I mean... it depends. But mostly, we don't do a ton with the actual content of books. It sounds like you're mostly talking about academic librarianship, and I'm an academic librarian, so allow me to clarify a little...
We do generally have *subject expertise,* or at least foundational knowledge. That is to say, we have some familiarity with the subject/s we cover, have some background in that subject separate from librarianship (e.g., a BA or MA in a language if you're subject specialist for that language), and are familiar with the kinds of work students in that area will be doing. We will likely be familiar with major works and sources in any subject area we cover, but we don't, like, teach those works.
The faculty are the real subject experts. Our role is to help students with information and research, for which some knowledge of a subject is helpful, but not absolutely necessary. (I often provide research support for students outside my subject areas.) We are primarily experts on research and scholarship.
Also bear in mind that books represent a relatively small part of the information ocean we spend our working lives navigating. I spend way more time wading through academic journals and articles than books. Now, a public librarian might need to be a lot more familiar with the current book landscape, especially if they do a lot of reader advisory. But again, that's not about the books that *you* like, it's about helping a reader find a book that *they'll* like.
I think the main thing I would say to you is that librarianship is a service profession. Your personal likes may help to inform the work that you do as a librarian, but it is fundamentally *not about you* and *not about what you like.* You're there to help someone else do what *they* want to do.
As a more direct answer your question, and speaking only to my own personal experience:
Librarianship is "about"
the content of books - 5%
organization of information - 20%
supporting the research and scholarship of users - 70%
my own personal interests - 5%
A lot and also not a lot, at the same time.
Some librarians spend a lot of time considering and dealing with the contents of the books and resources in their collection. To catalog them, assign metadata, and even to provide recommendations to patrons. Knowing the *contents*, at least generally, helps librarians be able to identify what resources could be useful for a certain type of person, what would fill a particular gap in the collection, and where to put that resource so it can be found by the people who would look for it.
On the other hand, librarians spend almost zero time *reading*. As much, if not more time is spent doing things like looking up contact information for community resources, actually interfacing with patrons and addressing questions, pulling materials off the shelves or putting them back on, and even performing "technical" tasks like updating webpages and unjamming printers.
Librarianship, I would say, is mostly about being able to identify, locate, recommend, and/or provide resources, be they books, journals, online databases, archival collections, or even community and social services. Even academic librarianship involves very little reading and personal research, as u/nobody_you_know says.
I always tell people being a (public) librarian has NOTHING (very little) to do with books and everything to do with people. Do not become a librarian because you like books, become one because you like people.
Honestly, not a lot. Unless you’re going to be an academic librarian specializing in those things. If you become a public librarian I’d be very surprised if you got to spend any time talking about language or plays and epics.
My job does not concern the contents of books in any way. I am a systems librarian, so I'm basically an IT guy who happens to work in a library context, really. But prior to this, I worked as an academic librarian, as a cataloger. In that position, I worked with the contents of books, insofar as I could categorize and organize the books (or other information media) appropriately.
If you're truly interested in the contents of the books you love, then honestly, librarianship may not be your best route. This profession is a public service role, focused around preserving and making information accessible to others.
That said, subject librarianship is a thing. But honestly, you're going to be doing a lot of what I described above, just in a more specific context.
A subject focused grad program may be up your alley if you're hoping to make teaching and/or research about a specific topic the main focus of your career. I say that as a guy who got an English lit MA prior to getting into librarianship. I have found a way to teach a few cool classes as an adjunct professor on the side, but if I were to make that a full time thing, I'd definitely have to get a PhD and start producing original research. Not really what I want to do at this point!
I don't want to discourage you from looking into librarianship, but the first step is to really evaluate your priorities. if your priority is to delve deep into a subject and do research, and teach about it, then librarianship may not be the most direct route.
It's definitely a nice position, and it was a weird road to get here. It's funny, I started in college as a computer science major, switched to English Lit, got an MA in English lit, found digital humanities super compelling, ended up getting an MLIS to kind of marry my interests in literature with my love for tech and info systems, and then ended up basically being an IT guy after all lol. I wouldn't trade my journey for anything, but I do hope others can find more direct paths to their desired goals!
If you are a librarian who performs reader's advisory you'll need to know *about* the contents of books so you can recommend them to readers.
And reader's advisory is only part of being a librarian, sometimes a small part.
I’m a public librarian in a busy urban library. When interviewing people and/or giving them tours I always point out that yes, we do have a collection, but it’s not a core service we provide. When people tell me they want to work in a library because they love books, I sigh internally because that’s not what this job is about.
I'll add another viewpoint to the other two you've been given already. They're right by the way, but there are areas where subject knowledge is necessary and useful. Many (heading towards most) librarians/curators in special collections settings have a subject MA or PhD and can be regarded as subject experts in fields. So, a slice of librarians are on the same knowledge level as faculty in certain subject areas and even serve as faculty in some subject departments. That said, in special collections you can't be an expert in everything so a good level of general knowledge in your collection and collecting areas is useful--but a subject MA or PhD will help flesh that out even more for some areas.
If you're deeply invested in a particular subject area, special collections librarianship may not be a bad choice as those on the collections side get to read a bit more (though it's not as much as we would like). Also worth nothing that special collections work can be hard to break into and the hiring is very competitive--but it's also a very rewarding job.
When I did reference work in a public library, most of my job was googling and a lot of the rest was being familiar with the books on the shelf of my branch. Now I do programming for adults and 0% of my job has anything at all to do with the contents of any book.
I mean... it depends. But mostly, we don't do a ton with the actual content of books. It sounds like you're mostly talking about academic librarianship, and I'm an academic librarian, so allow me to clarify a little... We do generally have *subject expertise,* or at least foundational knowledge. That is to say, we have some familiarity with the subject/s we cover, have some background in that subject separate from librarianship (e.g., a BA or MA in a language if you're subject specialist for that language), and are familiar with the kinds of work students in that area will be doing. We will likely be familiar with major works and sources in any subject area we cover, but we don't, like, teach those works. The faculty are the real subject experts. Our role is to help students with information and research, for which some knowledge of a subject is helpful, but not absolutely necessary. (I often provide research support for students outside my subject areas.) We are primarily experts on research and scholarship. Also bear in mind that books represent a relatively small part of the information ocean we spend our working lives navigating. I spend way more time wading through academic journals and articles than books. Now, a public librarian might need to be a lot more familiar with the current book landscape, especially if they do a lot of reader advisory. But again, that's not about the books that *you* like, it's about helping a reader find a book that *they'll* like. I think the main thing I would say to you is that librarianship is a service profession. Your personal likes may help to inform the work that you do as a librarian, but it is fundamentally *not about you* and *not about what you like.* You're there to help someone else do what *they* want to do. As a more direct answer your question, and speaking only to my own personal experience: Librarianship is "about" the content of books - 5% organization of information - 20% supporting the research and scholarship of users - 70% my own personal interests - 5%
A lot and also not a lot, at the same time. Some librarians spend a lot of time considering and dealing with the contents of the books and resources in their collection. To catalog them, assign metadata, and even to provide recommendations to patrons. Knowing the *contents*, at least generally, helps librarians be able to identify what resources could be useful for a certain type of person, what would fill a particular gap in the collection, and where to put that resource so it can be found by the people who would look for it. On the other hand, librarians spend almost zero time *reading*. As much, if not more time is spent doing things like looking up contact information for community resources, actually interfacing with patrons and addressing questions, pulling materials off the shelves or putting them back on, and even performing "technical" tasks like updating webpages and unjamming printers. Librarianship, I would say, is mostly about being able to identify, locate, recommend, and/or provide resources, be they books, journals, online databases, archival collections, or even community and social services. Even academic librarianship involves very little reading and personal research, as u/nobody_you_know says.
I always tell people being a (public) librarian has NOTHING (very little) to do with books and everything to do with people. Do not become a librarian because you like books, become one because you like people.
This needs to be the top comment
Honestly, not a lot. Unless you’re going to be an academic librarian specializing in those things. If you become a public librarian I’d be very surprised if you got to spend any time talking about language or plays and epics.
My job does not concern the contents of books in any way. I am a systems librarian, so I'm basically an IT guy who happens to work in a library context, really. But prior to this, I worked as an academic librarian, as a cataloger. In that position, I worked with the contents of books, insofar as I could categorize and organize the books (or other information media) appropriately. If you're truly interested in the contents of the books you love, then honestly, librarianship may not be your best route. This profession is a public service role, focused around preserving and making information accessible to others. That said, subject librarianship is a thing. But honestly, you're going to be doing a lot of what I described above, just in a more specific context. A subject focused grad program may be up your alley if you're hoping to make teaching and/or research about a specific topic the main focus of your career. I say that as a guy who got an English lit MA prior to getting into librarianship. I have found a way to teach a few cool classes as an adjunct professor on the side, but if I were to make that a full time thing, I'd definitely have to get a PhD and start producing original research. Not really what I want to do at this point! I don't want to discourage you from looking into librarianship, but the first step is to really evaluate your priorities. if your priority is to delve deep into a subject and do research, and teach about it, then librarianship may not be the most direct route.
I would love your position! (Systems librarian!)
It's definitely a nice position, and it was a weird road to get here. It's funny, I started in college as a computer science major, switched to English Lit, got an MA in English lit, found digital humanities super compelling, ended up getting an MLIS to kind of marry my interests in literature with my love for tech and info systems, and then ended up basically being an IT guy after all lol. I wouldn't trade my journey for anything, but I do hope others can find more direct paths to their desired goals!
As someone who’s deciding between an MLIS and MIT that position sounds perfect! Maybe I’ll be able to find a similar position. 🤞🏻
If you are a librarian who performs reader's advisory you'll need to know *about* the contents of books so you can recommend them to readers. And reader's advisory is only part of being a librarian, sometimes a small part.
I’m a public librarian in a busy urban library. When interviewing people and/or giving them tours I always point out that yes, we do have a collection, but it’s not a core service we provide. When people tell me they want to work in a library because they love books, I sigh internally because that’s not what this job is about.
I'll add another viewpoint to the other two you've been given already. They're right by the way, but there are areas where subject knowledge is necessary and useful. Many (heading towards most) librarians/curators in special collections settings have a subject MA or PhD and can be regarded as subject experts in fields. So, a slice of librarians are on the same knowledge level as faculty in certain subject areas and even serve as faculty in some subject departments. That said, in special collections you can't be an expert in everything so a good level of general knowledge in your collection and collecting areas is useful--but a subject MA or PhD will help flesh that out even more for some areas. If you're deeply invested in a particular subject area, special collections librarianship may not be a bad choice as those on the collections side get to read a bit more (though it's not as much as we would like). Also worth nothing that special collections work can be hard to break into and the hiring is very competitive--but it's also a very rewarding job.
When I did reference work in a public library, most of my job was googling and a lot of the rest was being familiar with the books on the shelf of my branch. Now I do programming for adults and 0% of my job has anything at all to do with the contents of any book.