I think that Librarians would disagree with your
          descriptions of libraries as more or less passive
          collections of information. Two caveats: one, I'm not a
          librarian, and two, I'm speaking from what I understood of
          your post, and I hope I don't mis-characterize it.
 
          Librarians work hard to contextualize information for
          researchers and the public, and try to present the huge mass
          of information that is out there in ways that are meaningful
          to the user. Here at the NYBG, where we have a massive
          botanical library, I would ask one of our wonderful research
          librarians some nebulous question, such as: "I need to find
          more about the history of roses, and when hybridization
          began." They would help with personal knowledge, catalog
          searches, and information from collections that are not
          cataloged at the item level, but only as a description that
          the collection exists (for example, our old rose clipping or
          vertical file). I guess that this is more ad-hoc than
          systematic, and that museums attempt to do this sort of
          thing more systematically with their collections.
          Nonetheless, the librarian is much more than a passive
          purveyor of information.
 
          As you suggest, information is kind of a flat term, and I
          think that Librarians are very aware of this. They try to
          present their collections in a context that makes it as
          useful as possible. In that way, it is really not too
          dissimilar to a museum.
 
          Eric Siegel
          [log in to unmask]