Back to the timeline

Or should I say… back in time (Har har).

Silly jokes aside, I need to make a decision about this timeline… Do I keep it objective, or do I put myself in it?

What I’m trying to do is to put together a timeline that highlights significant environmental, political, social events that have occurred from let’s say the formation of the American Library Association (ALA) in 1876 through to now. The aim of this, is to look at the events that lead up to the concept of a sustainable library (assuming of course, that we know what definition of sustainability we are using, and what a library is).

Here’s what I’ve got so far, and I’m interested to know your thoughts.

2 comments

  1. David Chester says:

    Hi Katie,
    A couple more you may (or may not) want to add.

    The Great London Smog of 1952 and the introduction of the U. K. Clean Air Acts of 1956 (social environmental awareness -> social pressure -> governmental legislation)

    1879 – National Park, N.S.W. (later Royal National Park) proclaimed. The worlds second national park and Australia’s first.

    1948 – International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) founded.

  2. Introvert says:

    In short it is difficult for me to say anything useful about the timeline without knowing what is ment by “sustainable library”?

    In long:

    What is this a timeline of?
    “significant environmental, political, social events” – but in relation to what?

    If everything then there are some world wars, womens sufferage, civil rights and anti-apartide events missing. And the timeline should probably be orders of magnitude larger.

    Does the burning/destruction of books by various groups (notably to me the Nazi’s; though they aren’t the only ones in the period covered) count as a significant event?

    Why do “Ash Wednesday bushfires, Australia” and “Black Saturday bushfires, Victoria” rate a mention but the “Black Friday – 1939 Victorian Bushfires” not?

    Next, why do somewhat important and interesting things like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, share space with uninteresting and unimportant things like “United Tasmania Group (political party) formed”?

    And how are nuclear accidents and the formation of (presumibly green) political parties related to a “sustainable library”?

    And having realised that I don’t understand the question well enough to say anything actually useful, I’ll just put my central question at the top of this comment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *