IGF CultureWatch

On June 13, someone set fire to the gay/lesbian special collection at the John Merlo branch of the Chicago Public Library, destroying about 75-80 of the 800 books in the collection before the fire was extinguished.

Library administration spokeswoman Maggie Killackey downplayed the fire and a police spokeswoman said it was not a hate crime because there were no prior threats or anti-gay graffiti, as if that were sufficient to rule out anti-gay intent.

Most gays, however, noticing the timing just before the Gay Pride Parade and the Gay Games in Chicago, viewed the fire as an attempt to attack gays and mounted a sustained effort to draw media attention to the fire. Gratifyingly, television stations visited the library, interviewed gay spokesmen and covered a June 20 protest denouncing the police.

On June 21, police announced the arrest of a 21 year old pregnant, homeless woman with a long arrest record who said she wanted to protest the library's refusal to let her to sleep in the library. She said she did not know what books she burned but chose books in a secluded part of the library.

To gays familiar with Chicago police practices, the quick arrest of a suspect after major negative publicity, a homeless person at that, smacked of "round up the usual suspects." But the woman reportedly bragged to friends about setting the fire.

Police said, "What she did in her mind was little. She realized it got a lot bigger than she intended." If that means she bragged about the fire after noticing the media coverage or the man who reported her realized from the publicity that the fire was a major issue, or the woman meant that police intensified their efforts after all the publicity (as they did), all those suggest that the media attention and political pressure produced an arrest. Activism worked.

The fire raises concerns about the safety of the library and the gay collection. There seems to be no surveillance camera in the library entryway, so police could not determine who had come and gone near the time of the fire. Library security guards are there only part time. Patrons in the library at the time said smoke detectors did not go off. And the gay books might wisely be moved to a less secluded location.

But the pressing issue now is the Chicago Public Library's (CPL) offensive and dismissive policy of not accepting donated books. That policy must be revised.

With amazing speed to stanch bad publicity, within two weeks the CPL reordered books that could still be identified. But gay community members insisted that the collection not only be reconstituted but be expanded to better meet local needs and interests as well as send a warning to homophobes that attacks on gays will be countered with a greater positive response.

Yet when people brought books to branch libraries, they were told that the CPL does not accept donated books and their offers were rejected. (Do not blame branch libraries--they do not control policy.) This policy has created growing anger as people learn about it. Although people are still sympathetic with the Merlo branch which supports the unique gay collection people are increasingly angry at the elitist downtown administration.

At the June 20 demonstration, library spokeswoman Killackey complained to me with evident irritation, "People are bringing books to libraries all over Chicago." Stunned, I could only think to reply, "It's a shame libraries are getting more books."

Killackey's main rationale for the policy is that processing books "is not an efficient use of staff time." Yet it takes about 10 seconds for a subject area specialist to determine whether a book would be a useful addition and five minutes or less to process it if the Chicago system already has a copy anywhere else in the system. Clearly a bargain. If no Chicago library currently owns the book, it takes about a half hour to process it. But if the library can get a free $50-$60 university press book (a typical price for specialized books) for a half hour of processing time, that too seems like a bargain.

And the no-donations policy seems to be unique among libraries in the U.S. New York, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia told me they all accept and consider books donations. They leave it up to specialist librarians whether to add donated books to their collection based on the condition of the book, its value to the collection, and their current need. Reasonable enough.

Gays and lesbians in other cities who wish to help can donate funds for the Merlo gay book fund at the website of the Chicago Public library Foundation (www.chicagopubliclibraryfoundation.org). They would also be wise to learn from Chicago's sour experience. Consider donating library-appropriate gay and lesbian books in good condition to your local library. Talk with the librarian first to make sure they can be added to the collection, but please help expand the range of materials available for gays, students and other people who wish to learn about gay history and gay issues or wish to explore the gay/lesbian literary heritage.

For Chicagoans, the following are some possible responses: Write to Library Commissioner Mary Dempsey to urge revision of the policy. Write to Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley since Dempsey is a close ally. Donate gay books to any branch library you like (they could all use more) and let them cope with the problem. Call or write 44th Ward Alderman Tom Tunney (the Merlo branch is in his ward) and ask his help. Consider an informational picket outside Harold Washington Library downtown: The CPL honchos richly deserve the negative publicity they would get.