Then later in the morning this comment was posted to my blog:
I have to be anoymous here as I am a staff member at the National Library. I work with Turnbull collections and the researchers who use them.
Paul Reynolds does certainly NOT represent the views of myself or my colleagues. We have never had any engagement with him in his role as "adjunct director". That role seems to be entirely about Carnaby's vision for a digital experience on the ground floor of the new building. Some of his misconceptions need to be corrected.
1.Our concerns are with the new building and the rushed relocation, not the need to make the collections more available by digital means. We all strongly support that, But we don't need an ugly new building to do it
2. It is uncertain how much new collection space will be provided but it is at the most an extra 10 years. Are we going to spend $70m on another building when that space gets used up? You don't need a $70m building for extra collection space. All research libraries eventually find offsite storage for lower use collections.
3. The plant equipment in the current building is getting old - but it can be replaced. Restoring optimum storage conditions does not need a a new building
4. The proposed space for the Turnbull research library is much smaller than the existing areas for researchers. This is mainly because the whole ground floor (apart from the Gallery - which we have already) will now be taken up by Carnaby's digital playland
5. There seems serious doubt if researchers will be able to get the same service as before. The specialist pictorial, manuscripts and oral history areas, for example, are being done away with - everything will be provided from one generic research desk
6. Evidently the plans do not allow for any soundproofing walls between the digtial experiences (such as the kidzone) on the ground floor, and the Turnbull research area now consigned to the first floor mezzanine.
This is all appalling enough. The hectic, last-minute, poorly-planned process of shifting everything out of the building for two and a half years, without any adequate warning to researchers is just as awful. Staff are demoralised by all this. Consultation has been a farce - but we are committed to trying to work through it - to do what we can to maintain the values and services of a great research library.
To which Paul Reynolds has responded as follows:
Interesting - so the anonoymous correspondent who began this thread is a "Turnbull User" because he/she actually works there. This seems an important distinction, and should have perhaps been made clearer at the outset.
But let's move on. As I said in my last post, most of his concerns are for others to pick up. As for his comments about me - again, the tone is more interesting than the substance.
For the record my role is to contribute to the broad reach of projects and ideas that are needed to ensure the NL becomes a first class example of how to use digital and online services as core dimension to all of the NL's activities. And that includes thinking about how best to digital services with the needs of researchers, et al. And if you think that's all rhetoric, then, truly, you don't know me at all!
Anonymous says I don't represent his views or his colleagues.It is hard to know what to say about that. After all, he seems to know who I am. I don't have the same privilege about him. Speaking of irony - curiously, he has more digital privileges than I do. I have no internal access rights, can't see the intranet, nor do I have a National Library e-mail account, or any system or library privileges. I can't even take a book home!
Curiously, I'm around the Wellington Library today if he works there, as opposed to the other three NL buildings in Auckland, Christchurch and Palmerston North, and wants a conversation, why doesn't he tap me on the shoulder and we can have a coffee? Might be a little more civilised than throwing rocks out onto the public square?
Paul Reynolds has suggested that Turnbull User who started this thread and Anonymous are the same person.The Bookman is able to advise him that is not the case.
Anyone else have anything to say on this subject?
PS The whisper around Wellington today is that the Government are about to can the project anyway!