Send Comments to the Editors

U.S. Mail:
The Rice Thresher
6100 Main Street (MS-524)
Houston, TX 77005-1892

These endless hours in the stacks have brought to my attention a few very aggravating and unbecoming problems of the library. A particularly obnoxious facet of the boxy building comes immediately to mind -- the chronic absence of books from the stacks.

On numerous occasions this year, I have come to the library armed with citations only to find a large quantity of these books in a nonexistent state. I do not mean checked out or on reserve, but missing entirely. They are not being reshelved -- repeated visits over a week's time reveal the permanence of the matter.

Let me provide an example. Last week, I was looking for some books off a list a professor gave me. After a couple of books came up missing, I became extremely irritated and proceeded to look for every book on the list. Out of 37 books, 29 were there.

Offhand, this may not seem too bad, but placed in its proper context, eight missing books out of a decently-sized sample is a travesty. If all of Fondren followed this pattern, 372,860 of Fondren's 1,864,300 volumes would be unaccounted for. This is probably an exaggeration, but still, an 80 percent success rate is pretty awful.

I cannot tell you on how many occasions I entered the stacks with lists of call numbers only to return with half of what I was looking for.

This is not only very annoying, but a real impediment to undergraduate research and academics. How is a student supposed to carry out meaningful research when such a large number of volumes are missing?

The same holds true for some periodicals. My beloved Economist is always missing, as well as The New Yorker , for example.

I can think of a couple of reasons for this. The presence of the History and English departments in Fondren undoubtedly has something to do with it. The temptation to "borrow" a book without trekking down to the first floor to check it out is certainly powerful. While graduate lockers are searched, faculty offices are not.

Thus, books "borrowed" in this manner are sucked into a black hole of academia, never to see the light of day again.

Periodicals, I suspect, are taken by students and are not replaced, are stolen or are cut up by some sadistic person making photocopies.

Solutions are necessary -- I have several of them. The periodical problem could be tackled quite easily by borrowing a policy of the first-rate Emory University library. There, popular periodicals are placed on permanent reserve.

Not a terribly difficult procedure, and one which would minimize these disappearing acts. If fines were placed over the heads of periodical vandals, I am sure they would see the light.

The problem with faculty "borrowing" privileges is more complex. A sort of "Fondren Gestapo" could be organized to search faculty offices and "re-educate" offenders, but I doubt anyone would want to heed my sarcasm.

A more feasible alternative could be stiff fines leveled against those who hoard books, although enforcement could be a problem. But these approaches do not get to the heart of the matter. A comprehensive solution brings to light another shortcoming of the library facilities.

The problem lies not in irresponsible faculty, but that we house two departments in our library.

I see clearly now why I was never shown the fifth-floor history ghetto on my tour of the campus. It is shameful that we build a large new nanotechnology building while neglecting basic, germane disciplines.

If Rice had the sense to place the History and English departments in a real classroom building, then perhaps faculty would not thieve from the stacks. As a bonus, administrators would not feel compelled to force me into classrooms smaller than my dorm room.

Decent facilities for the humanities, including the library, have been largely sidelined. Will we have to wait for a Nobel Prize, Dr. Gillis?

This item appeared in the Opinion section of the March 21, 1997 issue.