Special Topics Paper Summary

A Brief History of Adult Readers Advisory in the United States


    Readers’ Advisory has undergone a lengthy evolution in the United States. From humble beginnings

to a complete renaissance, the meaning of “adult readers advisory” and how it  relates to the American Public Library system has changed from nonfiction book lists curated by scholarly librarians to tailored patron fiction and nonfiction recommendations. For a lengthy portion of time, nonfiction dominated the RA service. Between 1920 and 1940, just after the First World War and before the Second, librarians were dedicated to crafting extensive lists of nonfiction to give to patrons who were looking for their next read.


Despite this sudden recognition of the need for adult readers advisory services, and the 


subsequent officialization of it via the ALA statement, readers advisory was lost during the war 


years. Despite librarian efforts during the war to ensure that soldiers had reading material, the 


uphill surge that RA had been experiencing sort of mellowed out. Due to this, the period from 


1940 until 1984 saw RA becoming lost, a forgotten service amongst all other public library 


adult services being offered.


However, the service did make a surprising and urgent comeback in 1984. Librarians 


offering readers advisory argued that previous methods of providing advisory were “‘didactic,’ 


had ‘pedagogical origins,’ and were interested in ‘elevating the masses’ by ‘mov[ing] readers 


toward classic works… and outlining a plan of reading that would be educational, not recreational”


(Dilevko & Magowan, 2007, p. 23). They therefore advanced the theory that RA should provide 


patrons with books they will actually enjoy (and read), with buzzwords such as 

“pleasure reading” and “recreational reading” popping up more and more. Additionally, 


words such as “renaissance, resurgence, and revival – indicators that readers’ advisory had 


been of crucial importance for public librarianship in the past, but more recently had fallen on 


hard times – were used to describe the explosion of interest in readers’ advisory between 1980 


and 2005” (Dilevko & Magowan, 2007, p. 3). Readers advisory post 1984 underwent a 


marketing and rebranding campaign like no other. Some have attributed this boom to the


 work of publishing companies hoping to market their bestsellers to even more sellers. 


    I had to cut out quite a bit for this summary! But overall, RA went from nonfiction to nonexistent 


to full of fiction recs.



References


Crowley, B. (2005). Rediscovering the history of readers advisory services. Public Libraries, 


44(1), 37-41.



Dilevko, J., & Magowon, C. F. C. (2007). Readers’ advisory service in North American public 


libraries, 1870-2005: A history and critical analysis. McFarland, Inc. Publishers.


Comments

  1. Hi Megan,
    My topic was on the role of readers advisory in libraries and I start with some of the history behind it. I came across the same article by Crowley. It was really interesting to read about how it's made such a comeback and wasn't always a feature in libraries like we have today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ooo, yes, I bet our papers had a lot of overlap. The Crowley article was chockful of great info about the topic I never knew. You're right, it is wild to think about how RA used to not be as huge of a deal as it is today!

      Delete
  2. I haven't really considered the history of Readers' Advisory before so this was interesting to read! Now that I think about it, it makes sense that RA started with nonfiction titles as opposed to fiction. It's kind of weird that it was somewhat a lost art for so long.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Laurie, I honestly was shocked when I read that the focus was on nonfic, but you're right, it does make sense. Learning was seen as only being accomplished through nonfic.

      Delete
  3. Hi Megan! That is a super interesting topic! I shouldn't have been surprised to learn that RA started with nonfiction, but I definitely was. I guess I've never really thought about it before now, to be honest. Thanks for sharing your summary - it was very eye-opening!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chloe, I was shocked too! Thanks for your kind words.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts