College & Research Libraries ago is now mainstream librarianship. On the other, she doubts that there is any such thing as information science: what, if anything, it is remains, she says, a matter of debate. She is not the only one to be confused about information science, but confusion on this subject is not an advantage when trying to de- scribe LIS education. Nothing she says suggests any reason for the multiversity to be interested in LIS programs. The picture she draws (apparently based on published docu- ments, accreditation records, and visits to eight schools) is a depressing one, of small isolated units with undistin- guished faculty members. The schools are unselective, admitting nearly all who apply. (She mentions Berkeley and UCLA as exceptions to this rule.) On their campuses, she thinks, they are not respected: they are seen as providing training rather than education, and are viewed as intellectually and profession- ally inadequate. They are expensive, and bring in little outside support for re- search. They have been attempting to transform themselves into schools for the information professions generally, but librarianship and information sci- ence are diverging socially and intellec- tually, as information scientists assert their intellectual superiority over tradi- tionallibrarianship. Stieg does not even try to defend the LIS educational pro- grams she describes in such unflattering terms; nor does she make any substan- tive recommendations for improvement. She thinks the schools fit awkwardly in the multiversity, and expresses no con- cern about the possibility that LIS educa- tion might go elsewhere. (She mentions alternatives such as undergraduate edu- cation and intensive workshops but has no recommendations herself.) She does say that it is hard to understand campus disdain for the knowledge base of the field, but only suggests vaguely that this may be because that knowledge base is essentially humanistic-a weird view of LIS, but she is thinking only of tradi- tional librarianship, not of information science or of the, for her, nonexistent library-and- information science. Her ig- May1993 norance of information science is crip- pling and dangerous; if others were to take her book as a competent account of the current state of research in LIS, it could be the end of LIS education in research universities. It has to be said that this is a pro- foundly reactionary book, showing a strong distaste for the kind of research, development, and professional practice in information work that is gradually growing from deep roots in bibliogra- phy and librarianship. It would be de- plorable if the fact that the American Library Association published this book were taken to imply corporate endorse- ment of its reactionary message. Stieg says her book is meant to clarify issues and increase understanding. It does neither. It will make work for deans, having to counteract within the univer- sity its regressive and misleading ac- count of the present and possible future of LIS education.-Patrick Wilson, Uni- versity of California, Berkeley. Harris, Roma M. Librarianship: The Ero- sion of a Woman's Profession. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex, 1992. 186p. alk. paper, $22.50 (ISBN 0-89391-941-1). The year 1992 has been called the year of the woman, and, indeed, some significant events justify that label. It was a year of historic firsts, ranging from the election of four women to the United States Senate, the announcement that an African-American woman would be the poet laureate at the new President's inauguration, and a clear indication that the new First Lady will have a post that matches her intelligence and accom- plishments. Reading Librarianship: The Erosion of a Woman's Profession against the backdrop of this supposed woman's year, however, brought a heavy dose of reality, reminding one how far librarians have come and how terribly far we, as individuals and as a profession, have yet togo. Roma Harris has written a book that will, I. expect by design, make some people extremely uneasy. She is unam- biguous about her purpose and unapol- ogetic about her theoretical orientation.