good, even if it would cut down on system-gaming (I know I've looked for $0.50 or cheaper cans, to save money on fines).
Thanks, I guess, for coming to my Ted Talk.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Copyright (c) 2019-2020 Case Duckworth. CC-BY-SA.