It is a hindrance to investigation to have to make inquiries, or selections, through the medium of an application at a desk. A large number of serious readers want to glance at all the books bearing on the point they are investigating, often to “taste” books by dipping into them here and there; and to make choice directly from the shelves, of books they want to examine more thoroughly or copy from, to be carried to a public or private reading room and used there undisturbed at leisure. They want free access to the stack for ten minutes only at a time, but they want it badly. See Fletcher.[289]
“It is fortunate for those who have the use of a library if they can be admitted to the shelves and select their books by actual examination.”—Cutter.[290]
For this, several devices have been used. One is to leave the space in stacks next to windows for tables and chairs, to be used by readers. “Or alcoves on one side, as in Iowa College.”—(Marvin.[291]) A variation of this takes the form of “cubicles,” little glassed-in rooms next the windows, as in the new Harvard Law School stack, or as proposed for the Harvard University Library. But before using this form generally, it would be better to calculate, first, how much space this will abstract from the storage capacity of the stack; second, how much it affects the penetration of daylight into the stack; third, how often any one reader will want to use any one section of the library so long as to make this arrangement worth while; fifth, the expense of construction and provision of equivalent stack room elsewhere; and sixth, the problems of heating and ventilation, for readers who require reading-room conditions.
Another favorite device is to shorten the outer ends of ranges of shelves, say by one three-foot section, in every other case on every floor, where a tiny desk can be set into the range, with a chair or stool underneath for the use of a reader. This furnishes room for reading but pro tanto less space for books.
Open Access Stacks. Can wider aisles be left in stacks so that readers may stand well back or stoop to inspect books, and pass each other easily? Yes, stack cases five feet “on centres” will allow fairly free movement, as this means 3-feet-6-inch or even 3-feet-8-inch aisles. But no such width could well be allowed as is called for with open-access floor cases, i.e., six feet clear between. The present methods of stack construction would not apparently lend themselves well to wide spaces on the ground floor and narrow spaces above, because the uprights would not directly support each other. A building might have, indeed, two or more different stacks, one open access for readers, the other close storage for books, but this seems rather wasteful. Is there no way to provide, in a stack which will give the maximum storage, some facility for such inspection and handling as is needed both for staff and readers?
A Suggestion. In reading “Clark’s Use of Books,” I came across an old expedient of mediæval days which will give a good name for the device I had already thought of. (See next section.) His quotation[292] is as follows:—
“In the north Syde, the Cloister was all fynely glazed. And in every wyndowe iii Pewes or Carrels, where every one of the old Monks had his carrell, severall by himselfe, and there studied upon there books. From one stanchell of a window to another, and in every one was a deske to lye their bookes on.” “These were devices to provide a certain amount of privacy for literary work.”[293]
Carrels. While thinking of this conflict between the desired use by readers and the close storage which is the proper use of a stack, I tried to find some wasted space which might serve the one use without infringing upon the other. While searching I noticed that window ledges were thus wasted. Look through Koch’s floor plans,[294] or any others, and you will notice that window frames, usually set midway between the outer and inner surfaces of the wall, were sometimes set flush with the inner surface, thus leaving outside a window “stool” nearly the full width of the wall. But why leave it outside where it would be only useful for pigeon-roosts or flower-boxes, neither strictly necessary? Why not set the window-frame flush with the outer wall and so leave the whole ledge inside, both sill and stool? In the Salem Public Library stack, as the architect saw no structural reason against it, this has been tried. In each stack window on every floor a thin shelf has been run across, table high. The setting back allows this shelf to be twelve inches deep and three feet long without projecting into the aisle, and without materially interfering with light. Set a stool near and here is provision, close to the books, and without cutting into the stack, for just as many choosers of books as there are windows on each floor. When no readers need them, here is a ledge for attendants to use in assembling or dispersing books.
This device does not suit permanent reading, for which the stack is not intended,—but why does it not perfectly meet the needs of casual inspection, and choice?