Estimated Death Tolls in the Arab Uprising Against Dictatorships in the Middle East and North Africa

Update and correction:

I had originally posted an infographic detailing the over 19,000 dead in the uprisings of the so-called "Arab Spring," by country. It was so good in showing how Syria and Libya differ from the other cases, that I could not resist. It therefore turns out that I acted somewhat too hastily, for I in the meantime noticed that the source, NOW Lebanon, allows us to reproduce only excerpts from the text of its articles, and not its graphics. I of course need and want to respect that wish.

In any case, it gives me a chance to call grateful attention to the fuller coverage at that site.

In "The cost of revolution: Facts and figures of the Arab Spring," Aline Sara notes that it can be difficult to obtain accurate facts and figures on the human cost of revolt against dictatorships whose essence is the lack of an open society and the threat of physical violence. Nonetheless, "NOW Lebanon has compiled the most reliable statistics on the major uprisings to occur in the Arab world so far to give readers an idea of the cost of revolution."

Readers will be shocked (but not necessarily surprised) to learn that:

Last week, AVAAZ averaged the rate of disappearances in Syria at one per hour, and the global organization estimates that since March 15, over 25,000 people have been arrested, many of whom have been tortured. Twelve thousand are still in custody, it said. 

The essence is the series of infographics:

• Estimated Number of Dead (by country)
• Timeline
• A matrix, showing: "Country + population," "Type of upheaval," and "Outcome"
• Approximate Number of Refugees Caused by Uprising
 

Aline Sara, "The cost of revolution: Facts and figures of the Arab Spring," from NOW Lebanon, 20 August.

Riders and Romances

This spring, as the Amherst Historical Commission put forward a request for Community Preservation Act funds for the restoration of paintings hanging in the Jones Library (still need to post about that), it occurred to me that most residents had at best a dim awareness that we owned an art collection. In preparation for any questions in Town Meeting, I took a stroll through the building in order to re-familiarize myself with the location of each work of art.

Lo and behold, I came across one of the canvases—Paul Dominique's late 19th-century "Arabs Mounted in Battle"—hanging over: the romance collection.

I'll bet that even some of the more dedicated lovers of this beloved institution didn't know that we owned this one, much less, where to find it. And beneath the venerable painting, we find such alluring titles as One Fine Cowboy: He's got a way with horses. . . and with women . . . .

What's the connection (besides physical proximity—and studs on stallions)? Actually, maybe more than you think.


Read the rest on the book blog:  Gotta Love Those Romance Titles (or: the price of freedom is eternal kitsch).

Books Into Battle: John Hench Wins Distinguished Award for Study of Propaganda and Publishing During World War II

With all the attention paid to the Civil War these days, it's easy for the topic of World War II to get pushed into the background. Military history of the conflict will always find an audience (and a publisher), but it's a delight to come across a book that actually breaks new ground by attempting to tell us what the war meant to governments, soldiers, and civilians--moreover, by studying the role of culture rather than killing.

World War II is still seen by most of us as "the good war" (to cite the title of Studs Terkels's oral history), especially in comparison with the wars in which the United States has since become involved. It was seen as a contest between good and evil, a war of ideas or worldviews. The old "Why We Fight" indoctrination films, for example, made this clear in the opening shots, depicting opposing "slave" and "free" worlds. The Allies of course eventually went to war reluctantly, and not out of abstract opposition to fascism, as such, but once the war was underway, it became a fight for ideas as well as survival.

John B. Hench, former Vice President for Collections and Programs at the American Antiquarian Society in Worcester, tells a little-known part of that campaign in Books As Weapons: Propaganda, Publishing, and the Battle for Global Markets in the Era of World War II, (Cornell University Press, 2010). He shows how the United States sought to use the printed word to win both the war and the peace—and a piece of the big postwar global economic pie.

Last month, at the annual conference of the Society for the History of Authorship, Reading and Publishing (SHARP) in Washington, DC, we honored him with the George A. and Jean S. DeLong Book History Book Prize for the best publication of the past year. It was a real delight to see such richly deserved recognition for a great scholar and generous colleague.

This is a fascinating book that draws upon new sources to tell an important story. He had me hooked at the outset:

Only weeks after the D-Day invasion of June 6, 1944, a surprising cargo—crates of books—joined the flood of troop reinforcements, weapons and ammunition, food, and medicine onto Normandy beaches. The books were destined for French bookshops, to be followed by millions more American books (in translation but also in English) ultimately distributed throughout Europe and the rest of the world. The British were doing similar work, which was uneasily coordinated with that of the Americans within the Psychological Warfare Division of General Eisenhower's Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force, under General Eisenhower's command.

Here, the table of contents:

Introduction : Books on the Normandy Beaches

Cultivating New Markets
1. Modernizing U.S. Book Publishing
2. War Changes Everything--Even Books

Books as "Weapons in the War of Ideas
3. Publishers Organize for War and Plan for Peace
4. "Books Are The Most Enduring Propaganda of All

5. Seeking "an Inside Track to the World’s Bookshelves"
6. "Everyone but the Janitor" Selected the Books
7. Books to Pacify and Reeducate the Enemy
8. Making the "Nice Little Books"

U.S. Cultural Power Abroad
9. Liberating Europe with Books
10. The Rise and Fall of the United States International Book Association
11. The Empire Strikes Back
12. Books for Occupied Germany and Japan

Epilogue : American Books Abroad After 1948

Read the rest of the story on the book blog.

Walking the Walk and Tweeting the Talk (Digital Humanities and the New-Old World of the Book)

I recently and ever so gently chided the Jones Library for being not quite up to date in the digital domain (1, 2)—all benevolently and in good fun, of course ("Alles in Güte und Liebe, werter Herr Erbförster, gar nicht böse gemeint!"). It's only appropriate, then, to share some further reflections on the appropriate role of "new" and "social" media in the world of the book, based on my own experience.

Specifically, I would like to speak about Twitter: Is it, as so many acquaintances dismissively say, a faddish and foolish exercise in narcissism—a sort of metaphorical modern mashup of the twentieth-century "pet rock" and vanity license plate—or, as others maintain, a valuable social, intellectual, and marketing tool? As an inveterate tweeter, I of course incline toward the latter view.

We, on the Executive Council of the Society for the History of Authorship, Reading, and Publishing (SHARP), the leading international organization dedicated to the study of all aspects of the history of the book, agreed. Many of us had, by chance, tweeted individually at our last annual conference, in Helsinki in 2010. Buoyed by the results of that experiment, we decided to formalize that endeavor this year in Washington by officially promoting it and rewarding the best practitioners with a prize: in in the form of a book, of course, and in print format (though the National Book Awards finally acknowledged the onset of a new century and a new era by including, for the first time, a digital candidate; for us, the format is not important: it all depends on the content).

George Williams, a member of our governing Board, who co-edits the ProfHacker blog over at the Chronicle of Higher Education, invited several of us to contribute brief observations on our use, experience, and perception of Twitter in the context of a scholarly conference on the history and nature of the book.

Here's the beginning of my contribution:

To tweet or not to tweet? If I do not tweet for myself, who will tweet for me? If I tweet only for myself, what am I? Twitter, as one of my non-SHARP “tweeps” says, is the most misunderstood of social media. To wary outsiders, for whom it represents an exercise in egotism, I gently explain that it all depends on what you are looking for and whom you choose to follow. In the 4 years I’ve been on Twitter, it has become one of my most valuable research and networking tools. Frankly, I am much more interested in what total strangers on Twitter are reading than what my Facebook friends had for lunch or their kids did at the birthday party. . . .

Read the full post here, on the book blog.

Here Today, Gone Tomorrow

In yesterday's blogpost on the selection of a new Director for the Jones Library, I took the opportunity to note an irony: Although the topic assigned for the candidate talks was the library in the age of the internet and new media, the Jones Library has generally been rather remiss in taking advantage of the rapidly evolving digital culture.

Its web presence has not been very up to date in either form or content—as evidenced by the fact that it didn't even announce the choice of a new Director.

In fact, the page for public comment on the candidates was still up—and even accepting submissions—last night.

Well, no more.

Do you think they saw the blog?

Here today, gone tomorrow—or rather: there yesterday, gone today. And, as Martha Stewart would say: it's a good thing.

Of course, the homepage and Facebook page are unchanged, but: one step at a time.

Update: New Director at the Jones Library (and some advice on new media needs)

August 10

As noted in last night's brief update, the Jones Library has a new Director. Scott Merzbach of the Gazette has now provided a thorough run-down of the deliberations, which corresponds to the sense that I was getting throughout the process: Christopher Lindquist enjoyed strong support from those whose focus was on professional librarianship, financial issues, and management skills. Sharon Sharry, by contrast, was more popular among those who placed a premium on personal style and presumed ability to connect with employees and patrons.

The Library’s interim management team thus unanimously supported Lindquist, while a preponderance of staff favored Sharry. Among those with formal votes, the Search Committee favored Lindquist by 3-2, and the Trustees split 3-3 on the first ballot, but unanimously chose Sharry on the second.

Recommendation of the Search Committee in favor of Lindquist, by a vote of 3-2:

for Lindquist 

•  Trustee President Sarah McKee
•  Trustee Austin Sarat
•  Head of Information Services Matthew Berube

for Sharry

• Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Tony Maroulis 
• President of Jones Library Friends Lucy McMurrer 

Among the Trustees, President Sarah McKee, Austin Sarat, and Michael Wolff supported Lindquist on the first ballot, while Chris Hoffmann, Emily Lewis, and Carol Gray supported Sharry. On the second ballot, the vote was unanimous for Sharry.

Thus, McKee praised Lindquist for his attention to (as Scott summarized), “budgeting, long-term action planning and Town Meeting processes”—what she called “the sorts of things I want a director to know about.” Carol Gray, by contrast, was more drawn to (again, in the Gazette’s wording) “Sharry's monthly reports to trustees in Greenfield and her responses to questions about how to deal with boisterous teens and homeless people in the library.” Gray, recently returned from her studies (and adventures) in Egypt, declared Lindquist unacceptable and said she could not have voted for him: "I would have grave reservations about hiring someone like that." (not clear what "that" means)


Tough Choices

Clearly, it was a complex choice, and I’m glad I didn’t have to make it. It’s a tall order at the best of times, all the more so under straitened financial circumstances and when coming out of a period of great internal discord. In the first place, it’s a question of how one defines qualifications. In the second place, it’s a more subjective matter of personal “fit.” Comments by Trustees Emily Lewis and Austin Sarat nicely summarized the contrasting approaches to the task and the candidates:

Trustee Emily Lewis . . . was extraordinarily impressed with both candidates, but [said] that Sharry's ability to attract library patrons was evident during her public interview. "She won the hearts and minds of the community and the staff, the businesses, and the schools," Lewis said. 

Sarat said Sharry is articulate, passionate and compassionate as well as engaging. But her weaknesses were more evident in specific questions by the search committee focused on financial planning and budget numbers. Even if Lindquist did not connect with the public or staff, this was not a concern, Sarat said. "We're not hiring an interviewee, we're hiring a director, and the interview is one part of the search process," he added. 

The choice then, is both a practical and a philosophical one: a matter not just of how one views the internal and external role of the director, but also of whether to go instinctively to one’s comfort zone or to make a choice that may require more adjustment and entail some risk but offer the prospect of bolder action and long-term gains. I know that, in academe, administrators and search committees occasionally (but not often enough) worry about a tendency “to keep replicating ourselves” by safely hiring people whose profile is “just like us” rather than opening themselves to the challenging possibility of the new and different. Clearly, the Search Committee and Trustees had to grapple with precisely this issue. There is no single “right” answer, and much depends on both personalities and circumstances.

What is clear is that there were two good choices, and that both the participants and the public seem satisfied with the ultimate choice and inspired at the prospect of new permanent leadership.


Encomium

In a formal announcement of the choice to the Select Board this morning, Trustee President Sarah McKee declared, "We thus embark on a new chapter in our common, but surely uncommon, history." Repeating the analogy of the voyage two sentences later but switching images from tomes to time, she commended to us Frank Prentice Rand's history of the Jones Library (1919-1969), and observed, "As we embark on a new era, I think its opening Apologia worth our recalling":

Every library is entitled to publish its history. For a library is something more than a repository and exchange center of printed matter. It is an incarnation of the wisdom within a community, and an embodiment of the communal personality as well. Its card catalog is an index to the dominant interests of the citizenry. Thus the widely known and highly regarded Jones Library is a manifestation of the widely known and highly regarded village of Amherst, Massachusetts -- a physical revealing of the men and women, living and dead, local and distant, who by their utterances and influence have made the little town what it is today. President Calvin Plimpton of Amherst College has said: "Good libraries are the extension of great people." So this library is in various ways the extension of people of varying degrees and kinds of greatness, all the way from the Medici to Samuel Minot Jones, from Thucydides to "Tip" Tyler. Its annals are short, but not simple. 

She concluded:

Now, you will probably have to google "Tip" Tyler. But I invite you to glance back, for a moment, at the long and noble history that you all have kept alive and thriving in Amherst during the past year, day in and day out, in spite of stresses of a sort that the Jones has probably never before seen. 

My two cents' worth of advice

Now I'm sure that Ms. Sharry has more than enough to do, but at the risk of adding to her burdens, I'll mention just one pressing task: Take prompt and firm charge of the Library's digital presence. In its current state, it is both primitive and chaotic.

Money is tight, and the taxpayer is not going to pay for the glorious geothermal heating and cooling system you mentioned (I crave it, too, but Amherst College can afford that; the Town of Amherst cannot). Fundraising from private donors will be crucial for any big projects, including capital ones. Of course, before you can persuade either public or private parties to make major new investments in your undertakings, you will have to start by demonstrating that you have, at long last, put your own house in order: implement effective long-range planning (quite overdue), and finally start budgeting fully for maintenance as well as operating expenses. (The Community Preservation Act Committee, for example, is not a piggy bank. Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency need, as far as the Town is concerned.) Recent practices have not been sustainable. They need to change now.

By contrast, investment in digital media is a relatively modest expense and, if done right, gets you a lot of bang for the buck. Especially given that you were selected because of your ability to connect with current patrons and other residents, this is your real opportunity to sell the Jones—and make the public buy in. The more you publicize what the Library gives to the Town, the more its residents will be eager to use it and willing to give back.

For example, hire a good web designer. The Jones Library homepage has long been a mess: clunky, old-fashioned, badly laid out, hard to navigate. It communicates an antiquated air as well as indifference to both the taste and the convenience of the user. It's at least a decade out of date. One need but compare this throwback with the updated sites of the Town of Amherst (public) and Amherst History Museum next door (a private institution whose resources, by the way, are but a fraction of those of the Jones, which enjoys support from both a public budget of $ 2.19 million and an endowment worth nearly $ 8 million). They're not perfect or pioneering, but they are modern in look and functionality. If they can do it, why can't you?

The Library web page is an embarrassment. The only exception is the award-winning Digital Amherst, which shows what one can do—and it's an instructive example. That took luck and energy, but relatively little money because it was the work of a dedicated and creative visiting employee funded by an outside grant (acting on the ideas and with the guidance of head of Special Collections Tevis Kimball, of course). Take a lesson there.

First of all, though, make sure your current new/social media presence is up to date. It is ironic that the topic assigned to the director candidates was the library in the age of the internet and digital media—and yet, the news that the Jones has hired a new director is nowhere to be found on its web presence.

• The Library homepage is its homely self. A visitor would have no clue that the search had been successfully completed (or even taken place).

• A visitor who knew the URL of the page for feedback on candidates would be no better served: That page informs us that it was last updated on July 19, before either candidate spoke, not to mention, before the feedback deadline was extended to August 3. And there is of course no indication that the search is now over.

[Update:] In fact, I just visited the page again, and was able to submit feedback even though that deadline passed more than a week ago and the new director was chosen yesterday. Ouch.

The Facebook page is not much better: It is now a week out of date. Thankfully, this one (but why not the candidate feedback page?!) does tell us that the time for public comment on the search has been extended to August 3. However, the last entry, from August 4, deals only with a staff reading recommendation about cancer survival (uplifting, I am sure). Nothing more about the search, the final meeting, or the outcome.

The Library should have led with and controlled the story of the hiring of its first new director in 30 years. That it somehow failed to do speaks volumes (to use a metaphor drawn from the era of print) about its strategic reasoning and positioning in the modern world.

The news of the hiring of a new director should have been trumpeted to the public via all new media as well as old: Library web page, Facebook updates, Twitter. As we've seen, the Library does not pay proper attention to the former two and apparently does not yet use the latter tool, though almost everyone else in the field of public humanities and cultural tourism now does. In fact, Twitter is ideally suited to quick communication of breaking news: a few moments and 140 characters, and your story is out there.

One might take as a counterexample the Springfield Library, a reasonably typical midsized New England small urban library: Its web page, though not a model of design or execution, is at least clear and contemporary—not revolutionary, but not antediluvian, either. Above all, you can actually use it easily. And its Facebook page is not only up to date (revised 10 hours ago, last I checked): It reports news of general literary-cultural interest, not merely local happenings, e.g., the appointment of the new Poet Laureate, Philip Levine (Jones Library, take note). In fact, it's even got a special teen page (a model that would interest Trustee Carol Gray, I assume), and a lively Twitter account, which I gladly follow.

The thing about modern digital media is that, once one starts to employ them, one has to do so regularly and consistently. We expect these resources to be up to date, and when they are not, users become frustrated or lose interest, or both. Even if one does not rush headlong into use of Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking tools (after all, the activity has to be purposeful, not mindless), one can at least keep the website up to date. (Example: at least take down the public feedback page after the candidate has been hired.)

It is a rather revealing state of affairs when our public library lags behind the Amherst Brewing Company in its use of new/social media. The latter, an almost equally beloved institution, has a rigorously maintained website, Facebook page, and Twitter account. Why should residents of Amherst be able to get day-by-updates of the move of a private microbrewing enterprise from North Pleasant Street to University Drive—but not of the search for the Director of a publicly funded cultural institution? It's really an irony and a disappointment.

Fortunately, that's easy to remedy. In any case, that's in the past, and we should look to the future.

Let's combine the best of both topics: raise a foamy glass in toast to the library, with best wishes for a successful partnership between the new director, her staff, patrons, and the town.

Recent Posts

• Initial report on the choice of Sharon Sharry as Director
• Report on candidate presentation by Sharon Sharry
• Report on candidate presentation by Christopher Lindquist

[11.VIII. update: new screen shot]

Updated news coverage:

• Diane Lederman covers the story here: "Amherst trustees offer Jones position to Greenfield Library Director Sharon Sharry," Springfield Republican, 11 Aug. (posted Wednesday evening on masslive.com)

• Scott Merzbach offers further coverage in the current issue of the Amherst Bulletin (12 August) as "New Jones director impresses staff, public." This version contains a few additional quotations.

And the Winner is: Sharon Sharry (updated)

I was not able to attend the Jones Library Trustees' meeting devoted to the choice of a new Director this evening, but over at Only In the Republic of Amherst, Larry Kelley has conveniently provided the result (ahead of the professional print and electronic media, as is often the case).

As predicted: Sharon Sharry, though on the second ballot. In the first ballot, he reports, each candidate got 3 votes.
Neither result is surprising, and each squares with my gut feeling about both divided opinions and the ultimate outcome.



Update, August 10

The Gazette has now reported more fully on last night's meeting. An update follows in the next post.

Awaiting the Decision on the Library Director

Tonight the Jones Library Trustees will announce their choice for new Director. The period for public comment was extended from July 29 to August 3. One might have supposed either that this resulted from too tight a turnaround time, or that it reflected some internal dissension or indecision, but I am told that it was really a matter of having to obey Open Meeting Law deadlines.

For what it is worth, virtually all the public comment I have heard has favored Sharon Sharry of the Greenfield Library over Christopher Lindquist of the Westfield Athenaeum, so if I were a betting man, my money would be on her. Still, it would be rash to make predictions, as Lindquist apparently enjoys some strong support on the board.

The bottom line, of course, is that both candidates have strong credentials and come well recommended by their colleagues in the field.

As the Amherst Bulletin put it at the end of last week:

It appears the Jones board has two top-notch finalists to succeed Bonnie Isman, who stepped down last year after 30 years. . . .

We liked the way both candidates spoke of a library's mission in their public interviews late last month. . . . .

The Jones has a strong staff. After a short break in leadership, we're glad to see that it will soon get a new director, because the work it does for all in our community must be unrivaled.

Can't argue with that.

Backup and Back to Blogging

My employer-owned laptop was damaged right at the start of my European trip this summer, evidently while it went through security at nearby Bradley Airport. I finally got it fully diagnosed and sent off for repairs. Apple received it on Friday and had it back here by today (Monday). Only problem: for some inexplicable reason, they erased the hard drive, even though (1) it was not part of the repair order, and (2) they had an administrator password and thus had access to all programs and functions.

What makes this so bizarre is that this is the second time this has happened to me. The first time, 5 or 6 years ago, they wiped the drive even though the only repair order was for a fan replacement.

This is starting to seem like a recurrent bad dream.

At any rate, thanks to a large external hard drive and reasonably good backup habits, I'm back in business.  As a helpful reminder, some of the clever and kindly folks at Reddit designated March 31 as "World Backup Day," with the slogan, "Don't be an April Fool."  Good advice.

Anyway: after backup (and restoration), back to blogging.

Moby-Dick Aboard the "Morgan"

August 1

Speaking of the "Charles W. Morgan," it was time again for the annual Moby Dick Marathon at Mystic Seaport, which took place from noon yesterday to noon today—today being Herman Melville's birthday. This was a special year for the event, for not only is 2011 the 170th anniversary of the launching of the "Morgan" and the 70th of its arrival in Mystic: It is also the 160th anniversary of the publication of Moby Dick—which a reviewer of the new film version for today's Daily News rather perversely described as "Sometimes called the greatest of all American novels (though we Fitzgerald fans, among others, would argue that point)." Well, I'm sure that Twain and Hawthorne fans, too, "would argue that point." For that matter, so would Danielle Steele fans, but that doesn't make them right. But I digress.

A distinguishing and welcome feature of the event this year was the new embrace of social media. Not only was there a live video feed. In an addition, and in particular, Mystic made use of Twitter:

"Twitter is an innovative way for us to share this special event with a global audience," said Museum president Stephen C. White. "Nowhere else does 'Moby-Dick' come alive the way it does on the decks of the Morgan, the sole surviving ship of the fleet that inspired Melville."

I've followed Mystic Seaport on Twitter for quite  some time. For this occasion, however, staff not only live-tweeted the readings, but also tweeted on three related themes: Melville's novel in popular culture, images from Mystic Seaport collections, and scientific information related to the novel. They created a special hashtag for the event (#MDM2011), as will as separate accounts for each of the three supplementary themes:

http://www.twitter.com/MbyDickMarathon
http://www.twitter.com/MS_Collections
http://www.twitter.com/MS_PopCulture
http://www.twitter.com/MSeaportScience

This is all to the good.

There is a lot of debate (and consternation) concerning the use and abuse of social media in the museum, preservation, and scholarly worlds, and I'll have more to say about that in the near future. I recently returned from a conference on the history of the book in art and science, at which participants not only tweeted, but were officially encouraged to tweet. As I have noted, some participants were put off by the typing at the panels (though this really should be no different than taking notes on a laptop, which is already common practice). Others, made of heartier stuff, nonetheless questioned the validity of the endeavor. Like any other social-networking technology, Twitter is only as good as the purpose to which it is put.
Most participants judged it a great benefit and success: it allowed us to expand the conversation at the conference, it allowed those unable to attend in person to take part vicariously, and it provided a record of both the events and the evolving reactions to themes.

I'd like to think that Melville would have understood. The narrator in Typee recounts how the news of an incoming boat was circulated on his tropical island by shouts from person to person:

This was the vocal telegraph of the islanders; by means of which condensed items of information could be carried in a very few minutes from the sea to their remotest habitation. . . . one piece of information following another with inconceivable rapidity.