Page 205 - JOURNAL OF LIBRARY SCIENCE IN CHINA 2018 Vol. 42

204 Journal of Library Science in China, Vol. 8, 2016

development and their impact on the nation’s pledged target to develop a universal public library
service for all.
The study is based on a Foucauldian style of discourse analysis. It first analyzes 10 policies
issued by the central government since the 1980s,and then analyzes the library service provision
in 12 townships in four county-level regions. The policy documents are chosen because of their
relevance for township cultural services (which include the library service). Analysis of these
documents is focused on three clusters of statements: those concerning township library service
itself,those concerning the broader service of which the township library service forms a part,and
those concerning the relationship between the library service and the broader service. The 12
townships are chosen through a mixed sampling procedure. Data about their library services are
collected through participant observation and interviews and are analyzed following qualitative
data analysis procedure.
The study shows that government policies in which the township library service is mentioned
can be classified into three categories: policies on rural culture,policies on township cultural
stations and policies on library development. Related policy statements converge on two discursive
formations: the grass-root public culture discourse and the world’s public library discourse.
While the world’s public library discourse defines the township library as an integrated part of
the nation’s public library service which provides people with a range of knowledge,information
and cultural resources,the grass-root public culture discourse defines the township library,which
it equates with the book-lending reading room,as one of the many grass-root cultural activities
held by the township comprehensive cultural situation. Despite the fact that the grass-root public
culture discourse has also named a range of information services (such as government information
service,adult and formal education support) for township residents,it designates the township
comprehensive cultural station as the legitimate provider of these services in lieu of the township
library,and the public library for this matter. In constructing the township cultural services in this
way,the grass-root public culture discourse has practically made “township library” a different
kind from the world’s professional public library service.
The study also shows that while policy documents on rural culture and township cultural
stations consist mainly of statements of the grass-root public culture discourse,policies on library
development attempt to incorporate statements of both discourses. However,as statements
from different discourses are by nature incompatible,the attempt to follow both often leads to
confounding,and sometimes even collapse,of meaning regarding township library services.
Current township library development is therefore dominated mainly by the grass-root public
culture discourse from the first two types of policies. The world’s public library discourse has
achieved very little impact so far.
By adopting a discourse analysis approach,this paper has unveiled some hidden contradictions
in China’s current endeavor to develop a universal public library service for all.
This paper contends that the grass-root public culture discourse and its discursive practices are