(Note: I did change the title of this piece, from “terrorize” to “get busy,” though in my comments I indicate why I’m not entirely comfortable with that. In truth I had issues with using the word “terrorize.” It bugs me that I did, though.)
Don’t quit ALA over Michael Gorman. In fact, if your membership has lapsed or you’ve never been a member, join. Now. We need you. Join a division, such as PLA or LITA, and get active. Meet people. Network. (The “people” kind of networking.) Lurk on the division discussion lists. Become a cyber-member of the increasing number of e-committees. Cobble together the cash to share a hotel room with a friend, and go to ALA or to LITA Forum or to PLA in Boston, or all of it.
The very best thing you could do for Michael Gorman is leave ALA to his ilk. He was elected, but had he run on the Luddite platform he’s now espousing, the election would have gone much differently. He’s not representative of the Association. If I relentlessly pound him (and his little dog Toto), it’s because I know he’s not the real ALA.
The very worst thing you could do for Michael Gorman is join ALA, find a niche or two, and speak up. Guys like him believe in a world where a few voices represent the rest of us. Prove him wrong.
I’ve been active in ALA since I was a library student (January 1992 was my first conference). Yes, there are some vocal Luddites. We have even elected some spectacular idiots to ALA offices. But we also have elected soem great folks–Ann Symons comes to mind as a stellar, stand-out ALA president–and we have a lot of members who are tuned in, turned on, fully wired and wi-fi’ed, podcasting, real-time video delivering, valid and well-formed librarians. Many ALA members are not techies but are administrators and leaders who have helped lead, fund, and champion all information tools–books, CD-ROM, the Internet, and beyond. They got that way not only from influence within their libraries but from their experiences in our–read me: our–association.
In a year, Gorman will be the past-president. In a couple of years, he’ll be just another library dean with “ALA President” on his c.v. In the meantime, you can really only meaningfully critique Gorman and his statements if you’re an ALA member.
You know, I remember we did the whole business with the “blog people” banner, but I still think the best suggestion for a website or t-shirt was “I blog and I vote.” Next time there’s an ALA election, make it political. Drill the ALA presidential candidate mercilessly. Demand he or she commit to a pro-tech platform. Make them wake up at 2 a.m. terrified that they might not have been pro-tech enough when you interviewed them for your blog or newsletter or discussion list.
ALA, like any organization, can be frustrating at times. That’s what it means to participate in a big organization. Trust me, I have worked on issues that have gone down in flames, and I have some that seem to get nowhere. But you know, for all the frustration, there’s also a lot of fun and camaraderie.
Come on in, it’s a great gang. Many of my best friendships, many great moments in my life, many things I’m proud of, many things I’ve learned, are connected in some way to my ALA membership. We, in ALA, are ALA. I know that includes Gorman, but he’s one in 65,000. Join up and find out for yourself. Please!
Posted on this day, other years:
- City view, sunny day - 2010
- June, Spoon, Noon, Croon, Tune, & Sandy - 2009
- Ah, MPOW, I hardly knew ye... - 2008
- Tallahassee Event: An Evening of Drama with Drew Willard - 2007
- NASIG Presentation - 2007
- The User Is Not Broken: A meme masquerading as a manifesto - 2006
- ALA offers Wireless for ALA Council, Staff - 2004
- MT Comment Registration Somewhat Funky - 2004
Karen, while I agree entirely with your sentiments about how to handle Michael Gorman and the value of membership in ALA, your choice of “terrorize” in your title is, in my humble opinion, completely unacceptable. Whether or not he would characterize what you are recommending as that is not relevant; we should not frame the process in such language, for a whole host of reasons.
I appreciate your input, and invite others to comment. I debated use of that term as a play on the word “organize,” and knew some would find it uncomfortable. But we’re entering an era of far too many unacceptable words. Gorman makes a reference to “hip hop,” and suddenly he’s a racist; I use the word terrorize, and I’m invoking terrorism. I don’t know what Gorman meant by “hip hop”; I’m sure he’s not aware it’s a music form, and I’m equally convinced it wasn’t a racist comment, clueless or otherwise. He meant “follies of young people who aren’t as scholarly as Michael Gorman,” which is a fair shot. Similarly, someone who terrorizes is not a terrorist.
So much language has been coopted and distorted in the name of political advantage. The notion of “evil” has been stolen from us, the idea of “regime” has been fully politicized, we can no longer feel shock and awe without irony. If root words are fair game for exploitation, what is left for us?
Thoughts from others?
After Gorman’s term of office is over he’ll be just another out-of-touch Luddite. OTOH, Prez-elect Leslie Burger is *already* blogging, and she really does understand the future of libraries and librarianship, so send in those membership dues and make your voice heard.
After a pleasant email exchange this morning with Karen, and with her permission, I am posting my email to her which followed my above comment.
Hi Karen,
First, let me say that I am sorry that you changed your post title. That was certainly not the intention of my comment. I have been reading you long enough to realize that you probably agonized over your choice of words, and I greatly respect you for that! I certainly did not think that you had used the word lightly.
I would’ve said more, and started to, in my comment but I didn’t feel right posting so much commentary to ‘your place.’ I also agree entirely with your comments about ‘unacceptable words’ in our culture, and, in fact, with your entire reply. I for one am greatly disturbed at what is happening to language in our culture, and have spent quite a bit of time, academic and personal, studying the issue. I did not mean my comment in a censorial manner, but more in a manner of how the discussion is framed. I agree with you that Gorman is not a racist, at least not based on an uniformed comment using the term “hip hop.” And while I agree that all who terrorize are not ‘terrorists,’ in the sense that term has been co-opted in our society, I do think that it does no good to use it in many contexts, precisely because of the now common usage.
By the way, I have just looked up both “terrorize” and “terrorist” in two pre-Iraq II dictionaries (OED 1989 & Oxford American 1999) precisely because part of mind is screaming at me that the way words work means that anyone who terrorizes is a terrorist. And, that is the case. The problem with the current usage though, and that which we probably agree on, is to which groups or individuals the term is, or is not, applied. That is the politicized aspect of the term now, and it is a shame. Again, my main concern is in how the discussion is framed, and whether that framing is useful.
I guess I liken it to a couple of years ago when I went to St. Louis to watch my college women’s soccer team play for the MVC championship and it ended in a complete fiasco after they had battled through 3 games, all of which had ended in overtimes. In the championship game, now in its 2nd overtime, on an extremely clear off-sides by the opposing team, our ladies let up for a second expecting a call that never came. The opposing team took advantage of the confusion and scored. The referee ran off the field to hide in a locked room without ever even calling the game! My comment to others for a few days was that “Our team was raped!” until I said it to a wonderfully wise, 60-ish feminist woman friend of mine. She looked at me quizzically for a second, until I realized what I was saying. “Oh, I guess that’s not a good phrase to use for a women’s team,” I said. But you know, by the dictionary I am correct and perfectly justified in using that phrasing (d. To rob, strip, plunder (a place). Also used with a group of people as object. OED 1989). Yet still, it just seems wrong when I think about it.
As a fellow veteran, I am increasingly dismayed when I look around me and see what is being done in our names as Americans, both internally and externally. As the parent of a child who has already been sent to Iraq once and has almost three more years left to serve as an attack helicopter repairer, I am even more terrified. For myself, but even more so for him and the things he now has to live with.
I am truly sorry if I caused you any angst or other negative emotions with my comment. I truly did not mean it that way! I greatly respect what you do and the stands you take. You are one of the folks that I am trying my darndest to learn from as to how to act responsibly in this world. After over 20 years in the service I was completely shut down, both mentally and emotionally. It has been a long, painful process to come back to life but I am glad that I have. I am just so often overcome with the enormity of the issues facing our country now. I served all those years in (a very naïve) hope that things would be better for us all when I was done. I now know better and am trying to figure out what I can do to change things for the better. Please keep up the work that you do, and thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. They truly do serve as a guidepost for me.
I look forward to meeting you at the OCLC blogger soiree at ALA.
Sincerely and respectfully,
Mark
http://bookmark.typepad.com/the_thoughts_are_broken/
P.S. Please feel free to post any or all of this, or not, as you see fit. I may post it at my blog depending on any further commentary at either your place or mine.
Mark Lindner
Masters Student
Graduate School of Library and Information Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
FRL on how to handle Gorman and ALA
Karen Schneider, the always wonderful Free Range Librarian, made a post last night that I came across first thing this morning.
After my previous comment and Karen’s reply, we had a nice exchange via email. With her permission, I have decided to post my email to her as a follow-up.
Hi Karen,
First, let me say that I am sorry that you changed your post title. That was certainly not the intention of my comment. I have been reading you long enough to realize that you probably agonized over your choice of words, and I greatly respect you for that! I certainly did not think that you had used the word lightly.
I would’ve said more, and started to, in my comment but I didn’t feel right posting so much commentary to ‘your place.’ I also agree entirely with your comments about ‘unacceptable words’ in our culture, and, in fact, with your entire reply. I for one am greatly disturbed at what is happening to language in our culture, and have spent quite a bit of time, academic and personal, studying the issue. I did not mean my comment in a censorial manner, but more in a manner of how the discussion is framed. I agree with you that Gorman is not a racist, at least not based on an uniformed comment using the term “hip hop.” And while I agree that all who terrorize are not ‘terrorists,’ in the sense that term has been co-opted in our society, I do think that it does no good to use it in many contexts, precisely because of the now common usage.
By the way, I have just looked up both “terrorize” and “terrorist” in two pre-Iraq II dictionaries (OED 1989 & Oxford American 1999) precisely because part of mind is screaming at me that the way words work means that anyone who terrorizes is a terrorist. And, that is the case. The problem with the current usage though, and that which we probably agree on, is to which groups or individuals the term is, or is not, applied. That is the politicized aspect of the term now, and it is a shame. Again, my main concern is in how the discussion is framed, and whether that framing is useful.
I guess I liken it to a couple of years ago when I went to St. Louis to watch my college women’s soccer team play for the MVC championship and it ended in a complete fiasco after they had battled through 3 games, all of which had ended in overtimes. In the championship game, now in its 2nd overtime, on an extremely clear off-sides by the opposing team, our ladies let up for a second expecting a call that never came. The opposing team took advantage of the confusion and scored. The referee ran off the field to hide in a locked room without ever even calling the game! My comment to others for a few days was that “Our team was raped!” until I said it to a wonderfully wise, 60-ish feminist woman friend of mine. She looked at me quizzically for a second, until I realized what I was saying. “Oh, I guess that’s not a good phrase to use for a women’s team,” I said. But you know, by the dictionary I am correct and perfectly justified in using that phrasing (d. To rob, strip, plunder (a place). Also used with a group of people as object. OED 1989). Yet still, it just seems wrong when I think about it.
As a fellow veteran, I am increasingly dismayed when I look around me and see what is being done in our names as Americans, both internally and externally. As the parent of a child who has already been sent to Iraq once and has almost three more years left to serve as an attack helicopter repairer, I am even more terrified. For myself, but even more so for him and the things he now has to live with.
I am truly sorry if I caused you any angst or other negative emotions with my comment. I truly did not mean it that way! I greatly respect what you do and the stands you take. You are one of the folks that I am trying my darndest to learn from as to how to act responsibly in this world. After over 20 years in the service I was completely shut down, both mentally and emotionally. It has been a long, painful process to come back to life but I am glad that I have. I am just so often overcome with the enormity of the issues facing our country now. I served all those years in (a very naïve) hope that things would be better for us all when I was done. I now know better and am trying to figure out what I can do to change things for the better. Please keep up the work that you do, and thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. They truly do serve as a guidepost for me.
I look forward to meeting you at the OCLC blogger soiree at ALA.
Sincerely and respectfully,
Mark
http://bookmark.typepad.com/the_thoughts_are_broken/
P.S. Please feel free to post any or all of this, or not, as you see fit. I may post it at my blog depending on any further commentary at either your place or mine.
Mark Lindner
Masters Student
Graduate School of Library and Information Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
This is the sort of thing that gives me mixed feelings. As someone new to the profession (but not inexperienced in terms of work and large organization membership), it does concern me when on the one hand I hear about all the desire for inclusiveness and wanting to bring in new voices, then someone like Gorman gets elected. Because we can say there are not enough voices, or there are enough, but the fact is he did get elected, so he must reflect some segment of the ALA in order to have garnered the vote. That bothers me, and the fact that guys like him, as much as we wish, tend not to go away as easy as we think (I have seen it happen in other places often enough and gotten burned often enough to know). It bothers me especially since as a professional, this is one of those memberships I have to have, RUSA and others were recently campaigning to have their fees raised (I don’t make a whole lot, so a small raise is a chunk for me), some of the exchanges on the Councillors’ discussion lists I read through others like you pointing to them (which look none too friendly to those not in the know), so those little things add up. Maybe I have not been in the profession long enough to have the broad perspective some of you out there have, but overall, it is a troubling impression I am getting. I love this profession dearly, and I know it to be my best destiny. But right now, its professional organization leaves a lot to be desired, and it is going to take some serious convincing for me to scrape the money for travel, let alone involvement. On the positive side, I did find helpful some suggestion I found thanks to the Lethal Librarian on inexpensive professional development (http://www.lethal-librarian.net/?p=32). Some of his suggestions I do already, hoping to buy myself time while the piggy bank swells a little.
I have probably ranted way more than I intended to. A part of me follows Don Corleone’s advice about never letting others know what you are thinking (so much for advice). But a part of me can’t quite do that, and I just wonder if maybe I am the only new professional out here, who is tech savvy but by no means a technophile, with similar mixed feelings.
By the way, thanks for the writing. This is one of the blogs I definitely keep up with. Best.