At a press conference on a plan to merge two of Russia's largest libraries, the RSL in Moscow and the NLR in St. Petersburg, the director of the latter surprised journalists and colleagues with a statement: the library has too many copies of Eugene Onegin, and "two or three" would be enough. ". And in general: “Why do we need libraries if everything is on the Internet?”.

Alexander Visly, Director of the National Library of Russia

After journalists became aware of plans to merge the two largest libraries in Russia, the Russian State Library in Moscow and the Russian National Library in St. Petersburg, into one institution, bibliographers, scholars and journalists are concerned about the possible consequences of such a merger. In St. Petersburg, people picket, sign petitions against unification, and hold conferences at which they explain how two large libraries are better for the country than one.

On Wednesday, March 1, ITAR-TASS organized a press conference for the directors of two libraries - Vladimir Gnezdilov and Alexander Visly (). The head of the St. Petersburg library, Visly, made several statements that surprised and worried journalists. About it posted on facebook historian and journalist Daniil Kotsiubinsky.

Today at a press conference in ITAR-TASS, for the first time in my life, I realized what a pure bibliographic idiot is. That is, a person who does not understand at all what a book is and why it is needed.

According to Visly, Russian libraries do not need "too much influx of paper books." At the same time, the director of the library, judging by his words, does not understand how the concepts of “copy” of a book and “edition” differ.

It is much cheaper to keep one electronic copy and one hard copy in the library than two hard copies. And even in case of loss of a printed copy, there is always the opportunity to make a printed copy from an electronic copy and replenish this printed copy.

After all, each copy of the library needs "pr And to take” (with an emphasis on “and”), the director complained, and this is two carloads of books annually. Do we really need so many books?

There is a very simple question: how many copies of "Eugene Onegin" should be in electronic form? Well, one, well, two, well, three, right? And how many actually printed copies of "Eugene Onegin" does each national library keep? Over ten thousand. Therefore, all the same, everything printed should not be digitized.

Kotsiubinsky points out that for a library director, this level of understanding is a sign of incompetence:

Natalia Sokolovskaya, who was sitting next to me, almost jumped with indignation: “Does he not understand that these are all different books?” No, he doesn't understand! For he probably does not know that there are prefaces, notes, illustrations in books. That a book is not an “electronic letter carrier”, but also a monument of that era and the circumstances under which it saw the light. That, for example, the text of "Eugene Onegin" changed depending on the time of publication ...

Even at the very beginning of the press conference, Alexander Visly wondered why libraries are needed at all, if everything is available on the Internet. During the event, the director of the National Library of Russia did not give an answer.

The public is the same symbol of St. Petersburg as Isaac. Signed a petition against the accession of the National Library of Russia to the RSL.
Next: an interesting text that describes the current situation.

Who and why wants to destroy the Russian National Library

The National Library of Russia (RNL), according to the decree of the President of Russia, is a particularly valuable object of national heritage and constitutes the historical and cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation. The RNL is one of the largest libraries in the world, the second largest collection in Russia, and now a serious threat hangs over it - they want to optimize it and merge it with the Russian State Library. This, in turn, will lead to the fact that the National Library of Russia will lose the right to receive a mandatory copy of new book publications, which now guarantees the acquisition of its funds. The destruction of the National Library of Russia as an independent unit will deal an irreparable blow not only to Russian science and St. Petersburg as the cultural capital of Russia, but also to the entire national librarianship. Let me remind you that in the Year of Literature, the country already lost the library of INION RAS, and the new acting. Ilya Zaitsev, director of INION, now directly states that the country does not need an “pre-fire” INION: “The world has changed. You can order any book in any country. Translating it is no problem either. A huge amount of information on the Internet. Therefore, that INION does not correspond to modern realities, ”Polit.ru quotes Zaitsev as saying.

"Moreover, - as Mazuritsky notes, - according to A.I. Visly and V.I. Gnezdilov, the merger of libraries will make it possible to halve the number of copies of printed materials required for "eternal" storage, which will make it possible for 15; 20 years (Attention! In fact, this cheerful declaration means that one of the megacities - Moscow or St. training centers!), or at worst they will be distributed between the library and its ... branch according to the principle: this is for me, this is for you, this is also for me.)"

Now a petition "Against the destruction of the Russian National Library" has been created on the Change.org website. To date, more than 2,000 people have signed it. The petition contains the following demands: "In connection with the current situation, we, employees of institutions of science, culture and education in St. Petersburg, consider it necessary:
1. Preserve the independence of the Russian National Library as the oldest public library in Russia, which has the status of a particularly valuable cultural object.
2. Retain the right of the National Library of Russia to receive a legal deposit in accordance with the Federal Law "On the legal deposit of documents" dated December 29, 1994, No. 77-FZ.
3. Put under control the process of completing the construction of the storage facilities of the new building of the National Library of Russia on Moskovsky Prospekt (second stage) and the timely repair of other buildings of the library."

These proposals are quite reasonable, but their implementation will require the active participation of the entire civil society, concerned about the state and preservation of Russian culture. Honored librarians have already sent an open letter to President Putin, in which they expressed their protest against the merger of the largest libraries. "In our country, there has been a long-term and consistent destruction of the library system. The network of municipal libraries is annually reduced by 700 - 900 institutions, there is an outflow of qualified personnel. The library school and library science are in crisis. The library policy of the Ministry of Culture of Russia contradicts the Fundamentals of the State Cultural Policy, which provides for the preservation of libraries as a public institution for the distribution of books and familiarization with reading. Of particular concern is the intention to unite the two largest national libraries - the Russian State Library (RSL, the former State Library of the USSR named after V.I. Lenin in Moscow) and the Russian National Library (RNL, the former State Public Library of the RSFSR named after M.E. Saltykov- Shchedrin in St. Petersburg)," their letter, signed by three doctors of sciences Valery Leonov, Arkady Sokolov and Yuri Stolyarov, says.

The authors of the letter also state: “It seems to us absurd and regrettable that outsiders decide the fate of Russian libraries without the participation of library professionals, that library functionaries and ministerial officials dictate which national libraries we need.<...>We ask you to prevent the upcoming anti-library, anti-cultural action."

On January 11, a press conference was held by the general director of the National Bank Alexander Visly, at which he did not refute the information about the impending merger. “The talk about ‘something needs to be united’ has been going on in the country’s two main libraries for 20 years, and now there is just another surge,” the official hastened to reassure. – I even saw the draft government decree of 2002. The story is clear: two national libraries in the country is a lot, and even three is a little overkill (the Yeltsin Library also has the status of a national library). Now this story has arisen again ... I think time will pass, and it will arise again, then again and again ... ”, Novaya Gazeta - St. Petersburg reports Visly's words. When asked to name the advantages of the merger of the National Library of Russia and the RSL, the general director replied that there would be a reduction in the staff of the libraries: "If we combine computer services, economic and financial, then it is clear that there will be benefits." The peculiarity of the moment, according to Wisly, is that "the unification of electronic resources is inevitable, and it is moving forward." To a direct question from Novaya Gazeta whether or not an appeal was sent to Prime Minister Medvedev, Alexander Visly did not answer. As well as he refused to name the initiators of the draft of such a document.

Let me remind you that back in October 2013, the philosopher Alexander Rubtsov wrote an article “Why the Mania for Mergers Has Taken Over the Russian Power”, in which he noted that “convulsive attempts of officials to create something big and great are harmful to both the Academy of Sciences and the Mariinsky Theatre.” As Rubtsov rightly writes: “The point is no longer in specific situations, but in the very mania to merge everything, whether it be science, art, winter time or time zones. Why right now, excessively playful hands suddenly began to reach for objects that the authorities protected centuries - and in liberal periods, and in bouts of autocracy, and in enlightened governments, and even in times of ideological obscurantism no worse than the present. To the last question, he answers as follows: “The authorities in Russia are generally uncomfortable with this complexity of the country and with its size. But now it is getting worse. Ancestors had “small chain mail” - this is clearly great. The outstanding Russian economic geographer Leonid Smirnyagin once accurately noted: these guys are constantly bothered by the fact that the country is big ... "

The writer Mikhail Zolotonosov also wrote the following about the plan to merge the largest libraries in Russia: “The project begins with megalomania, characteristic of all totalitarian regimes.<...>We will be explained that, firstly, you can go to Moscow (or, conversely, to St. from two EB buildings) the paper book will be immediately digitized, and the digital copy will be forwarded to the building where there is no paper original. The idea is rotten and vicious in principle, since, firstly, the paper original of the publication and its image in the computer are fundamentally different things, working with paper originals is much more convenient than manipulating scrollbars (this is especially true for Ogonyok magazines and newspapers, to watch which de visu, say, for a year on the screen is one torment), and it is not by chance that the scroll in the process of the evolution of culture was replaced by a codex; in addition, all illustrations look completely different on paper and in a computer; secondly, one can imagine how many errors will be digitized (this number of errors can be judged, for example, by the American project books.google); thirdly, as you know, the entire project of the NEL contradicts the existing copyright law (it is no coincidence that Visly admitted that he is seeking at least partial abolition of it) and will only spur the circulation of pirated copies of paper books on the Internet, which will go from libraries to "Big world"; fourthly, the existing technological level of storing information in digital form does not provide durability and reliability comparable to the reliability and durability of paper as an information carrier (paper is many times more durable), and in relation to water and fire, paper and a microcircuit are equally defenseless; fifthly, the National Library of Russia and the RSL, two national repositories of printed publications, should duplicate each other, this is fundamentally important, because it ensures reliability in case of disasters (remember the fires in the BAN and INION)".

Perhaps the same can be said about other major libraries? But here is a wonderful commentary on the words of Zaitsev, INION employee Svetlana Pogorelskaya: “This is not true. Firstly, "any book in any country" you can not "order", but BUY. Neither a student nor a graduate student can afford it. They need a library with this book or a license that allows computer access to the digitized version of this book. Secondly, "it will not be a problem to translate" (c) - yeah, well, yes - machine translation from Japanese into Russian through Google, for example. Thirdly, on the Internet - all access to archives and articles is paid, you need to buy licenses, and for this you need a library. It's amazing how people look from their rich perspective without even thinking that the library and abstract services of the institute are for those who can NOT "order a book in any country" and "translate it without problems", for students, graduate students, for scientific personnel in the Russian regions "The world has changed", yeah. Some have become rich, while others have become poor, and the rich have ceased to understand the poor.” She also worries that “monsieur plans, at the suggestion of FANO, to halve or quarter book stocks.”

The problem with the INION library and the National Library of Russia fit perfectly into the logic of the current government, which seeks in every possible and impossible way to reduce government spending on science and culture and generally reduce the diversity of various cultural institutions. The director of the National Library of Russia also changed in 2016 - by the decision of the Minister of Culture, Alexander Visly, who headed from 2009 to 2016, was appointed to this position. Russian State Library. No one particularly concealed what tasks were assigned to the new leader, who himself mentioned in an interview with the Izvestia newspaper in February 2016: "There were historical precedents and showed that there is nothing terrible in merging libraries." It is quite obvious that Visly was transferred to St. Petersburg for the successful conduct of a special operation to eliminate the RNB as an independent structure.

The new general director of the National Library of Russia has already begun to give away library buildings to the insatiable Russian Orthodox Church, swallowing up more and more objects of cultural significance. So, by September 1 of this year, the National Library of Russia will hand over to the St. Petersburg diocese one of its buildings on the Obvodny Canal (it was built in the 1880s). As Visly explained: “The building is transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church. Of course, this is not such an acute issue as with Isaac, because this building used to belong to the church. But there is a very valuable fund there, personal libraries are kept there...”.

On January 10, an expert in the field of library science, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences Alexander Mazuritsky wrote that the project on the merger of the National Library of Russia and the Russian State Library was nearing its final stage: "And it became known that just before the New Year, the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation received an appeal from the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation V.R. Medinsky with a request to support the joint proposal of the Russian State Library (V.I. Gnezdilov) and the Russian National Library (A.I. Visly) to merge. The National Library of Russia will ensure the creation of the world's largest national library (more than 30 million books and more than 1.5 million copies of handwritten and printed book monuments), will eliminate duplication of functions and increase the efficiency of the joint library."

But the opinion of the well-known philologist Gasan Huseynov: “Neither during wars, nor during revolutions, nor in the era of ideological persecution, did the country encroach on the national heritage. Why did they encroach now, today? The answer is obvious: someone wanted to get historical buildings created at one time specifically for national libraries - as it was, is and will be in all developed countries, where national and university libraries are expanding, even side by side<...>If the message about the plans to move and merge the two largest libraries is not a stupid rumor, but true, then this is evidence of a dangerous administrative degradation, the consequence of which will be cultural and scientific degradation. Maybe it's even useful - to show by a living example to what absurdity the bureaucracy can sink. And yet, it is infinitely pitiful for the next generations, who will simply run away from the predatory savagery, hiding behind the reform ... "

I myself agree with Professor Huseynov and believe that such experiments on Russian national heritage sites are completely unacceptable, and even more so such decisions should not be made without lengthy and thorough consultations with the cultural and scientific expert community. I urge everyone to sign the Internet petition in defense of the National Library of Russia and keep the main library of St. Petersburg as an independent unit.

You can also subscribe to my pages:
- on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/podosokorskiy
- on Twitter: https://twitter.com/podosokorsky
- in contact: http://vk.com/podosokorskiy

http://philologist.livejournal.com/9026935.html

20:58 - REGNUM

© Evgeny Gnatenko

The proposal to merge the Russian State Library (Moscow) and the Russian National Library (St. Petersburg), with which the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation V.R. On the eve of the New Year, Medinsky addressed the Chairman of the Government D.A. Medvedev met with a sharp protesting reaction from the library community. Professionals emphasize that the implementation of the project will lead to the actual destruction of the National Library of Russia - the largest national book depository, a library of not just all-Russian, but global scale. Three leading representatives of Russian library science: scientific director Libraries of the Academy of Sciences V.P. Leonov, Professor A.V. Sokolov and Yu.N. Stolyarov - addressed the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin with an open letter.

President of the Russian Federation

V.V. Putin

Topic: Ministry of Culture vs Libraries

Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich!

In our country there is a long-term and consistent destruction of the library system. The network of municipal libraries is annually reduced by 700-900 institutions, there is an outflow of qualified personnel. The library school and library science are in crisis. The library policy of the Ministry of Culture of Russia contradicts the Fundamentals of the State Cultural Policy, which provides for the preservation of libraries as a public institution for the distribution of books and familiarization with reading. Of particular concern is the intention to unite the two largest national libraries - the Russian State Library (RSL, the former State Library of the USSR named after V.I. Lenin in Moscow) and the Russian National Library (RNL, the former State Public Library of the RSFSR named after M.E. Saltykov- Shchedrin in St. Petersburg). As we know, the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation received an appeal from Minister V.R. Medinsky with a request to support the joint proposal of the current general directors of the RSL (V.I. Gnezdilov) and the National Library of Russia (A.I. Visly) on the merger. This most important national-cultural action is being prepared privately, in bureaucratic offices, secretly from the staff of the RSL and the National Library of Russia, not to mention Russian librarians, who are vitally interested in the normal development of the leading organizations of the industry. The interests of the Ministry of Culture can be judged by the arguments set forth in the appeal to the Government of the Russian Federation.

It turns out that the leadership of the national culture is not concerned about the crisis state of the library industry and the reasonable use of its cultural, educational and scientific information potential, but about saving costs for the maintenance of the RSL and the NRL. In the case of merging libraries, the sources of savings allegedly lie on the surface: there is no need to duplicate funds, it is enough to receive one “mandatory copy” instead of two; the problem of shortage of space will be solved and the cost of processing literature and maintaining electronic catalogs will be halved; due to the reduction of the administrative apparatus (at the same time, we add, and production personnel), wage savings of the order of 250 million rubles a year will be obtained; finally, the status of the united Russian library in the international arena will increase and the costs of international activities (membership fees, etc.) will be reduced. Such an argument is not like an economically and culturally-politically justified elaboration of the proposed reform. Of course, the meager finances allocated to the Ministry of Culture must be spent carefully, and why not combine the Tretyakov Gallery and the Russian Museum for reasons of economy?!

As for readers, the initiators of the association of national libraries promise them that it "will allow to unify services for access to full-text electronic publications and will give a new impetus to the development of the federal state information system National Electronic Library (NEB)". It is not clear why the "new impetus" of the NEB cannot be given through business cooperation, without administrative unification.

It remains a mystery to us why the Ministry of Culture is interested in creating a “centaur library” with its head in Moscow and its tail in St. Petersburg? Or vice versa. Until now, librarianship has not known such monsters throughout its thousand-year history. In order to create this miracle, at the beginning of 2016, it was necessary to turn the General Director of the RSL A.I. Visly to the General Director of the National Library of Russia. Since the director sent from Moscow perceives the Russian National Library as a place of business trip, it is not surprising that less than a year later he had the idea to combine both libraries, where he happened to be director, and he willingly signed a letter to the Ministry of Culture. Generally speaking, the general director of Vislyi has no moral right to speak on behalf of the National Library of Russia, in which he ended up due to bureaucratic arbitrariness, and not because of his business ties with the St. Petersburg library. In addition, neither Gnezdilov nor Visly have a library education and do not know the history and traditions of the institutions they head. However, Minister V.R. Medinsky paid no attention to these ethical nuances.

It seems to us absurd and regrettable that the fate of Russian libraries is decided by outsiders without the participation of library professionals, that library functionaries and ministerial officials dictate which national libraries we need. One thing is clear. Overcoming the crisis state of libraries as a public institution for book distribution and familiarization with reading is impossible on the path of building a unified and unique electronic library. The main thing we lack is the subject-subject communication of readers and librarians in the hospitable interiors of rural, school, public, scientific and national libraries. There are many problems here, and the most important of them is the definition of the humanistic mission of Russian libraries in the information society.

The proposal put forward by the two directors needs to be discussed by the professional library community, and the rest of the population of the country, because its implementation directly affects all real and potential readers of national libraries, it requires changes in the articles of the Law on Library Science. The issue cannot be resolved in an administrative-command way. To consider the current cultural and political situation, it is advisable to convene All-Russian Library Congress And entrust its organization to the Russian Library Association and the Russian National Library in St. Petersburg.

We ask you to prevent the forthcoming anti-library, anti-cultural action.

Leonov Valery Pavlovich, Doctor of Pedagogy, Professor, Honored Worker of Culture of the Russian Federation, full member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, awarded the medal of the Order of Merit for the Fatherland, II degree

Sokolov Arkady Vasilyevich, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor, Honored Worker of Science of the Russian Federation, Honored Worker of Culture of the Russian Federation, Commander of the Order of the Badge of Honor

Stolyarov Yury Nikolaevich, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor, Honored Worker of the Higher School of the Russian Federation, awarded the medal of the Order of Merit for the Fatherland, II degree

The National Library of Russia (RNL), according to the decree of the President of Russia, is a particularly valuable object of national heritage and constitutes the historical and cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation. The RNL is one of the largest libraries in the world, the second largest collection in Russia, and now a serious threat hangs over it - they want to optimize it and merge it with the Russian State Library. This, in turn, will lead to the fact that the National Library of Russia will lose the right to receive a mandatory copy of new book publications, which now guarantees the acquisition of its funds. The destruction of the National Library of Russia as an independent unit will deal an irreparable blow not only to Russian science and St. Petersburg as the cultural capital of Russia, but also to the entire national librarianship. Let me remind you that in the Year of Literature, the country already lost the library of INION RAS, and the new acting. Ilya Zaitsev, director of INION, now directly states that the country does not need an “pre-fire” INION: “The world has changed. You can order any book in any country. Translating it is no problem either. A huge amount of information on the Internet. Therefore, that INION does not correspond to modern realities, ”Polit.ru quotes Zaitsev as saying.

www.nlr.ru

Perhaps the same can be said about other major libraries? But here is a wonderful commentary on the words of Zaitsev, INION employee Svetlana Pogorelskaya: “This is not true. Firstly, "any book in any country" you can not "order", but BUY. Neither a student nor a graduate student can afford it. They need a library with this book or a license that allows computer access to the digitized version of this book. Secondly, "translating will not be a problem" (c) - yeah, well, yes - machine translation from Japanese into Russian through Google, for example. Thirdly, on the Internet - all access to archives and articles is paid, you need to buy licenses, and for this you need a library. It's amazing how people look from their rich perspective, not even thinking that the institute's library and abstract services are for those who can NOT "order a book in any country" and "translate it without problems", for students, graduate students, for scientific personnel in the Russian regions "The world has changed", yeah. Some have become rich, while others have become poor, and the rich have ceased to understand the poor.” She also worries about the fact that “monsieur plans, at the suggestion of FANO, to halve or quarter book stocks.”

The problem with the INION library and the National Library of Russia fit perfectly into the logic of the current government, which seeks in every possible and impossible way to reduce government spending on science and culture and generally reduce the diversity of various cultural institutions. The director of the National Library of Russia also changed in 2016 - by the decision of the Minister of Culture, Alexander Visly, who headed from 2009 to 2016, was appointed to this position. Russian State Library. No one particularly concealed what tasks were assigned to the new leader, who himself mentioned in an interview with the Izvestia newspaper in February 2016: "There were historical precedents and showed that there is nothing terrible in merging libraries." It is quite obvious that Visly was transferred to St. Petersburg for the successful conduct of a special operation to eliminate the RNB as an independent structure.

The new general director of the National Library of Russia has already begun to give away library buildings to the insatiable Russian Orthodox Church, swallowing up more and more objects of cultural significance. So, by September 1 of this year, the National Library of Russia will hand over to the St. Petersburg diocese one of its buildings on the Obvodny Canal (it was built in the 1880s). Like Visly: “The building is transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church. Of course, this is not such an acute issue as with Isaac, because this building used to belong to the church. But there is a very valuable fund there, personal libraries are kept there...”.

On January 10, an expert in the field of library science, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences Alexander Mazuritsky wrote that the project on the merger of the National Library of Russia and the Russian State Library was nearing its final stage: "And it became known that just before the New Year, the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation received an appeal from the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation V.R. Medinsky with a request to support the joint proposal of the Russian State Library (V.I. Gnezdilov) and the Russian National Library (A.I. Visly) to merge. The National Library of Russia will ensure the creation of the world's largest national library (more than 30 million books and more than 1.5 million copies of handwritten and printed book monuments), eliminates duplication of functions and improve the efficiency of the joint library."


Director of the National Library of Russia Alexander Visly. Photo: TASS

"Moreover, - as Mazuritsky notes, - according to A.I. Visly and V.I. Gnezdilov, the consolidation of libraries will make it possible to halve the number of copies of printed materials required for "eternal" storage, which will make it possible for 15-20 years (Attention! In fact, this cheerful declaration means that one of the megacities - Moscow or St. learning centers!), or, at worst, they will be distributed between the library and its ... branch according to the principle: this is for me, this is for you, this is also for me.)"

There is now a petition on Change.org "Against the destruction of the Russian National Library". To date, more than 2,000 people have signed it. The petition contains the following demands: "In connection with the current situation, we, employees of institutions of science, culture and education in St. Petersburg, consider it necessary:
1. Preserve the independence of the Russian National Library as the oldest public library in Russia, which has the status of a particularly valuable cultural object.
2. Retain the right of the National Library of Russia to receive a legal deposit in accordance with the Federal Law "On the legal deposit of documents" dated December 29, 1994, No. 77-FZ.
3. Put under control the process of completing the construction of the storage facilities of the new building of the National Library of Russia on Moskovsky Prospekt (second stage) and the timely repair of other buildings of the library."

These proposals are quite reasonable, but their implementation will require the active participation of the entire civil society, concerned about the state and preservation of Russian culture. Honored librarians have already sent an open letter to President Putin, in which they expressed their protest against the merger of the largest libraries. "In our country, there has been a long-term and consistent destruction of the library system. The network of municipal libraries is annually reduced by 700-900 institutions, there is an outflow of qualified personnel. The library school and library science are in crisis. The library policy of the Ministry of Culture of Russia contradicts the Fundamentals of the State Cultural Policy, which provides for the preservation of libraries as a public institution for the distribution of books and familiarization with reading. Of particular concern is the intention to unite the two largest national libraries - the Russian State Library (RSL, the former State Library of the USSR named after V.I. Lenin in Moscow) and the Russian National Library (RNL, the former State Public Library of the RSFSR named after M.E. Saltykov- Shchedrin in St. Petersburg)," their letter, signed by three doctors of sciences Valery Leonov, Arkady Sokolov and Yuri Stolyarov, says.

The authors of the letter also state: “It seems to us absurd and regrettable that outsiders decide the fate of Russian libraries without the participation of library professionals, that library functionaries and ministerial officials dictate which national libraries we need.<...>We ask you to prevent the upcoming anti-library, anti-cultural action."

On January 11, a press conference was held by the general director of the National Bank Alexander Visly, at which he did not refute the information about the impending merger. “Conversations that “something needs to be united” in the two main libraries of the country have been going on for 20 years, and now there is just another surge,” the official hastened to reassure. - I even saw the draft government decree of 2002. The story is clear: two national libraries in the country is a lot, and even three is a little too much (the Yeltsin Library also has the status of a national library). Now this story has arisen again ... I think time will pass, and it will arise again, then again and again ... ”, Novaya Gazeta - St. Petersburg reports Visly's words. When asked to name the advantages of the merger of the National Library of Russia and the RSL, the general director replied that there would be a reduction in the staff of the libraries: "If we combine computer services, economic and financial, then it is clear that there will be benefits." The peculiarity of the moment, according to Wisly, is that "the unification of electronic resources is inevitable, and it is moving forward." To a direct question from Novaya Gazeta whether or not an appeal was sent to Prime Minister Medvedev, Alexander Visly did not answer. As well as he refused to name the initiators of the draft of such a document.

Let me remind you that back in October 2013, the philosopher Alexander Rubtsov wrote an article “Why the Mania for Mergers Has Taken Over the Russian Power”, in which he noted that “convulsive attempts of officials to create something big and great are harmful to both the Academy of Sciences and the Mariinsky Theatre.” As Rubtsov rightly writes: “The point is no longer in specific situations, but in the very mania to merge everything, whether it be science, art, winter time or time zones. Why right now, excessively playful hands suddenly began to reach for objects that the authorities protected centuries - and in liberal periods, and in bouts of autocracy, and in enlightened governments, and even in times of ideological obscurantism no worse than the present. To the last question, he answers as follows: “The authorities in Russia are generally uncomfortable with this complexity of the country and with its size. But now it is getting worse. Ancestors had “small chain mail” - this is clearly great. The outstanding Russian economic geographer Leonid Smirnyagin once accurately noted: these guys are constantly bothered by the fact that the country is big ... "

The writer Mikhail Zolotonosov also wrote the following about the plan to merge the largest libraries in Russia: “The project begins with megalomania, characteristic of all totalitarian regimes.<...>We will be explained that, firstly, you can go to Moscow (or, conversely, to St. from two EB buildings) the paper book will be immediately digitized, and the digital copy will be forwarded to the building where there is no paper original. The idea is rotten and vicious in principle, since, firstly, the paper original of a publication and its image in a computer are fundamentally different things, working with paper originals is much more convenient than manipulating scroll bars (this is especially true for Ogonyok magazines and newspapers, to watch which de visu, say, for a year on the screen is one torment), and it is not by chance that the scroll was replaced by a codex in the process of cultural evolution; in addition, all illustrations look completely different on paper and in a computer; secondly, one can imagine how many errors will be digitized (this number of errors can be judged, for example, by the American project books.google); thirdly, as you know, the entire project of the NEL contradicts the existing copyright law (it is no coincidence that Visly admitted that he is seeking at least partial abolition of it) and will only spur the circulation of pirated copies of paper books on the Internet, which will go from libraries to "Big world"; fourthly, the existing technological level of storing information in digital form does not provide durability and reliability comparable to the reliability and durability of paper as an information carrier (paper is many times more durable), and in relation to water and fire, paper and a microcircuit are equally defenseless; fifthly, the National Library of Russia and the RSL, two national repositories of printed publications, should duplicate each other, this is fundamentally important, because it ensures reliability in case of disasters (remember the fires in the BAN and INION)".

But the opinion of the well-known philologist Gasan Huseynov: “Neither during wars, nor during revolutions, nor in the era of ideological persecution, did the country encroach on the national heritage. Why did they encroach now, today? The answer is obvious: someone wanted to get historical buildings created at one time specifically for national libraries - as it was, is and will be in all developed countries, where national and university libraries are expanding, even side by side<...>If the message about the plans to move and merge the two largest libraries is not a stupid rumor, but true, then this is evidence of a dangerous administrative degradation, the consequence of which will be cultural and scientific degradation. Perhaps it is even useful to show by a living example to what absurdity the bureaucracy can sink. And yet, it is infinitely pitiful for the next generations, who will simply run away from the predatory savagery, hiding behind the reform ... "

I myself agree with Professor Huseynov and believe that such experiments on Russian national heritage sites are completely unacceptable, and even more so such decisions should not be made without lengthy and thorough consultations with the cultural and scientific expert community. I urge everyone to sign the Internet petition in defense of the National Library of Russia and keep the main library of St. Petersburg as an independent unit.

A little earlier, RBA President V. Firsov, causing the library community to worry about a long silence, said that "merging libraries as one legal entity, from my point of view, is inappropriate", after all "By and large, it is the RNB that is an integral element of Russian civilization." Let's remember that it was this - historical and cultural - argument that was voiced in the very first speeches of respected professors: A. Mazuritsky, A. Sokolov, V. Leonov, Yu. Stolyarov. Two Muscovites and two Leningraders-Petersburgers, whose total experience of library service is almost equal to the age of the National Library of Russia! It was they who were the first to point out the very absurdity of raising the question of uniting national libraries. Everyone who decided to publish their opinion in the media expressed their position unequivocally: “We are against the merger!” 310 employees of the National Library of Russia sent a letter to the President of the Russian Federation with a request to look into the current situation and protect the National Libraries from incompetent administrative interference.

From the position of the law, it is possible to merge the RSL and the NLR by merging (creating a new legal entity) or joining. In reality, another metropolitan "absorption" may occur. Petersburg will get the "tail" of the new organization. The National Library of Russia will cease to exist in its status, its 200-year history as the national library of our country will end. Many readers and scientists do not want to admit this. The petition "Against the destruction of the Russian National Library" has collected about 7,000 signatures on the Internet. So far, no specialists have been found who are ready to publicly support the idea of ​​merging the National Library of Russia and the Russian State Library.

In a number of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the process of "optimization" by connecting children's, youth and libraries for the blind to the central universal libraries has been actively going on in recent years. Without any involvement in the discussion of the scientific and library community. After all, the law does not require substantiation of decisions taken by the founders within their competence. The social standards prepared by the Ministry of Culture for the regions make it possible to reduce the network of municipal libraries in the country by 30-40%. Who needs such a library policy?

So, can we be sure that the adoption of a "closed" decision has become impossible?

Alexander Visly in his interview to the radio "Echo of Moscow" bluntly said: “… what is being discussed by the public is also very good. This sets the stage for some sensible, correct decisions to be made at the highest level.” What are the right decisions at the government level? If it is about the unification of electronic resources, the use of unified technological solutions and the coordination of scientific activities, then these issues are within the competence of the RSL, the NLR and the Ministry of Culture, which performs the functions and powers of the founder, enshrined by the Government in the charters of the Libraries. “Whether an administrative association is needed is not a matter of my competence, it is a matter of the competence of the Government itself, not even the Ministry of Culture. Let it decide."- says A. Visly. But there is still no answer to a simple question: with what proposal did the leaders of the RSL and the National Library of Russia initially turn to the Prime Minister, what proposal did V. Medinsky ask the prime minister to support? Alas, this "starting point" of the entire problematic situation has not been presented to society.