Making my stand

"We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats. They invade our space and we fall back. They assimilate entire worlds and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far, no farther!" --Capt. Jean-Luc Picard, from the film Star Trek: First Contact.

I have been attentive to what has been going on with the recent suicides of gay youths due to bullying up to and including the incident of the bigoted school board member in Arkansas. I have written some things in response, but so far, I kept them in my personal journal. The more I listen and watch and ponder, the more difficult I find it to stay silent, to not stand up, to not say anything. So my three readers can consider this post the one where I draw the line because bullies and bigots come and think they can get away with their crimes and uncivilized behavior. Well, no more. Not if this librarian has anything to say about it, and I do have a thing or two to say. What follows are two small items I wrote earlier that I am ready to share.

* * * * 

From my personal journal, October 6, 2010:

I've been wanting to blog about the recent bullying and suicide stories, but I am not sure what approach to take. Jeff Jarvis, in discussing the tragedy at Rutgers University, summarized it well: "It is a story of human tragedy." What we have here is not just an individual failure. We have a community failure from the parents of those bullies who very likely failed to instill good values like common decency to a society that pretty much is willing to accept bullying. That we had more than one suicide due to bullies in less than a month was probably enough for the media to cover it. But if it had been just one suicide in some small town, no one else would have heard about it, and people in that small town, with the exception of the victim's relatives, would have likely chalked it up to "boys will be boys" or some similar line. A line such as "kids in school will always be kids" should never be an acceptable cover or excuse for bullying, hazing, harassment, or other kind of anti-social behavior. That adults consistently use that excuse reflects a serious lack of character and compassion.

But there is another reason I find it difficult to blog about it. It means making my views more public in a fairly hostile environment. But if I don't stand up and speak, then who will? For me, this is the right thing to do, and yet I have my fears. As a librarian, I struggle with the illusion many in the profession hold of neutrality against the belief that we should help educate, that we should not only provide information but use our best professional judgment in providing good, accurate, and reliable information. Taking a stand breaks that illusion. It raises a flag stating that this is what I stand for and what I will defend or oppose. Yet, if I remain silent, it would not be right. I don't think anyone said this profession would be without some risk. Then again, every time I blog, or even post a shared link online, there is the risk of offending somebody, somewhere, maybe even a future potential employer. A lot of librarianship is about image, and it is a pretty small profession where the wrong blog post can get you shunned. I try not to let it bother me. I try not to self-censor more than is necessary. But I am finding it harder and harder to stay silent. The truth needs to be spoken. We have to take a stand for what is right. In my case, writing and blogging are my ways to do so.

* * * * 

From my personal journal, October 11, 2010 (National Coming Out Day): 

Today is National Coming Out Day. I think it has a special significance this year given the series of LGBT youth suicides due to bullying. As Jeff Jarvis said in a post I read a few days back, those deaths are a human tragedy. 

What I am thinking about today is the bravery of those LGBT folks who do choose to come out, whether today or any other day. Maybe that is just what moves me to be an ally. Maybe it's that I think everybody should be able to love whomever they like and not be discriminated against on that basis. That civil rights should be rights for all, not just for some. That if you choose to live in a committed relationship of marriage, the gender of those involved should not be an issue for receiving the rights and responsibilities of marriage. 

But what does it have to do with me? I am a straight male (at least I was last time I looked, haha!), so one would think I have nothing to gain or lose. In fact, I may have more to lose--from folks suddenly thinking I may be gay to workplace concerns; East Texas is not a particularly friendly place if you do not fall within its norms and parameters. I do it because it is the right thing to do. I do it because I look forward to the day where coming out won't matter because it will not be an issue. Just like I hope for a day when no one is judged by race, handicap, so on, I look to the day no one is judged by their sexual orientation. I don't think I will live to see that day given how much work and education this nation needs before it truly embraces diversity. But I hope that some day, maybe in the days of my daughter's grandchildren, they will look back at our society and say things like "what the fuck were they thinking?" or "discriminating because someone is gay? How quaint." Maybe some day, and I hope that day arrives sooner rather than later. 

In the meantime, coming out (as an ally) is the small part I can do to bring about better days. It is my small way of saying to those in the LGBT community and the rest of the allies that they are not alone. It is my way of saying that as a librarian my skills and knowledge are at the community's disposal, and if I can't find a resource, I know someone who does know. I am here for those who may need a supportive person. 

Do I want to be "that" librarian? I sure do. It's the decent thing to do, and I cannot do anything less. And if certain coworkers don't like it, then let them stew in their bigotry. They will either see the error of their ways and do the right thing, or history will simply pass them over. 

I thought I could remain silent, but I can't. Not anymore. I am coming out, and I am letting others know.

* * * *

Other readings I had in mind at the time I was writing: 

• Emily Lloyd, on "Being Visibly Queer-Friendly: Please Consider It."
• Jen McCreight introducing and commenting on the "It Gets Better Project." 
• And because I am a librarian, I feel that I should provide some books to help out. So here is a list of "10 LGBT Books for Teens That Tackle Suicide and Bullying." Via Lambda Literary.  We probably should acquire one or all for our library, but between the tight budget and, well, the usual barriers, I am not sure it will be possible (at the moment). 

(Crossposted to The Itinerant Librarian and Alchemical Thoughts)

Update Note: (11/1/10): Wayne Bivens-Tatum, the Academic Librarian, picked up on this post, and he wrote a very detailed, thoughtful, and reasoned response on librarians and our neutral (or not) stances. It is worth reading it in its entirety. 

Booknote: Ensayo sobre la ceguera (12 Books, 12 Months Challenge, Book 1)

My review as posted to my GoodReads profile:

Ensayo Sobre la Ceguera by José Saramago

My rating: 1 of 5 stars


This is a book that people will either like or hate (or at least dislike). I don't hate it, but I do dislike it, which is why I gave it just one star in spite of the fairly smart premise. I am even willing to admit that I skimmed parts of it since this is one of those books that, once you get to a certain point, you can pretty much predict with accuracy what will happen in the end. For me, that detail came when it was revealed the doctor's wife had a pair of scissors shortly after the thugs in Room 3 take over the food. From that point, I knew a war would break out, and that she would end up killing at least one person (she kills more than one. I happen to think they more than deserved it, but more sensitive people can debate that elsewhere). That the asylum was burnt to the ground did not surprise me either. Given the poor and extreme conditions, it had to happen pretty much.

This was not an easy book to read, and it may well be the hardest one in my list for the "12 Books, 12 Months" challenge I recently began. I am glad I got it out of the way early. This is by no means a "light" book. It is very depressing; it gives a view of society at its worst, and it shows how easily society can degrade and fall apart. All it takes is some catastrophe or apocalyptic event, and all hell will break loose. If you remember events like Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, or just know some history of failed nations, you know that we are pretty much a step away from the hellish chaos. In the novel, compassion and kindness end on the losing end for most of the book as the doctor and his ward eventually have to use violence to get the food that was stolen from them by the Room 3 thugs. As much as it pains the doctor, it's either that or starve. While there is some credit, so to speak, given to good deeds and kindness at the end, overall, the message is you may well need to be ruthless even to do the right thing. If you already have a negative view of humanity, this book will only serve to affirm it.

Saramago's novel is also difficult due to its style. There are no number chapters. It uses long sentences in long paragraphs and lots of commas. Conversation lines are often not separated. Chapters are separated by blank spaces. Thus the book goes on without allowing much pause. This might work better on other books. Other Latin American authors I like, for instance, use the same or close to the same style, but their works are better. This is specially so when it comes to pacing. Saramago's novel is extremely slow in its pace, especially in the parts taking place in the asylum. While the blindness plague strikes suddenly (and ends just as suddenly), much of the time in the novel and the narrative slows down after the outbreak. In addition, characters are not named; they are identified by some trait or profession such as the Doctor, the Doctor's Wife, and the Woman with Dark Glasses. Once you get used to it, the technique of not using names works, but it can be a bit disorienting at first. On doing a little bit of reading about the author after finishing the novel, I learned that this nameless technique is very common in his books.

I've wanted to read a novel by Saramago for a while. For one, he is a Nobel literature laureate. However, now that my curiosity has been satisfied, I will probably not read another of his books any time soon. The book does have a smart premise, and it does raise some dark questions that may be uncomfortable to many, but it is not an easy nor flowing reading experience. Still, I am glad that I did try out one of his books. To paraphrase one of the library laws, this book is not really for this reader. But, and this is made clear by many positive reviews on GR, I am sure the book is for some other readers out there, and other readers are for this book.




View all my reviews

If you don't like Facebook or other social media, go find another career

"I am going to say a few things and I am going to say some bad words, and you're just going to have to deal with it." --Tony Soprano, from the series The Sopranos.

I struggled for a while about putting this post on the blog after writing about it in my journal. I was hoping I could let it drop, but I find that I cannot because I am honestly getting a little sick and tired of the attitude some people have in our profession that, if you "don't get it" or "play with the latest shiny toy," then you have to be swept out of the way so someone more perky can come in. We can file this under things that bother me. To borrow the term from the Annoyed Librarian, this is about another example of twopointopians using the "us vs. them," the "we get it, you don't," and the "if you don't adapt and use it, you're not welcome here."

Michael Stephens has a new column in Library Journal, the lightweight library news magazine. In his first column,  he wrote the following, which I did find somewhat arrogant and condescending not to mention alienating. The quote in question is:

If the online world is not for you, then neither may be a career in librarianship. The most prevalent LIS jobs in the next few years will probably be ones where you’re not tied to your desk and you communicate well beyond the physical walls of the building.

It’s not just students who should participate in this online world. Librarians must find their niche as well. Five years ago the conversation went on in blogs. Now it flows vibrantly across media platforms, enabling a stronger connection with library users through marketing, outreach, and the human touch. (emphasis in the original).

Where do I even start? You have to be online but not tied down to a desk. It may sound a bit contradictory at first; that was what the colleague I showed the article to said. But on reading the column, we see that it refers to being constantly plugged in to the mobile device of your choice. Then there is the thing about the human touch. Being constantly online and connected  is not exactly conducive to the human touch. Sooner or later you may have to deal with a real person.

As I mentioned, I showed a colleague the column, and she had a thing or two to say about it too. One thing she said that stuck with me is the following: in all the rush to teach new technologies and fads, library schools are not teaching how to deal with people like basics such as how to do a proper reference interview. I added during our conversation that no one really teaches how to do good liaison work to future academic librarians, a topic I have written about before in this blog.

And then I thought about another colleague of mine who wins awards for her scholarship in history as well as provides excellent service to the library and its patrons. She's definitely found her niche, and it does not involve the twopointopian vision of the online world. No Facebook or Twitter for her. Should she give up her career in librarianship because the online world is not for her? If she was entering library school now, would she be told she does not fit in? And before some apologist chimes in, allow me to point out that my colleague is not a Luddite. She avails herself of electronic tools that meet her needs, keeps up as needed, and maintains an excellent local and civil war history website that has received state and national praise. By her admission though, she does not care about Twitter and really has no use for Facebook nor a lot of online social media. Should we have kept her out of librarianship because the online world, as narrowly defined by some people, is not for her?

I write and raise these questions as someone who has found places in the online world. I also use social media (feel free to check the right side column in this blog for links to my various profiles). I use online social media tools in my work as well as for my professional development. I am still figuring out my niche, but that is part of the learning process for me. But I do know that my niche does not include the attitude of "you either get it or you don't, and if you don't, we don't want you here." That attitude has bothered me since the earliest days when the term Library 2.0 was emerging (some of my earlier thoughts on L2 here, here, here, and here).And it bothers me now. When people ask if I am sorry that I became a librarian or have any regrets, I can usually that I like what I do. But statements like the one by Stephens make me wonder because I do not want to be associated with such attitudes.

"Oh, oh, Anthony. He's a big boy, he knows what he said." --Tommy DeVito, from the film Goodfellas.

And no, I am not going to "try to look at it in a charitable light." That is a cop-out. He wrote it, with the backing of his reputation, and he clearly stands by it in making it public. Now, he can choose to dig in his heels, expand the statement or try to clarify it, but the statement is out there, and it seems pretty clear.

Personally, for what little my opinion is worth, the statement seems divisive. I see plenty of excellent librarians who work hard, provide excellent service to their patrons, and the online world is not really for them. I don't think they should be deprived of a career because they are not interested in Facebook or lack a Flickr fetish.

Is there dead weight in librarianship, including some coming out of library school even as we speak? Yes, ther is, and that needs to be weeded out. But exclusion on the basis of not being interested in doing reference via an iPad or laptop in some cafe should not be part of the exclusion criteria. Many talented librarians who do cataloging, reader's advisory, acquisitions and other technical services, and yes, even front line reference do great work and don't need nor have an interest in the online world.

Or you can use your local library and save some more

I was intrigued by Chris Guillebeau's post for the Powell's blog entitled "Skip Graduate School, Save $32,000, Do This Instead." Don't get me wrong. I do like a lot of the advice in it, and I understand he is working for a bookstore after all. But these are tight times, and for some of the book suggestions he gives you really are better off borrowing the items from your local public library (or academic library if you happen to already be in school).Your library will probably have a lot of the basics and classics Mr. Guillebeau suggests, and they won't cost you a thing (well, you already paid for them either with your taxes or tuition depending on your situation, so you may as well use them). So allow me to highlight some items from the post and tell you how to get them. By the way, another useful tool is WorldCat, the OCLC's world catalog, which now has a nice free version. Type in your book title, and it can locate a library nearby that has your book. Heck, I even have it loaded on my smartphone.

And yes, this is a basic promo post for libraries. 

So, here we go. I will present the author's suggestions, then my humble observations:

• "Subscribe to The Economist and read every issue religiously. Cost: $97 + 60 minutes each week." Read it at your local public library, which is likely to subscribe to it already. Cost then would be free. And if you need additional information about something you read in the magazine, you can always ask the reference librarian. 
• "Read the basic texts of the major world religions: the Torah, the New Testament, the Koran, and the teachings of Buddha. Visit a church, a mosque, a synagogue, and a temple. Cost: Materials can be obtained free online or in the mail — or for less than $50 + 20 hours." If you go to the library, these will pretty much be free. Libraries usually keep a copy of major world religion texts both for reference as well as for readers. He does make a good point: you can often get materials free from the religious organizations (this does vary from group to group). The idea of visiting places of worship I think is a good one, and it is one I think more people should do. It certainly is one I should try out some more; besides Catholic church, I've only been inside some Protestant churches, usually because someone I knew had some function I was invited to. In terms of reading the texts, I think I have a good track record, but there are still a few more out there to read. 
• " Read at least 30 nonfiction books and 20 classic novels. Cost: approximately $750 (be sure to support Powell's!)" Again, go to your local library. However, I will say this with a bit of a grain of salt. If the books you want to read are things you will only read once, definitely borrow them. If you think you will reread them or need them later, then do buy them. For classics, you can read a lot of them online via things like Project Gutenberg, which also has option for downloading e-books of classics to your reading device. The cost is pretty much free, unless you sprung for a reading device. Also, I would try to be a bit selective about what books to read. There are a lot of "classics" which are, to be blunt, a waste of time (or to be charitable, may not be the best for you as a reader).As for nonfiction, if all you read is Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, or Keith Olbermann (what, you thought I was just going to only mention right wing people?), you won't get very far in your education. Need help deciding what to read? Many public libraries have librarians who specialize in reader's advisory. Ask them what may be good to read. And yes, I do reader's advisory too, so you can ask me as well.
• "Instead of reading the entire Encyclopedia Britannica, read The Know-It-All by A. J. Jacobs, a good summary. Cost: $10 or less." If Jacobs' other book is any indication, this one is one to borrow, not buy. The book is not bad, just not a keeper. 

Do read the rest of the original post, since there are some good ideas there, but for a lot of the books, you can borrow them as needed.  However, if you decide to support your favorite bookstore, I am not stopping you.

Some idle thoughts on handwriting

I was recently reading a story out of The Wall Street Journal entitled "How Handwriting Boosts the Brain." The author reports that researchers say there are good cognitive benefits to handwriting. It turns out that kids in general are losing those benefits because they are not learning how to write by hand in school or at home. You can thank the ubiquity of keyboards and texting devices for that. Even adults who may have learned handwriting and penmanship in school seem to be losing out on the benefits as they give up handwriting for keyboards. However, not all is lost. According to the article, "but in an interesting twist, new software for touch-screen devices, such as the iPad, is starting to reinvigorate the practice." It seems the old is new again. Plus, it also seems that adults learning to write by hand later in life can gain some benefit. In fact, according to P. Murali Doraiswamy, a neuroscientist at Duke University, "as more people lose writing skills and migrate to the computer, retraining people in handwriting skills could be a useful cognitive exercise."

Reading the article took me back to 7th grade Catholic school. Yes, I am a Catholic school survivor (no, not that kind of survivor though, thank the deity of your choice). Back then, I had to practice penmanship in religion class. Penmanship was a big part of the grade. We kept a separate notebook where we took dictation from the Catechism-- questions and answers that had to be neatly and carefully written out. I had some very elegant script back then. Now some may view that as old fashioned rote memorization, but as I wrote the original draft for this post in my journal I could not help but think that the Brothers were on to something.

Even though I am a heathen now, you can ask me any question today about Roman Catholic practice and doctrine, and odds are very good I will know the answer even if I have to pause for a moment to translate it into English if needed since the lessons were in Spanish. In addition, the practice of penmanship made me very comfortable with writing by hand. In addition to keeping a personal journal, which I have done for years now, I still write out a lot of my drafts by hand before I type them out. This post started out in my journal. I don't always move things out of my journal to the blog, but I have often explored ideas on paper before taking them online. And some things do remain in the privacy of my journal. Overall, I do feel that I can think better, more freely when I write by hand. Don't get me wrong; I can draft very well on a keyboard but given a choice I still prefer to write by hand. My handwriting is not as elegant as it was in 7th grade. This is mostly because I tend to write faster now, but it is still neat and legible (enough so that people who notice do praise it now and then). Cursive writing and penmanship overall have served me well for writing and expressing my ideas. I may have evolved into a blogger, but keeping a journal in paper is still my passion and outlet. And I would not be able to keep a journal without good handwriting. So, who knew? It turns out those lessons and drills were good for my brain too.