Whether this is entirely fair is another question, but this is the way the system works at present. It should also be noted in this connection that the terms defined by the National Library Council for the category of visiting librarian predispose to tasks, rather than to research , which certainly seems to be reflected in the scant number of applications received. Almost by definition, then, proposals by librarians tend to be somewhat mundane, lacking depth, rigour and with not the slightest hint of glamour or intellectual excitement. When this is coupled with an invariably limited research and publishing output, it is not surprising that librarians fail to get up. You may think that this does not matter, except to the disappointed candidates, and in one sense, you would be right.
Good scholars mop up the fellowships anyway, and excellent work is nearly always done.
But it may be that immense damage is done to that overworked, yet still important notion, the image of our profession, and those of the conservator and archivist. The obvious answer is that we should do all that we can to ensure that seriously considerable applications go forward, and that trivial and mundane ones do not, or if they do, that there is a clear distinction evident. This cannot be regulated for, however and the task is therefore one of increasing and extending awareness, encouragement, support and advice. This might be done informally, as individual candidates seek counsel or it might be done in a more considered way, as is the case in the academy when higher degree candidates first begin the process of identifying and reifying a topic for research. The important thing is that it should be done.