If the nature of a city and its people are reflected in the public/civic institutions they support, then Kathmandu appears distinctly barbaric. Our libraries are in shambles – they are run like museums, carrying bounded tomes of dust. Our museums are equally neglected for our present is too pressing to allow for anything but a haphazard and kitsch collection of artifacts. Granted, our museums are newer, they are after all institutes we created in the hope of becoming modern and Western: they bear the Western mind’s urge for documentation and definition. However, libraries have been around for longer – while restrictive in access, they have a long and distinctive history within South Asia.

The library and the museum stand in odd opposition. The museum seeks to capture time, to centre the past in a moment, or as Orhan Pamuk states in Museum of Innocence, “Real museums are places where Time is transformed into Space”. The library is fundamentally different. It is not a recorder of history but a source for history. It requires representation and interpretation. This is not to say museums do not raise questions, but the library is spatially constructed around inquiry while the museum is built to tell. You only raise questions in a museum if you are unhappy with what it tells you.

Kathmandu and other cities would do well to take a few lessons from the city of Seattle. With over 80% of Seattle’s population possessing library cards, the library has been at the heart of Seattle’s public services. The library holds a host of programmes targeting the various groups of people who live in the city. From major literary events to English language classes and career guidance, the library is invested in engaging its community. The Seattle Public Library benefited from a city supported US$290 million public bond issue for its 10-year Libraries for All programme, which began back in 1998. The money was used to rebuild its new central library and expanded to 26 locations around the city. While the amount of money raised is tied to the wealth of America and the city of Seattle, the commitment of its residents speaks volumes. Such commitment from patrons could reinvigorate library systems in any city.

The Seattle Public Library has received its fair share of criticism too, However, what makes it special is the road it has taken. Its outreach and engagement with the community has directly resulted in support from the community. When visiting the library, this is evident in the sheer number of people that come to use it on a daily basis. Strikingly, the library hosts a large number of the city’s homeless and jobless during opening hours. Within the library these people can stay warm, use the restrooms, and avail themselves of all the other services the library offers – free power charging points, free internet, lots of reading material, and plenty of space to lounge around. For people with few access to resources, such a space represents a beacon of opportunity. It is a space designed to encourage the use of its facilities and I am sure many have benefited from its openness.

How a city takes care of its homeless people at night is a different issue, but at least during its hours of operation, the library offers services and access to opportunities that are unavailable for many in other cities. Historically, libraries in South Asia were largely reserved for the upper caste – the right to knowledge and access to its sources were limited to them. The lower caste learnt professions through a generational transference of skills. This limited employment opportunities and secured the foundations of a highly structured system. If we are to get over this legacy and provide mobility, our libraries have to be open to everyone and they must start catering to the entire demographic range it services. They cannot expect to be passive Brahminic keepers of knowledge, but must begin to exercise the remnants of their wisdom.