Restricciones

There is a relatively concise literature of academic art librarianship which primarily considers service design and delivery and seeks to explore and build awareness of art student information needs and information seeking behaviours (Pacey, 1982; Day and McDowell, 1985; Ferguson, 1986; Nilsen, 1986; Phillips, 1986; Teague, 1987; Stam, 1995a, b; Cobbledick, 1996; Toyne, 1997; Oddos, 1998; Layne, 1998; Frank, 1999; Littrell, 2001; Rose, 2002; Cowan, 2004; Lorenzen, 2004; Hemmig, 2008, 2009).

In general, the literature of academic librarianship has tended to focus principally on aspects of information practices concerned with searching and finding information for a specific need such as meeting the requirements of a piece of assessed work, rather than on the development of ‗understanding‘ of the subject and information domain relevant to these enquiries (Bawden and Robinson, 2016). This approach is perhaps also reflected in the sustained and relatively unchallenged focus of art libraries, on the provision of broad-ranging physically accessible collections which emphasise visual reference and are intended to meet the serendipitous information discovery needs of arts students.

Much of the research on the interaction of arts students with university art library services derives from the United States. Indeed there are very few recent papers which consider academic art library provision in the United Kingdom for students in the creative arts. That which does exist tends to focus on ‗artists‘ or ‗emerging artists‘ rather than the broader student grouping of those studying in the creative arts, design or media.

Mason and Robinson (2011) provide a thorough literature review of the information- related behaviour of artists, in their study on emerging arts and designers. They conclude that the study of the information practices of artists show them to be ‗an

unusual and not well understood group‘, (Mason and Robinson, 2011, p.159) with an unusually varied need for a wide range of resources. This review builds on research in the USA by Hemmig (2008, 2009) and also Medaille (2010) who focussed on the information-seeking behaviour of theatre artists.

Patelos (2013, p.47), also writing in the USA, describes the academic art library as not just a physical place for research, but a space for ‗information processing, a point of entering discourse, and even a site for artistic intervention‘. She offers a rich

description of art libraries as learning environments which is equally applicable to the UK, noting that an art library:

‗..stores, remembers, processes and transmits what it is, and what it used to be, in all its complexity: an archive, an information service, a digital abundance, a form, a ‗sheltering architecture‘. For artists, these qualities are the sine qua non. The library allows artists to browse its layers in all their infinitude‘ (Patelos, 2013, p.52).

The importance of an ‗abundance‘ of information to artists is further corroborated by Mason and Robinson (2011, pp.159-160) who note the particular need for information for ‗inspiration‘ for library users in the arts, as well as for more ‗conventional

technical, practical and marketing information‘. These requirements provide the foundation of the academic art library, with the need for serendipitous discovery taking primacy in the rationale for providing art library services and resources for creative arts students. As such the physical book remains of dominant importance for many, with library collections providing a place for ‗concentrated‘ browsing

(Poolman, 2011).

A recent survey of visual arts libraries in Scotland carried out by Duncan Chappell (2014), an Academic Liaison Librarian at Glasgow School of Art, sought to map the landscape of art, design and architecture libraries and information services in

Scotland. This research concluded that evidence existed to support the view that arts practitioners and researchers are unique in their information seeking behaviours:

‗Whereas other subject disciplines may safely assume certain core competences, this cannot be assumed for artists and designers, who often employ non-linear, hyperbolic modes of thinking. Most of our patrons and researchers exist and operate within visual arenas, and display a propensity towards images rather than text‘ (Chappell, 2014, p.29).

In order to provide users with easy access to a diverse and extensive range of resources for visual inspiration, art libraries must enable unimpeded browsing. The academic art library has traditionally been designed to encourage browsing which is interdisciplinary, usually undefined and often circuitous (Cobbledick, 1996). It is also ‗an essential physical space for artistic practice, both in research and information retrieval, and in practice and outreach‘ (Patelos, 2013, p.47).

The relationship between the physical space and information discovery remains a key

concern for academic art librarians planning libraries in the creative arts. Whereas in some multidisciplinary university libraries, physical visits to the library are declining and the use of virtual resources is increasing, in academic arts libraries the footfall remains steady or indeed increasing year on year. Carr-Harris et al. (2011)describes the importance of physical library collections to creative arts students in terms of a ‗physical‘ experience. Physical library collections provide materials which the students can grasp, collect and touch and offer a vastly different experience to browsing links on the Internet. Along with access to books and the provision of a variety of learning and study spaces, art libraries encourage their students to respond and engage creatively with library resources, often providing exhibition and making- spaces. Collections remain paramount however and as Amy Lucker (2003)notes:

‗As opposed to a library that supports the study of chemistry, where currency of information is of utmost concern…it is equally crucial for the art library to keep its old books and journals as it is to collect the new. Much primary research is done with the aid of old auction catalogues or early editions of art newspapers. More than in other specialties, the art librarian must keep an eye out for the past as well as the future‘ (Lucker, 2003, pp. 161-162).

However, budgetary limitations in the context of recent constraints to the economy are impacting on past practice as the cost of maintaining large physical collections and the space they need are increasingly influencing academic library decision-

making. At the same time, there has been a slow but cumulative growth in the amount and extent of digital resources relevant to the creative arts.

The development of online resources in the creative arts lagged behind many other disciplinary areas. Perhaps as a result of this, many art libraries held fast to the provision of analogue rather than digital visual images, for reasons of quality and adherence to the original, long after online collections became more prevalent. The

recent proliferation of visual databases has now required most art libraries to provide both and to develop ways to make both formats as easily accessible as possible. Technical developments have had a significant impact not only on the services provided by the academic art library and the work of the art librarian, but also on knowledge resources themselves:

‗The skills required for success as an art librarian today go well beyond a grasp of library management and a passion for the subject area. Technical skills need not only to be learned but also to be constantly updated. It is not enough to understand what technology is doing for us today, rather we must participate in discussions about what it could do for us tomorrow‘ (Lucker, 2006, p. 173).

At present, information systems in general appear ineffective at enabling students to develop deep, integrated knowledge or meet their need to understand and explain the subjects they study:

‗This is not because they are poorly designed, or badly implemented, but simply because they do not address this issue at all. They are intended to return relevant documents, to provide facts and figures, to answer specific questions, or, at best, to give fragments, or snippets, of knowledge‘ (Bawden and Robinson, 2016, p.295).

Given the need for creative arts students to develop conceptual understanding, make unforeseen and new connections between theory and their practice, visualise and synthesise information and extract sense, meaning and inspiration from information, it would appear that arts librarians might usefully refocus and re-orientate their

professional research domains. Rather than focussing on ‗how‘ students use

information and what they do to discover and retrieve information, it might perhaps prove more fruitful to probe the experiential aspects of ‗why‘ they use information more deeply, what it contributes as an essential component of their practice and what it means to their creative development, both theoretical and practical.

2.6 Academic art librarians: professional identity and professional