Exchange library

Walking down the street, on a sidewalk, hanging from a tree, there were two wooden crates of the kind commonly used in the fruit and vegetable sector. They were painted red and yellow, with strips of blue paper glued to them. Next to them, on the tree, three signs read "exchange library," "free library," and "leave a book, take another."

Right there, a kindergarten operates within the building. It is safe to assume this was an educational activity for the children. And I can imagine it was an activity integrated with the children's parents. I must clarify that these are merely assumptions born from simple, brief observation. But suffice it to say that the crates were placed at a height that a kindergarten child cannot reach, even on tiptoes and standing on the planter. Meanwhile, parents can easily reach them since both crates are at their height. Furthermore, the crates were not placed inside the kindergarten, but outside, right at the entrance where all the parents gather to drop off and pick up the children.

The system is simple: you leave a book and take another, creating an exchange circuit where, by simply contributing one book, you can read many different ones. Roughly speaking, it sounds fabulous. A recreational activity where everyone wins and intellectually enriches themselves in knowledge, always thinking of young children—presumably, these are books for kindergarten-aged kids, around three, four, or five years old.

Of course, for this system to work, a few other elements are needed: responsibility, solidarity, and the non-interruption of the circuit by those participating. It only takes one person not complying for the circuit to break. Or perhaps one person fails to comply, and out of imitation, the rest follow suit.

Unfortunately, these systems do not work—at least not in our society, and I would believe in the vast majority of them—and here, it did not work. My wife and I walked past one day and saw a single book placed there, waiting for the exchange; it was a book with a white spine, and there it was. Two days later we passed by again, and there were no longer any books, just a couple of magazines. They looked like those small, free delivery pamphlets advertising neighborhood service classifieds. Then, another visit later, there were two used books with adult themes, such as a world economy and finance novel. By a week later, the crates were completely empty, and in the meantime, rain had fallen and peeled off some of the colorful paper that decorated them. And so they remained for days. Empty.

The system did not work (at least in my view); selfishness, malice, disrespect, opportunism, harm—I don't know what it could be, a lot of conjectures come to mind, and all of them are bad. That individual who took the book (whether it was the one we saw or another that had been there) and left two free service advertisement magazines—why did they do it? There is a general principle that states "do not harm others." Did that person not think they were causing harm? Wasn't it better to leave nothing? Why did they take the book and not leave another? Did they really need it to read? After reading it, did they return it? Would they understand the difference between a book and a magazine? And that is assuming, in the best-case scenario, that they were an ignorant person, but even then, it doesn't add up; negative ideas assail me. Could they have been an opportunist? Did they take the book to keep it for themselves? Did they sell it? Did they give it away? Did they throw it away? Is it a manifestation of what is commonly called "cunning resourcefulness" (viveza criolla)? Could it have been a considerate attitude, thought out with a certain malice to cause harm and make the system fail? With current technologies, one might think the event was recorded by some dome or security camera nearby and that we could see who did it through the footage. But what good is that? We would only see an act and would not know the motivation. And even if we did find the author, and after a chat with them found the motivation (justified or not), what good would it do? None at all, because the "book exchange" system is already compromised; it has stopped working.

Many aspects come to mind here. These chain systems do not work; time is wasted, and other "members" or participants in the chain are affected. Chain letters are ancient and never worked; in theory, the analysis almost always turns out fantastic where everyone wins, but in practice, when individuals get involved, irresponsibility takes over, and the system is truncated and fails.

However, there are other similar systems that have a certain level of efficiency, though never complete. There are projects called "wandering library," "libertarian exchange library," etc., but they are never left entirely to the freedom of anonymous people to function; they have certain minimum rules of order or control.

In the aforementioned example, the two boxes were left without any control; anyone had access to them, no one was there observing or making sure that whoever takes a book leaves another, and this lack of control caused someone to abuse their freedom and cross into a lawlessness where selfishness and malice prevailed—over something as small as a book.

There was also the occasional error regarding inclement weather; the lack of a rain-protected place where people are asked to leave a book seriously affects how the system functions.

I am talking about all of this focusing on the physical realm and not the electronic and/or digital, since there the exchange issue (for example, P2P or other systems) works relatively well, whereas chain systems, hoaxes, fake news, and massive deceptions—where the organizer generally benefits while everyone else loses, though they usually go unnoticed for various reasons (minimal impact, ease of reproduction, etc.)—do not.

The positive aspect I see is the integration of parents. If it was designed that way—and that's what it seems to me—it can act as a motivator for parents to bring children closer to reading, and not just reading, but engaging in it by discussing the books or telling them the stories (in the case of storybooks) presented in the books. This is a flaw that occurs in many families, and I believe it has always been the case: just as there are parents who support their children's studies, there are others who are completely detached from it. It is one more motivation that helps children develop their imagination and fantasy. But although it seems simple, it is not entirely so; there are always reticent or "distracted" parents who don't care much, for whatever reason, and I believe that the vast majority of the time it is not an economic issue, but a cultural one.

The system implemented in the elementary school I attended was not far from this one, but it did have some variations. I don't remember the exact grade, but I think it was second or third grade: in an office that doubled as a "library," there was a table, and spread out on the table was a good and varied selection of children's storybooks. They would take the whole class and allow each student to take a book to read; after a week, it had to be returned. This was repeated twice a year. The second time, each student had to bring a book or booklet of their own to leave and contribute to the "library"; it could be new or used, and most brought a used one. But even with that system, there were always students who didn't bring any. It is understood that there was also a responsibility on the part of parents to cooperate with the child so they would bring the book—that is, the parent had to allow them to take the book, help and advise them for the best, and in many cases buy the book for them to take. And all of this, in many cases, did not happen. 

There were also cases of students who took the book and, after a week passed, did not return it. Some forgot, and two or three days later the book was returned, but there were those few cases where the book or booklet never came back. In this system, the parents' responsibility was at home; there was no parent-school contact, unlike these crates on the kindergarten sidewalk, where although there is no direct parent-kindergarten contact, the bond is closer because it reaches the very door of the facility, and inevitably, many parents likely cross paths with each other when they pick up and/or drop off a book. And here I see that situations can arise where parents chat with other parents and with their children about books and reading, as well as the positive imitation of some parents seeing others exchange books, and finally, a sort of positive social control toward those parents who are more reticent to exchange a book with their children.