Kenyon’s library gets a bad rep. Maybe it’s because the thought of the place, for many, stirs up associations with late-night cram sessions and all the homework left to be done. Despite this, Olin is still a bustling metropolis for quiet studying and an employer of many students for various jobs. In accordance with the proposed “Master Plan” for the college, however, the building will be demolished in favor of a new, larger building.
Many people will tell you that they think Olin is the ugliest building on our campus. Yes, tucked between the classical architecture of Rosse Hall and the modern sleekness of Gund Gallery, Olin can seem plain and unimposing. Our campus is known for its beauty, but I have never heard someone say that the library’s appearance has completely tainted the ambience of Kenyon. With its unique geometrical windows tucked behind blossoming trees, the library offers some diversity. How boring would our campus be if all buildings were carbon copies of each other? Let’s be real: No one has claimed that the NCAs are the most beautiful spot on campus. Though Olin may not please everyone’s aesthetic pallet, it presents us with something different.
Isn’t the heart of beauty internal anyways? Think of the wealth of knowledge available at Olin. A new library would house just as many books, but where will they go during the time between Olin’s deconstruction and a new library’s completion? It takes around two years to construct a building here such as the one proposed. In addition to books, the library hosts a multitude of services for students and staff, such as Helpline, the CIP, the Director of Disability Services, Special Collections, Collection Services, Operation services, other technological support offices, and much more. Where will they be housed for the time it takes to construct a new building? How much confusion would be caused in this span?
Maybe the library is not beautiful, but the work put into improving it every year is constant and heartfelt. Staff members painstakingly pick out fabric for new chairs and plot plans to remove old furniture and bring new in. This is a long process that is overlooked by most. So is the constant maintenance, not only of the furniture but also of everything else in the library, from Helpline serving printers to the student workers cleaning whiteboards and replenishing markers throughout the building.
For me, the most prominent issue the library presents is that we are more focused on building new, aesthetic constructions than preserving what we already have. Buildings have already been torn down to create parking lots and space for larger, modern buildings. We have here a historic campus, and though the library is not very old, it still stands to represent this issue. If we tear down newer buildings with no structural problems, what will stop us from tearing down buildings like Bexley and Rosse, who are classically built and teaming with historical background?
Certainly, accessibility needs to be improved upon in many buildings, but why not improve on what we have, instead of building from scratch?
Image: staticflickr.com