Innovation is exciting and splashy; maintenance doesn’t get the same attention, but it’s absolutely essential. As Jenny Odell writes in How to Do Nothing: Resisting the Attention Economy (2020), “Our very idea of productivity is premised on the idea of producing something new, whereas we do not tend to see maintenance and care as productive in the same way.” And here’s John Green quoting Kurt Vonnegut in The Anthropocene Reviewed (2021): “[O]ne of the flaws of the human character is that ‘everybody wants to build and nobody wants to do maintenance.'”
My own human character is certainly flawed in other ways, but for the most part, I really enjoy “doing maintenance.” (Although it would also be really nice to trim my nails to the right length once and have them stay that way forever. Alas.) In the context of library work, though, it can be challenging to show how much time and care go into maintaining the programs, services, and space; nothing runs on autopilot, and everything takes time. Some tasks are daily, some weekly, some monthly, some quarterly or annually or as-needed, but it all adds up.
Library jobs are not the only ones affected by “scope creep” or “mission creep.” We’re often asked to – and praised for – “do(ing) more with less” (usually less resources and/or staff) but at some point, just maintaining everything you’re already doing takes all of your time, so in order to add something new, you have to take something away. In my current job, I’m fortunate that I’m not being pressured to do more all of the time, and I don’t have to push back and set those boundaries. (If you are in that position, a helpful phrase is, “Yes, we can do [new thing]. What are we going to reduce or stop doing in order to do [new thing]?” or some variant of that.)
My approach for the first year or so of this job was to maintain the programs that were already in place and popular, and try some new things too: the “Throw it at the wall and see what sticks” approach. Some were successful and are still going (Lego & Games two afternoons a week); some never got off the ground (Girls Who Code, Caregiver Cafe); some were successful for a while but ran their course (Pokemon Club, Comics Club, My First Book Club). When introducing a new program, you want to give it a few chances; don’t cancel it if no one shows up the first time.
As the new calendar year begins, I’ve made some changes to our programs: I replaced Comics Club/Comics & Crafts with STEAM Time, and My First Book Club is going on hiatus until summer; it might be a summer-only program, as it’s especially helpful for families with rising kindergarteners. Caregiver Cafe didn’t work out, but Baby Lapsit Storytime has been a great success.
Again, I’m fortunate that I have the autonomy to make these decisions and these changes, and respond to community needs. “That’s how it’s always been done,” on its own, is not a good reason to continue doing things that way; at the same time, new is not always better. What programs are most popular in your library? What programs have flopped? Which have been successful?
I decided our February book club would be the last one until summer, when I would run it again for a new group of rising K/1st graders. No one showed up for the program…but, there were plenty of kids and adults in the children’s room, so I invited them all in for a storytime instead. We read the same two books – Arihhonni David’s The Good Game and Who Will Win? – and used the coloring sheets I’d printed (a flying squirrel and a bat, characters in The Good Game), I just sprinkled in a few songs and rhymes as well: “Open Shut Them,” “The Itsy-Bitsy Spider,” and 
Three of the younger kids started with Robot Turtles, and the others began making codes for each other to decipher. I gave a basic explanation about how to use the Caesar cipher (or shift cipher), then helped the kids get Robot Turtles set up, then helped the ones who were having trouble figuring out the ciphers. (I think one thing that tripped them up initially was the letter-letter correspondence, rather than letter-number correspondence; the only number you need with this kind of cipher is the “shift,”; it’s not an A=1, B=2 kind of code.) But eventually, everyone figured it out, and then they could swap ciphered messages to decipher!
In the next few weeks, we’ll have a building challenge with blocks (we have both regular and life-size Jenga), a puzzle challenge (a 36-piece jigsaw with the picture showing, then upside down), penny boats, Snap Circuits, primary color painting (think Mix It Up!), and more. What STEAM activities do you like to do with kids?
The kids’ graphic novel book club I started last fall is still going strong, with about 4-7 kids attending each month. This month we read Lucky Scramble by Peter Raymundo, about a kid named Tyler who goes to a Rubik’s cube competition. Our icebreaker question was “What’s your favorite kind of puzzle?” and a lot of the kids said “Rubik’s cube,” even though none of us could solve one. (I said word puzzles, like wordle, and it turns out all of the kids also do the NYT puzzles!)
Last, the kids voted on which book to read next. The choices were Curveball by Pablo Cartaya, Pebble & Wren by Chris Hallbeck, and Puzzled by Pan Cooke. The first two got one vote each and Puzzled got two votes, so that will be our February book – but all three books got checked out. It was a good afternoon!
WeNeedDiverseBooks: 189. Less than last year both in terms of numbers and percentage of the total, though I do suspect myself of undercounting/tagging.
Passive programming, or self-directed programming, is a type of program that library patrons can participate in independently or with only minimal interaction with library staff. This recent 
Jenny Arch 