This document discusses the concept of "monographcentricity" in libraries, referring to the traditional focus on printed books and monographs. It notes that library classification systems and formats were originally designed for printed books in the 1800s, based on earlier ideas from 245 BCE. However, it questions whether this focus still makes sense today, in an age where content exists in many digital formats beyond traditional printed books.

1. what the b**k?
rurik.greenall@ub.ntnu.no | @brinxmat
CC BY-SA 3.0

2. an academic library
perspective

3. https://twitter.com/TAC_NISO/status/323829380893769729

4. monographcentricity

5. “a funny word for book”
https://twitter.com/lukask/status/323868133574184960

6. formats designed to represent
the kind of thing that libraries
are interested in (in the 1960s)

7. based on formats
designed in the 1800s

8. based on ideas from 245 BCE

9. “…book…book…
book…”
Cutter CA. Public libraries in the United States of America: their history, condition & management : a special
report department of the interior bureau of Education.Washington: Government printing Office; 1876.
From Cutter’s 1876
“Rules for a printed
dictionary catalogue”

10. …in an age where
content is delivered in
many, many formats…

11. …and “books” are
simply digital objects

12. disagree?

13. what percentage of our
budgets are spent on “books”?

14. ta :)