The Libraries Directory has a long history. First appearing over a century ago in 1897 it has been issued irregularly ever since, for many years under the title Libraries, Museums and Art Galleries Yearbook. The directory took on its present form in the early 1980s when the museum and galleries content was dropped, the current format adopted and a generally triennial pattern of publication established (for a review of the 1996‐1998 edition see RR 1998/419). For a time publication proceeded on a relatively regular basis, but now this fiftieth edition, surely a milestone for any ongoing title, is issued five years after the previous release. Perhaps this suggests the title is struggling in an electronic environment increasingly hostile to print directories. Indeed, one might wonder, after 112 years, whether this fiftieth edition will be the last, at least in printed form.
In a very brief introduction, overshadowed by a polemical and some might think inappropriate preface on the state of UK public libraries from the well known Tim Coates, former managing director of Waterstone's bookshops, editor Iain Walker claims 300 new entries and an expansion “of nearly 10 per cent” for this edition. He also states that the depth of coverage has been improved with a wider selection of contact names and the indexing enhanced to include “major types of archives and records, indexed by region and country”. Apart from updating of content, in nearly all other respects the directory is the same as five years ago. There remain five sections for the UK (UK Legal Deposit Libraries; UK Public Libraries; UK Archives and Local Studies; UK Special and Academic Libraries; UK Library and Information Organisations) and five for Ireland (mirroring the UK sections). The directory is soft‐bound and printed on reasonable quality paper but the binding could be expected to disintegrate and the pages rip with heavy use. As before there is also an accompanying CD‐ROM version. This is available in single and network versions (the latter priced from £350). The CD‐ROM, which includes the full text and indexes as well as additional search functionality, is also available in a “marketing” version that offers various extra tools such as the ability to create and customise mail merges and generate address labels and mailing lists. In fact, if it where available separately the CD‐ROM would be an adequate alternative to the printed volume, especially for those intending to use the directory primarily for marketing.
A directory such as this must ultimately be judged on content, especially its comprehensiveness, accuracy and currency. In terms of comprehensiveness this edition must score highly. As far as could be established all UK public library authorities appear with up to 35 categories of information provided for each including senior staff, branch libraries, collections, charges and fines, equipment, stock and issues, acquisitions, classification system, catalogue, services, staff establishment and financial data. With 24 categories detail is less full for UK Archives and Local Studies, and Special and Academic Libraries, but with 720 and 2,270 entries respectively the net has been cast wide. Here though is perhaps a flaw, in that the net seems to have been cast somewhat indiscriminately. In particular, what is considered to constitute a “special” library is not defined. Thus whereas major special collections such as the BFI (British Film Institute) Library and Wellcome Library are covered, as would be expected, so too are apparently minor and very “special” interest libraries such as the Witchcraft Library and Archives at Boscastle, the Spiritual Studies Library at Louth, Bubbles Photo Library at Ipswich and the Kent Masonic Library and Museum at Canterbury. It is not that many major libraries are missing, simply that there seems to be an odd selection of more minor special libraries with no clear criteria as to why some are covered and others omitted. Certainly there are far fewer “special” libraries here than in the Aslib Directory of Information Sources in the United Kingdom (Garrard and Neale, 2008) (RR 2010/02), which must be considered to provide superior coverage of this sector, especially in the mapping of subject strengths and special collections.
Accuracy of information is more difficult to evaluate without specialist knowledge of the libraries included. Leafing through the pages no glaring errors were noted and the standard of data entry would appear excellent, no mean feat given the impressive amount of detail the directory provides for many of the libraries included. Here is one of the volume's major achievements, depth of detail, especially in comparison to more basic library directories. Take, for example, the up to 24 categories of information provided for UK Special and Academic Libraries. The University of Lincoln Learning and Information Services, a fairly typical entry, has data for fifteen categories including senior staff, entry arrangements, opening hours, subjects covered, special collections and, more unusually, equipment provided (for some libraries this includes number of PCs, photocopiers, etc.), stock totals by format, and library automation system. For those libraries providing relatively full information, and that is the majority, entries are not only accurate and detailed, but probably provide the best overall “snapshot” available outside institutional web sites or annual reports.
Commendation of the depth and apparent accuracy of the information provided must be tempered by concerns regarding currency. Again this is difficult to judge without knowledge of specific libraries. However, as the directory is based on “feedback received from questionnaires sent out in 2007 and 2008” (Editor's Introduction) and not published until late 2009, some of the data included could be as much as two years old. This is confirmed when checking the entry for my own library (I have a distant memory of completing a questionnaire). Although there have been no major changes, inevitably some detail is outdated, for example collection totals are different, staff numbers have increased and the archivist named has left our employ. Similar, probably more far‐reaching, changes will have occurred in other libraries. One has to question whether a directory based on information apparently assembled over a two‐year period is fully reliable or useful.
Other issues to note, more distractions than serious impediments to use, lie in the presentation and, to a lesser extent, indexing. Entries are set out in three‐column arrangement and can seem a little cluttered. Although boldface type is employed to distinguish headings it can take a while to penetrate the detail provided, especially as not all data elements are given separate lines. The use of symbols at the head of entries to indicate library types is potentially helpful, but only if not overlooked and the key memorised. In the Archives and Local Studies, and Special and Academic Libraries sections entries are arranged by town rather than A‐Z by library or institution title. In some ways useful, in that it groups libraries by location, this has the disadvantage of separating libraries of multi‐site institutions. For example, the University of Cumbria which has libraries at Lancaster, Carlisle and Ambleside, has entries under all three places. Although there is cross‐referencing between the library entries, those wanting a complete picture of the university's library will need to look under three separate locations. Overall the index, which runs to 78 pages, appears accurate and includes governing bodies, subjects and collections (as identified by libraries). In four columns and with some very long sequences such as Family Papers, the index can appear daunting at first sight, but is well laid out and easy to use. In addition, where enhanced retrieval is required, the search capabilities of the CD‐ROM can be utilised.
At £250 for the print directory with a single user “reference version” of the CD‐ROM this is a costly purchase, but is not unreasonably priced give the vast amount of information it contains. The difficulty however, is who will use it, especially as the currency of much of the data is questionable. Perhaps the market is increasingly with commercial organizations seeking to sell to libraries. Many reference libraries will probably feel that a combination of the Aslib Directory and the annual Libraries and Information Sources in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland (Franklin and York, 2009) (last reviewed in these columns in 2003 (RR 2003/164)) provide an adequate balance of basic and subject information on UK libraries. Then, of course, there are library websites. Nearly every library represented here has an internet presence and for directory information such as this the web, which in theory at least should be up to date, will surely be the preferred option. There is much to admire in this directory, not least its long history, depth of data and careful compilation. It is hard to see, however, that continued print publication is sustainable. The CD‐ROM version is useful, but far better would be a website that can be continuously updated. The difficulty for James Clarke & Co. is how to make the transition from a print to an online model of publication that is commercially viable. I hope a migration to a web‐based directory can be accomplished. It would be a pity of this is the last appearance of The Libraries Directory.
