I’ve utilized the many resources made available by by the San Jose Public Library system almost my entire life. My childhood and adolescence roughly coincides with the rise of home computers, mass adoption of the internet, and the advent of the digital age. Little did I suspect that these radical changes were raising real concerns about the future of libraries as a physical space (Jochumsen et al., 2012). After all, the digitization of knowledge has many advantages: Digital files can be accessed from almost anywhere at any time by multiple people AT THE SAME TIME, they are easily copied, and storage is less of an issue (Buckland, 1999). As the Cro Magnon supplanted the primitive Neanderthal, so too it seemed (to some), librarians were destined to be replaced by the Cybrarian! That is an objectively cool title, first coined by Michel Bawens (Dey, 2012). Luckily for members of the public, as well as future librarians like myself, something wonderful happened. Thanks in large part to dedicated information professionals grappling with complicated questions on a largely unexplored frontier, libraries today have evolved into hybrid entities capitalizing on the advantages of both physical and virtual spaces; Networked technologies and other digital tools have increased the quality and scope of services available to users regardless of proximity to the building itself (Stephens 2016). Meanwhile, physical libraries are thriving and increasingly been seen as vital community hubs to play, learn, explore, and engage meaningfully with others (Jochumsen et al., 2012; Wyatt & Leorke, 2024). Nowhere is this more evident than in an exciting and (relatively) new model for public libraries: The four spaces.
The Four Spaces
Jochumsen et al. (2012) propose that the primary purpose of a library is, “to support the following four goals: experience, involvement, empowerment, and innovation.” In short these goals, can help users to find meaning, connection, and purpose while becoming a stronger, more confident citizenry (though not necessarily confined to one nation). What I love about this model is that it has massive societal benefits that can be touted to the public or politicians to garner support for libraries (especially crucial in the age of budget cuts and austerity measures), but never loses sight of the fact that each of these goals are virtues in their own right which add richness and value to life itself.
The four spaces that give the model its name are: the inspiration space, the learning space, the meeting space, and the performative space. The inspiration space is meant to expand people’s worldview and should inspire users to move outside their comfort zones (Laerkes, 2016; Jochumsen et al., 2012). The learning space should offer, “free and unrestricted access to information and knowledge” (Laerkes, 2016). The meeting space is a place, neither work nor home, where people can gather either incidentally or purposely to socialize, debate or discuss issues big and small (Laerkes, 2016; Jochumsen et al., 2012). In the performing space, users should have access to both tools necessary to pursue creative endeavors as well as the platforms to publish and/or distribute them.
But How Do We Use It?
It is important to note that these “spaces” are not necessarily distinct from each other or limited to the material world (Laerkes, 2016; Jochumsen et al., 2012). In fact, the promise of the four spaces model is best fulfilled by utilizing the best traits of both the physical and online worlds. This model is an incredibly versatile tool allowing cities to build innovative new libraries from the ground up or redesign libraries already in existence to maximize their benefit to the public.
I have a lifelong love of making art. A lot of the ideas flowing through my head after reading about the four space model had to do with arts programming for libraries. Imagine a public library where a user could attend a flipbook animation class, but all the drawings are done in the margins of paperback books that were going to be discarded. Paperbacks flip incredibly well with no assembly required and despite the limited drawing real estate, it’s a great activity. I like to think it challenges people’s assumptions about art, and the tools required to make it. Plus defacing books in a library definitely forces people outside their comfort zones. Could this activity inspire the next Chuck Jones? Frequent comics maker meet-ups, in person or virtually, could allow users to learn the craft of cartooning through formal instruction as well as group games like making jam comics. An example of which is seen below:
Try this at home with friends! Divide a sheet of paper into panels. Each person draws a panel, when they finish, pass the paper to another. That person continues the comic with no verbal input/instruction allowed from the previous artist. When everyone is done, spread the pages out on the table and enjoy! It’s loose, it’s fun, and can be done at any artistic skill level. Endless variations exist, such as starting from the last panel and working backwards. Ok, we now return to your regularly scheduled programming.
My hypothetical (but soon to be realized) comics gatherings would allow users to meet and discuss shared interests. As a bonus, most libraries already possess the necessary tools to make and distribute comics (pencils, paper, xerox machines, internet connection). With a little instruction, xerox machines could be used to self-publish indie comics and artwork could be uploaded to a user’s webcomic with a scanners and an internet connection. If public interest was high enough a library could even host, live readings of people’s comics; yet another way for artists to perform. The point is, keeping the four spaces in mind when planning programming unlocks infinite opportunities.
Two Libraries come to mind when thinking about the four space models. The Morgan Hill Public Library (part of the Santa Clara County system) and the Martin Luther King Branch (of the San Jose Public Library system). Both possess collections that are broad, eclectic, and original; the displays are innovative and tickle the user’s natural curiosity. For example,The Martin Luther King Branch of the SJPL system has in their mystery section a revolving bookshelf, a staple of the genre, among MANY other easter eggs hidden throughout the building.
Morgan Hill hosts a story time that my wife and I liken to a baby rave with sing-a-longs, toy props, and games. Both Libraries, have spaces dedicated to exploration and experimentation. The teen center in MLK has a makerspace complete with 3D printer and audio recording booth . Interestingly, both libraries were built in the early aughts before the four spaces were were fully conceptualized as a model for libraries. This just goes to show that more than any physical characteristic of the library, or how current their technology is, the key component of the four space models is a dedicated library staff who are responsive to the needs and desires of their communities.
References
Buckland, M. (1999). Redesigning Library Services: A Manifesto. American Library Association
Dey, T. (2012). Cybrarian: The Librarian of Future Digital Library. International Journal of Information Dissemination and Technology, 2(3), 209-.
Jochumsen, H., Casper, H. R., & Skot-Hansen, D. (2012). The four spaces – a new model for the public library. New Library World, 113(11), 586-597. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/03074801211282948
Laerkes, J. (2016, March 29). The four spaces of the public library. IFLA. https://blogs.ifla.org/public-libraries/2016/03/29/the-four-spaces-of-the-public-library/
Wyatt, D., & Leorke, D. (2024). Playing in the “third place”: How games and play are transforming public libraries. Space and Culture, 27(2), 254–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/12063312231223118
