Archivists often act as arbiters of memory, carefully organizing and documenting the artifacts that allow us to assemble pictures of history and cultural identity. Despite the theoretical objectivity of this goal, many archives are run from a distinctly Western/European perspective- and as such some identities are not ours to document. In a quest to document the tribal communities indigenous to the land that now compromises the United States, objects have been removed from their tribal homes and placed without permission in institutions with little concern for the perspective of the communities that created them. In recent years this paradigm has started to shift, with dynamic changes in law and archival practice leading to the repatriation of artifacts to their communities, and greater representation of indigenous people in archives with direct tribal influence and support.

The history of the United States is incomplete without note of the human rights atrocities committed by the government (and its citizens) against the indigenous communities already present before European colonization. Mass murder and extensive treaty violations are but a small part of a deeply problematic history, which extends to the removal of cultural heritage items for new placement in museums or archival environs dictated by a Eurocentric perspective. To put it mildly- cultures being stripped of stewardship of their own culture.

The Indians did not only lose their land during the struggle with the white colonizers, but also part of their ethnic identity. In a process of cultural revival most of the Indian tribes today are looking in museums for important symbols of their tribal identity: sacred objects. Sacred bundles, ‘War Gods,’ dance masks and many other ritual objects are still regarded as powerful items. Even more sacred, however, are the bones of their ancestors, which are stored in large number in various museums in the United States. (pg. 71, Bolz, 1993)

 

This shift owes its momentum largely to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), which became law in November of 1990. NAGPRA highlighted some of the critical issues that tribes faced in regards to their own history and the way it was portrayed and used by institutions with zero tribal affiliation or guidance (Bolz, 1993)

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (Public Law 101-601; 25 U.S.C. 3001-3013) describes the rights of Native American lineal descendants, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations with respect to the treatment, repatriation, and disposition of Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony, referred to collectively in the statute as cultural items, with which they can show a relationship of lineal descent or cultural affiliation. (p1, McManomom for NPS, 2000)

 

Returning objects was not the societal norm before the NAGPRA was written into law, and even with its implementation, many institutions still possess substantial holdings of Native American cultural heritage. Even with NAGPRA’s intent clearly stated, many renowned institutions still possess extensive holdings of human remains, sacred objects, and other critical elements of tribal heritage many years after the fact (Museum of the American Indian).

This is not to say that no objects are being returned to their ancestral homelands. In addition to enlightening dialogues on how these items should be handled according to belief systems, some significant strides have been made that can be found in contemporary headlines. The Smithsonian has set up a repatriation department, which has outlets at both the Museum of Natural History and the Museum of the American Indian. It describes the duties of its office as upholders of the law, stating

This law and its amendment assert the right of Native American, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian peoples to determine the disposition of culturally affiliated human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony currently in the collections of the Smithsonian Institution. Out policy directs us to consider requests for the repatriation of the remains of Native American individuals whose identity is known, and objects acquired illegally. (p2, Smithsonian Institute’s Office of Repatriation)

 

While this does not make up for the institution’s past as a holder of such extensive collections, their collaborative efforts with tribes in recent history is starting to change the dynamic and response of large institutions to tribal requests.

Sacred objects are returned to the Apache by the Smithsonian in 2007. Photo retrieved from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-road-to-repatriation-98420522/

 

The return of objects is a layered issue, which balances on the inclusion of tribes to dictate how these objects should be handled. In the case of 2007 repatriation to the Apache, certain precautions and steps were taken in order to respect the Apache culture as defined in these objects.

“The shipping crates featured breathing holes for the masks and revered artifacts inside, which Apaches believe are alive. Before sending them off, a medicine man blessed them with yellow pollen, a holy element that fosters connection with the creator…After a ceremony at the Heard Museum in Phoenix, Apache elders returned the objects to sacred mountains and sites in the Southwest where they believe the spirits reside” (Fletcher, 2008)

 

This level of awareness sits in direct contrast with the past pillaging that allowed for these collections to be assembled. With increasing press, institutions are progressing toward more ethical actions in regards to their own collections. As recently as October of 2018, the governor of California has signed a new measure to offer increased transparency to the Native American collections held by the University of California system (Morris, 2018). While this law is hopeful in its aim to pay stricter observance to NAGPRA ordinances, there is still the long road to successful implementation. Institutions like UCLA and UC Berkley both have significant collections containing human remains, and there exists some remaining confusion over how such laws will be enforced within the UC system if NAGPRA itself was not enough.

Another contemporary approach to this history is to seek out greater tribal influence on existing institutions, and collaborate on a manner which best expresses the Native American perspective and past. The Autry Museum of the American West is one example of an institution that is currently working to drastically increase awareness and correct this criminal lapse of attention. The recent recipient of a substantial grant from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, the museum is seeking to “put funds toward initiatives used to reach Native communities” (Greenberger, 2018). This sets a trend of greater inclusion of institutions reaching out to the tribes whose history they display.

“In a statement, Lynn Valbuena, the chairwoman of the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, said, ‘Our partnership with the Autry Museum of the American West will increase indigenous peoples’ access, connections, and stewardship of their ancestors and material culture. It is out hope that not only out tribal community, but many others across California, will benefit from the healing and joy that such interactions with our ancestors can bring” (Greenberger, 2018).

 

These developments are helping to change the way certain histories are approached, thus changing the dynamics of representation and possession in museums and archives. Simply put, these actions are a start- but only that. Drastic actions need to be taken to better respond to tribal inquiries that have been pending for decades. Without repatriation, these communities are left with stolen histories told from a distinctly Eurocentric perspective.  This is an issue that cannot be ignored in the archival community, and can only be corrected with the return of these objects and remains to their ancestral homelands.

 

 

References

 

Bolz, P. (1993). Repatriation of Native American cultural objects — confrontation or cooperation? Zeitschrift Für Ethnologie, 118(1), 69-77. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.du.idm.oclc.org/stable/25842296

 

 

Fletcher, K. R. (2008, November 25). The Road to Repatriation. Smithsonian.com. Retrieved from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-road-to-repatriation-98420522/

 

 

Greenberger, A. (2018, October 18). Autry Museum of the American West Receives $414,101 grant from San Manuel band of Mission Indians. Art News. Retrieved from http://www.artnews.com/2018/10/17/autry-museum-american-west-receives-414101-grant-san-manuel-band-mission-indians/

 

McManamom, F. P. (n.d.). National Park Service: The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). Retrieved from https://www.nps.gov/archeology/tools/laws/nagpra.htm

 

 

Morris, M. (2018, October 2). UC will update Native American repatriation policies in accordance with AB 2836. Daily Bruin. Retrieved from https://dailybruin.com/2018/10/02/uc-will-update-native-american-repatriation-policies-in-accordance-with-ab-2836/

 

Protocols for Native American Archival Materials. (n.d.). Retrieved October, 2018, from https://www2.nau.edu/libnap-p/protocols.html

 

Smithsonian Institute. (n.d.). What is Repatriation? Retrieved from https://anthropology.si.edu/repatriation/whatis/index.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In America, libraries have long been seen as neutral spaces that cater to all members of society. This neutral outlook has helped libraries become key generators of social capital in their communities by increasing the network of social relationships that enable society to run effectively (Johnson, 2010). However, over the past year, the organization that provides leadership for the development and promotion of libraries, the American Library Association (ALA), has become increasingly vocal on moral issues in politics, creating a divide among library users and weakening that social capital. While some may view this institutional involvement as the ALA standing up for what is right, not everybody sees it that way. In fact, some commentators, especially right-wing news agencies, have come to view libraries as “anachronistic” liberal institutions (Waters, 2017) in the wake of the ALA’s political messaging. Despite this weakening of social capital in libraries, the stance that ALA has taken on moral issues of social justice is one librarians should support.

Before we examine why librarians should support ALA’s political decisions, we must first understand what those decisions are. In the weeks following the 2016 presidential election ALA sent out a press release on their willingness to work with then President Elect Donald J. Trump, stating “We are ready to work with President-elect Trump, his transition team, incoming administration and members of Congress to bring more economic opportunity to all Americans and advance other goals we have in common” (Albanese, 2017, p.3). This comment was quickly retracted after an outcry from the ALA membership, who claimed that the divisiveness of President Trump’s campaign was in opposition to the values of the ALA (Albanese, 2017). The ALA has since decided to become increasingly involved in the politics of its members, going so far as to issue statements of opposition to specific non-library related Trump policies, such as the construction of the Us-Mexico border wall (Albanese, 2018). While the intent of these statements may be to speak out on issues of social justice, some have worried that the ALA’s involvement in politics could carry negative consequences.

In 2018, the Trump White House released their 2019 budget proposal. In that proposal was a plan for the complete elimination of the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), which provides 156 million dollars in funding and aid to libraries across the United States annually (Office of Management and Budget, 2018). While the Trump administration has claimed that it is unlikely “the elimination of IMLS would result in the closure of a significant number of libraries and museums” (Office of Management and Budget, 2018, p.97), many experts agree that this could be disastrous for public libraries that rely on external funding for project and program support. While there is no connection between the ALA’s political stance and the decision to cut funding for the IMLS, the ALA’s vocal position could negatively affect their efforts in lobbying against the proposed budget cuts (Albanese, 2018).

In the past, the ALA has engaged in political lobbying for the benefit of U.S. policy toward libraries (Albanese, 2017). However, it may be much harder for them to lobby against this budget cut than previous attempts due to the increasingly divisive partisan stances being taken by American politicians on both sides. As partisan politics continue to intensify, some conservative media outlets have even taken aim at libraries as an extension of liberal education (Waters, 2017). The ALA has done little to walk back their position either, going so far as to tweet criticism directly at the President and his daughter (Albanese, 2017).

Conservative media has long been critical of the humanities in general (Nelson, 2012), but public libraries have often remained above the intense scrutiny that universities and academic libraries receive as part of the “academic left” (Waters, 2017, p. 2). However, as the ALA has become more vocal in its criticism of president Trump, public libraries have fallen under greater scrutiny on the right. This could have real consequences to the mission of public libraries. It has long been recognized that one of the strengths of public libraries is in their ability to generate social capital. In a 2010 study, library scholar Catherine A. Johnson found that “library use was significantly associated with community involvement” (p. 1), creating a common meeting place for members of society to be exposed to new ideas and individuals of different backgrounds. With conservative media beginning to criticize the use of public libraries, going so far as to encourage their disuse (Waters, 2017), that social capital is at risk of degrading.

While it is clear that ALA’s involvement in politics has had a negative impact on its perception by a segment of the population, that does not necessarily mean it is making a mistake. The ALA lists social responsibility, diversity, and democracy as some of their most essential core values, and choosing to stand up for what they believe is morally correct fits within these values. But by vocally criticizing the President, ALA has jeopardized another core value, access. The funding cuts to IMLS would severely limit the accessibility of information, especially in rural libraries that depend on external funding (Jaeger, Gorham, Taylor, & Kettnech, 2017).

Despite the negativity surrounding ALA’s political statements, there has been an outpouing of support from librarians and educators (Albanese, 2017). The fact is, “the foundation of modern librarianship rests on an essential set of core values that define, inform, and guide our professional practice” (American Library Association, 2015, p. 1), and by choosing to stand up for those core values, ALA is setting a high standard for the ethics of librarianship. The choice to vocally criticize the current administration may have consequences for the profession, but staying quiet would betray the core values ALA expects all librarians to strive for. In the wake of this new backlash, it will be essential for librarians to work together to strengthen the library’s social capital by reaching out to patrons regardless of background.

 

 

 

References

Albanese, A. R. (2017, February 17). Making ALA great again. Publisher’s Weekly. Retrieved from https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/libraries/article/72814-making-ala-great-again.html

Albanese, A. R. (2018, February 12). Trump renews bid to eliminate library funding, NEA, and NEH. Publisher’s Weekly. Retrieved from https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/publisher-news/article/76047-trump-renews-bid-to-eliminate-library-funding-nea-and-neh.html

American Library Association (2008). Lobbying and ALA: Fact sheet. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/aboutala/sites/ala.org.aboutala/files/content/governance/legalguidelines/alalobbying/lobbying-and-ala-fact-sheet-march-12-20081.pdf

American Library Association. (2015). Core values of librarianship. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/corevalues

Jaeger, P. T. , Gorham, G. , Taylor, N. G. , & Kettnech, K. (2017). Aftermath of the 2016 US presidential elections for libraries: Axioms, foxes, and the urgencies of now. The Library Quarterly, 87(3), 189-194.

Johnson, C. A. (2010). Do public libraries contribute to social capital?: A preliminary investigation into the relationship. Library & Information Science Research, 32(2), 147-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2009.12.006

Nelson, C. (2012). Fighting for the humanities. Academe, 98(1), 16-21. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23208996

Office of Budget and Management. (2018). An American budget: Major savings and reforms. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/msar-fy2019.pdf

Waters, C. (2017, September 21). ‘Woke’ librarians take their politics to another level. Retrieved from https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/woke-librarians-take-their-politics-to-another-level/

Lurking behind every research paper assignment is a librarian and a professor waiting to jump at the opportunity to teach information literacy. Sure enough, if you assign a research paper, the fake news articles and sensationalist web clickbait will come. At this point, Instruction Librarians lug around metaphorical toolkits with an unimaginable surplus of acronyms (CRAAP, Big6, Super3) created to help combat the fake news phenomenon and facilitate critical analysis of media news providers. It’s the quick-fix Band-Aid for teaching information literacy on the surface level but, when bots and algorithms can generate sensationalist news intelligently, those acronyms fall SHORT (Should Help Out but Really cause Trouble).

The intersection of media and libraries is well defined in the American Library Association’s core value of social responsibility last adopted in 2004. “The broad social responsibilities of the American Library Association are defined in terms of the contribution that librarianship can make in ameliorating or solving the critical problems of society; support for efforts to help inform and educate the people of the United States on these problems and to encourage them to examine the many views on and the facts regarding each problem” (2004). Essentially, the ALA is calling to arms the literacy information instructors in academic institutions to uphold and teach information social justice. Given that information inundates our lives, information should also be perceived as a tool that can work for or against a democratic society and, because the ALA serves the ideals of a democratic and informed society, Instruction Librarians are bound by their obligation to learn from and teach fake news.

The current complication we are all subtly facing is the quiet slow death of fake news.

When we call something news, we assign a level of validity that the information we are being presented with can convincingly hold some points of truth that, overall, feed a larger mission of misleading the reader. However, as fake news becomes less fake and more sensational, it is no longer fake or false facts that are responsible for the negative persuasion on the reader but rather it is the affect of the information. We consume information from a perspective of how it makes us feel.

That’s why there is a movement to drop fake news and understand it as rebranded propaganda in the post-truth world.

However, academic Librarians have been teaching with their handy acronyms (I’m guilty of this, too) as a remedy for understanding the misinformation crisis on a superficial level. In order to attack the influx of sensationalist information, libraries need to embrace the world as being in post-truth. Mr. Library Dude (Joe Hardenbrook, 2017) said it best, “it takes time to critically evaluate and a checklist approach won’t suffice. You need to think, analyze, question motives, and question your own assumptions too.”

“Now is not the time for information professionals to be neutral about fake news, half truths, alternative facts and those that perpetuate them and allow them to flourish, it is the time to be proactive, noisy and passionate” (Kylie Burgess, 2017). Kylie’s right. Academic libraries need to throw their acronyms aside, push up the sleeves of their cardigans, and fall deeply and maddeningly into an understanding of post-truth ideology.

As librarians across the Nation begin to use their voices with more confidence and assurance about social justice issues, the library as an institution will continually develop its reputation as a social justice beacon for the Nation. In this regard, academic Instruction Librarians must learn to adopt information social justice. Laura Saunders (2017) articulately points out that “for the most part librarians and library professional associations have embraced information social justice as a natural fit for their education and outreach missions, as well as the core value of social responsibility”.

We know we need to do something, but first we need to re-teach ourselves a better avenue of approach.

Post-truth, declared as Dictionary.com’s word of the year in 2016, is the idea that information is judged, not on objective fact, but from the consumer’s biases and beliefs. Emotional responses to information are more powerful a tool for rationalizing than the objective process of weighing the facts. Truth, therefore, that feels no longer relevant is no longer relevant.

An idea proposed at a conference held by the Phillips Academy (2017) suggests to academic Librarians to reduce the power of the conglomerate that is Fake News by reframing the information as propaganda when teaching their students. Propaganda has historically been difficult for information consumers to understand. Take, for example, Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” as the epitome of propaganda’s power. Mix in some well written satire, snap your fingers, and suddenly Europe thinks people are actually going to eat their progeny. Fake News seems like a new and dangerous thing but, when you re-contextualize it, it’s actually just a historical battle against propaganda and emotions.

With some historical context, the overwhelming task of deconstructing Fake News in a Post-Truth world seems increasing plausible and it’s easy enough to go into that Librarian tool-box, too. And, if I’m being realistic, the deconstruction has got to start in libraries. Barbara Fister (2017) makes the observation that “governments [cannot] pass laws that will fix the problem (though some are trying.) And teaching students the art of fact-checking won’t solve the problem, either. It goes deeper than that.” Though Barbara didn’t describe just how deep fighting misinformation goes, we know that it includes libraries.

The American Library Association established their five Key Action Areas in 1998 as guiding principles for themselves and libraries nationally. Most relevant to my argument is the focus on Intellectual Freedom and Education and Continuous Learning. Libraries are expected to provide all information without biases and objection—to foster Intellectual Freedom and continuous learning—but how can libraries carefully navigate that obligation if the information is falsified; skewed; misleading?

Libraries being examples of thoughtful and analytical information stewardship is one answer, and the only answer that I can justifiably present at this moment. The truth is that libraries can only educated insofar as they can afford to reach, and our resources only allow for so much prosperity. Ben Johnson (2017) justifies our failure with this thought: “And if false information wins the day, we can take comfort in knowing that we kept the option of truth available.”

By: Kimberlee Roberts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Burgess, K. (1970, February 06). Librarianship in a post-truth world: An information science student’s perspective. Retrieved October 23, 2018, from https://librarywhisperers.space/home/2017/2/5/librarianship-in-a-post-truth-world-an-information-science-students-perspective

Fister, B. (n.d.). Post-Post Truth | Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved October 23, 2018, from https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/library-babel-fish/post-post-truth-0

Hardenbrook, J. (2017, April 04). Post-Truth and Fake News. Retrieved October 23, 2018, from https://mrlibrarydude.wordpress.com/2017/04/04/post-truth-and-fake-news/

Johnson, B. (2017, March). Information Literacy is Dead: The Role of Libraries in a Post-Truth World. Retrieved October 23, 2018, from http://www.infotoday.com/cilmag/mar17/Johnson–Information-Literacy-Is-Dead–The-Role-of-Libraries-in-a-Post-Truth-World.shtml

1. (n.d.). Libraries in a Post-Truth World by Phillips Academy Andover. Retrieved October 23, 2018, from https://livestream.com/phillipsacademy/owhl

Saunders, L. (2017). Connecting information literacy and social justice: Why and how. Communications in Information Literacy, 11(1), 55-75.

From a young age students in America are taught to internalize the rules of the English language, taking what we learn in school and applying it to our everyday life with tactical precision. By doing so, we confirm our knowledge of the language and, on occasion, use that knowledge to correct others. This behavior, known as grammar policing, has been a common part of spoken English for centuries, and while it may seem harmless, it is far from so. The fact is, grammar policing shapes the way we perceive the English language on a fundamental level, and traces its origins to one of the most controversial systems known to the modern world, colonialism.

While it may seem like a stretch to claim a lineage between grammar policing and colonialism, the facts support the idea that proper, spoken English was designed with explicitly racist overtones, and incorporated into a system of genocidal thought aimed at Africa, the Americas, and all colonies of the British and later American empires. While many think of genocide as the systematic destruction of a people, it is also a destruction of their culture, and in no place is this distinction more apparent than in the colonial schools set up throughout the 18^th, 19^th, and 20^th centuries.

As Western Europeans spread across the globe, they brought with them a sense of superiority indicative of colonialism (Pernsteiner, 2014). This superiority manifested itself in many ways, but was most noticeable in the “superior intellect” (Vera, 1995, p.296) that many Western Europeans claimed to possess. It was the mistake of the colonizers to believe that technological progress (coal and steam industrialization) was the only form of progress, and so as they arrived in technologically “underdeveloped” parts of the world, they felt it was their duty to bring the local population up to speed, though not without compensation, which often took the form of depleting native populations of labor and natural resources.

The help they claimed to offer came in many forms, but the most recognizable of these was the colonial school. Speaking of his time in a colonial school in Kenya, author Ngugi Wa Thiong’o (1986) wrote that “the language of our evening teach-ins, and the language of our immediate community, and the language of our work in the field were one. And then I went to school, a colonial school, and this harmony was broken. The language of my education was no longer the language of my culture” (p. 111). After being beaten and made to wear humiliating signs for speaking his native language, Thiong’o was forced to learn a language that had no bearing on his people or their history, and was then told he was stupid for not learning it properly.

The heart of this issue is summed up nicely by social justice educators George Sefa Dei and Chizoba Imoka (2018), who noted that:

Even though English language and European knowledge system is indigenous to a minority of the world population, the global education architecture upholds a narrow and Eurocentric understanding of education. The success of students across the world is measured and determined by their: competence in English language, embodiment of Eurocentric norms/perspectives and alienation from their indigenous cultures (p. 1)

The deliberate suppression and elimination of cultures has often been accompanied by the promotion of new ‘educational’ opportunities, and in the 19^th and 20^th centuries, those opportunities came in English.

The fact that “proper grammar” is a modern, colonial concept that began to develop as a need to differentiate “good” native English from “bad” foreign English is an often overlooked part of the language’s history. In the drive to colonize and ‘educate’ native populations across the world, a system was put in place that gave a faux-intellectual edge to those with the grace to be born in a white-majority, English-speaking country, because it was presumed that whiteness and intelligence were interchangeable. Simply by being taught English in a Western education system, these students were able to claim an intellectual edge on people with no interest in learning an alien language that was irrelevant to their everyday life.

The same instance can be seen playing out time and again across the world, from British schools in India to Native American children being taken from their families in the 19^th and 20^th century to be raised and taught in boarding schools run by the United States. Language and how we teach language have always been part of the toolkit when colonial assimilation is being considered because “settler colonialism is inherently eliminatory, if not invariably genocidal” (Wolfe, 2006, p. 387). If the goal is to eliminate a culture, the first step is to eliminate the language of that culture.

So, we can see that policing the way in which we are told to speak has at least some connection to these stories of colonialism, but how does grammar policing effect social justice in the present? Scholar Eduardo Bonilla-Silva (2011) may have said it best when he wrote: “racial domination, like all forms of domination, works best when it becomes hegemonic, that is, when it accomplishes its goals without much fanfare” (p. 173). Racism works best when it is digestible through everyday systems of power such as our teachers, our parents, and even our peers.

This brings us to the grammar police and the people who tell us that y’all or ain’t are not words. The fact is words communicate single, distinct, and meaningful elements of speech and writing. So long as you understand the meaning behind the specific element, it constitutes a word. So why are we obsessed with keeping some elements of speech out of the language? To find the answer, all you need to do is look at racial and economic gaps in our system. The set of linguistic idiosyncrasies common among African-American communities (often called Black English) and the dialect of the poor are synonymous with the dialect of stupidity in the eyes of the “well educated” Eurocentric world (Franklin & Hixon, 1999, p.89). In her paper “African Americans have this slang” scholar Karen Paley tells the story of a Black Boston College Student who was forced to retake her practicum in teaching due to her continued use of Black English. The constant criticism of her spoken English by students, fellow teachers, and parents was often coupled with criticism of her intellect and capability to teach, showing that the effects of colonial grammar are still very much alive today.

While it is easy to see how colonialism and grammar have had an effect on education, we often fail to analyze how they affect our academic and public institutions, including libraries. Both academic and public libraries have a long history with internalized discrimination, much of which is predicated upon the same intellectual discrimination students in colonial schools faced (Simons, 1974). In the United States, libraries remained segregated through the 1960s under the assumption that “Black people just weren’t interested in literacy or having an education… they didn’t have the same capacity as white people to learn” (Wiegand, 2018, p.1). This assumption, which was partially derived from the language-based perception of intellect, had a profound effect on libraries that we can still see today. Many African American studies programs in the United States kept their collections separate from their institution’s main library for decades after desegregation due to an assumption that main libraries did not have Black student interests at heart (Glover, 1984), and many public libraries have had continued trouble engaging with and maintaining non-white patrons (Jiao, Onwuegbuzie, & Bostick, 1996). The fact is, the history of discrimination in libraries based on the concept of racial intelligence created by colonial education systems continues to have a profound effect on libraries and patrons today, with many patrons from marginalized communities reporting a type of “library anxiety” when having to interact with public and academic libraries (Jiao et al., 1996).

As members of an English-speaking society, it is important for us to recognize how important these hidden stereotypes of the English language actually are. Through grammar policing, we are taught to look at people with different backgrounds and experiences with the English language as less intelligent, and that has a major effect on our society. Whether you are a librarian or a bank manager, the way you perceive someone’s intelligence affects the service you provide them. By policing the grammar of those around us, we are actively contributing to a system that limits opportunities for the most vulnerable members of our society. The racially charged history of grammar policing is not something that can be solved overnight, but we need to begin addressing the issue now, so future generations will have an opportunity to overthrow a system of oppression as common and prevalent as the English language.

 

Works Cited

Bonilla-Silva, E. (2012). The invisible weight of whiteness: The racial grammar of everyday life in

contemporary America. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 35(2), 173-194. Doi: 10.1080/01419870.2011.613997

Dei, G.S. & Imoka, C. (2018). Colonialism: Why write back? E-International Relations. Retrieved from: https://www.e-ir.info/2018/01/03/colonialism-why-write-back/

Franklin, G., & Hixon, M. W. (1999). Yourdialect could place you onthe wrong side of the intelligence bell curve. The Negro Educational Review, 50(3), 89. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1304523432?accountid=14608

Glover, D. (1984). Academic library support for Black studies programs: A plea to Black studies faculty and administrators. The Journal of Negro Education, 53(3), 312-321. doi:10.2307/2294866

Jiao, Q.J., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Bostick, S.L. (1996).Library anxiety: Characteristics of ‘at-risk’ college students.Library and Information Science Research, 18 (2) (1996), 151-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0740-8188(96)90017-1

Paley, K. S. (2001). “African Americans have this slang”: Grammar, dialect, and racism. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED461117

Pernsteiner, A. (2014). The Colonial bath: Colonial culture in everyday life (1918–1931). In N. Bancel, P. Blanchard, S. Lemaire, &D. Thomas (Eds.), Colonial culture in France since the Revolution(pp. 200-208). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt16gh82z.19

Simons, H., & Johnson, K. (1974). Black English syntax and reading interference. Research in the Teaching of English, 8(3), 339-358. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40170604

waThiong’o, N.(1986). Decolonizing the mind: The politics of language in African literature. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.

Wolfe, P. (2006). Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native. Journal of Genocide Research, 8(4), 387-409. Retrieved from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/citedby/10.1080/14623520601056240?scroll=top&needAccess=true

 

Vera, H., Feagin, J., & Gordon, A. (1995). Superior Intellect?: Sincere fictions of the white self. The Journal

of Negro Education, 64(3), 295-306. doi:10.2307/2967210

 

Wiegand, S. (2018). The hidden history of segregation in libraries [blog]. Retrieved from:

https://www.proquest.com/blog/pqblog/2018/The-Hidden-History-of-Segregation-in-Libraries.html

The late Whitney Houston immortalized the words of Linda Creed with the release of her 1986 self-titled album when she sang Greatest Love of All. “I believe the children are our future. Teach them well and let them lead the way,” (Creed & Masser, 1977, track 9). The lyrics were written in 1977, and yet in 2018 we still are not letting America’s youth pave the way to the future.

As the topics of social justice – diversity, inclusion, privilege, sexism, racism, politics, poverty (I have to stop here, or the list of social justice topics will take over this blog post) – are being discussed in the LAIS profession, it becomes clear that we must also consider how to support and include youth in this conversation. Children and teens are curious, interested and informed on many of these topics. The Young Adult Library Services Association’s (YALSA), 2014 report, The Future of Library Services For and With Teens: A Call To Action, wrote that “libraries are neutral[1], safe public spaces that provide opportunities for adolescents to grow intellectually, emotionally, and socially,” (Braun, Hartman, Hughes-Hassell, Kumasi & Yoke, 2014, p. 1). The YALSA report also discussed the implications found in the Annie E. Casey Foundation analysis of the 2010 Census report that there were 74.2 million children under the age of 18 in the United States, and that youth between the ages of 14 and 24 make up 25% of all public library users (Braun et al., 2014). Are we, the LAIS professionals and students, including this demographic of emerging voters in the discussion of social justice?

Currently, society insists that middle-aged and older adults have the experience and knowledge and therefore, acceptable solutions for the issues that we believe are in need of correction. The passions, interests, fears, hopes, and voices of children, teenagers and young adults regarding social issues are seen as an indulgence that we do not need to cater. In Levenson’s op-ed published in the March 8, 2018 edition of The Daily Californian, she wrote that despite the organized, knowledgeable, and successful efforts of youth activists, particularly in light of the Parkland shooting, the responses from adults remain mostly condescending and dismissive. “Our age does not prevent us from engaging with the news and our values to make informed choices” (Levenson, 2018).

There are many avenues that libraries can take to support the youth of America in finding their voices regarding social justice. Burdic’s 2017 doctoral dissertation was focused on school librarians and their role in social justice, writing that it is the moral obligation of the librarian to build a society based on “social equity, diversity, and inclusion,” (p. 11). “Thoughtful curation [of collections] and positive discussions help students understand and appreciate local and global social inequities,” (p. 1). Both school and public libraries must focus on diversifying and including material in their collection that not only echoes the beliefs and experiences of their community and students but also broadens their worldview. Touhy’s 2018 article written for the National Library of New Zealand points out, “they’re [children] learning all the time, not just in the classroom, but from what they see, hear – and read – every day,” (para. 3). Library employees need to provide an outlet for the teens and children to feel comfortable and welcomed to use the resources of the library to discuss, examine, understand, and change the inequities of society. Erin Hoopes is a library supervisor in Philadelphia who wrote about their experiences creating a Social Justice Symposium for Teens at their library. After listening to teens in their community voice frustrations and fears, Hoopes realized that as librarians, “we have a responsibility not just to recognize our privilege, but to turn it into power for individuals and groups who are less privileged” (Hoopes, 2018).

Children and teens, regardless of the privilege they are born – or not born – into, will always be among the less privileged because of our (adults) tendency to silence them. This behavior creates a disadvantage not only for America’s youth but also for the adults who are failing to listen. Solnit was writing about power and the silencing of women, and yet her words apply to children, teenagers, and young adults. “Sometimes just being able to speak, to be heard, to be believed, are crucial parts of membership in a family, a community, a society. Sometimes our voices break those things apart” (Solnit, 2017, para. 11). We shouldn’t be afraid of American youth breaking our precious society. We should be encouraging them to find their niche, their passions, their community and make it better.

References

Braun, L. W., Hartman, M. L., Hughes-Hassell, S., Kumasi, K., & Yoke, B. (2014, January 8). The future of library services for and with teens: A call to action. Chicago, IL: Young Adult Library Services Association. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/yaforum/sites/ala.org.yaforum/files/content/YALSA_nationalforum_Final_web_0.pdf

Burdic, S. A. (2017). The social justice role of school librarians. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. 10642543.

Creed. L. (lyricist), & Masser, M. (composer). (1977). Greatest love of all. Recorded by Whitney Houston on Whitney Houston(cassette). New York, NY: Arista Records. (1986).

Hoopes, E. (2018, March 5). Social justice symposium for teens. Public Libraries Online. Retrieved from http://publiclibrariesonline.org/2018/03/social-justice-symposium-for-teens/

Levenson, E. (2018, March 8). Youth activism in response to Parkland shooting should not be underestimated. The Daily Californian. Retrieved from http://www.dailycal.org/2018/03/08/youth-activism-response-parkland-shooting-not-underestimated/

Solnit, R. (2017, March 8). Silence and powerlessness go hand in hand – women’s voices must be heard. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/08/silence-powerlessness-womens-voices-rebecca-solnit

Touhy, M. (2018, February 14). Understanding and promoting social justice through your library. Retrieved from https://natlib.govt.nz/blog/posts/understanding-and-promoting-social-justice-through-your-library

[1]The 2018 ALA Midwinter President’s Program debated the perception and reality of neutrality in libraries and the library profession. Read more here Are Libraries Neutral?

 

Nope, not the 1999 Kubrick drama-mystery, but a metaphor for something glaring that’s happening in libraries right now; something no one wants to talk about.

Citation: Depression, Ryan Melaugh. Flikr. https://www.flickr.com/photos/120632374@N07/13974181800

Let’s start with this.

Through a series of discussions and observations, a distaste for the popular buzz-word tolerance rose up in my throat. I felt my own guttural rejection of the term and its ideology when I listened to colleagues and friends throw the word around as a haven for radical ideas and social justice. Bearing witness to proposed solutions such as:  “With more tolerance we could…” and “We need to create spaces tolerant of…” my brain tried to rationalize why I wasn’t in agreeance. Then I made one association I’ll never forget.

We (human beings) are told we must tolerate pain—must learn to tolerate an unjust legal system—to tolerate the results of a government election. We are socialized to associate tolerance with our own silent acceptance of dissatisfaction. Why, then, are we pasting this word on the facades of our libraries?

The LIS profession is well-practiced at being self-aware. Many professionals have contributed their thoughts to the fields’ inherent inability to be a service that is apolitical and neutral. It seems to be a consensus that every decision executed within libraries is a deliberate choice that has come from a living, breathing, in-some-way-biased human being. In a wildly popular post from the online platform BookRoit, Kelly Jensen writes “it’s impossible to be a neutral space with the goal of reaching a community” (2017). Therefore, as a way of mitigating our position in society while also honoring our own code of ethics, libraries have been and have begun to establish advocacy programs and platforms for unheard marginalized populations. Libraries have sacrificed their reputations with stakeholders to foster exhibits on resistance, pigeonholed cultures, and confront failing education systems and fake news.

It is obvious: the work libraries are doing is important and it is work that the library should be doing. The mistake of progress originates in the use of the complacent ideology of tolerance. Kelly Jensen continues in her article: “by inviting all in a community to be in a shared space, libraries embrace the idea of encouraging education, encouraging acceptance and tolerance” (2017).

Kelly’s only speaking what libraries in large are thinking, too: that there is an unprecedented level of hatred and racism and tension in this current socio-political environment and we believe that the library can do something about it. But it isn’t tolerance we should be advocating for.

Attitudes of tolerance create spaces that foster micro-aggressions, continued support of systemic oppression, and spot-light or feel-good diversity and multiculturalism. Tolerance is active silence and passive participation in standing up and speaking out against historic social issues.

In the same year that Kelly Jensen wrote her article praising the work of social justice librarians, April Hathcock and Fobazi Ettarh responded to their recent experience at ALA Chicago with an opposing perspective: that libraries weren’t achieving their progressive agenda as well as they were all claiming.

April Hathcock took to her wordpress (2017) to illuminate for her colleagues that the LIS profession is infiltrated with historic racism and no one wants to talk about it. Several days at the convention exhausted April, beyond the usual busy-ness and excitement, but on a deep and personal level that April best describes as race fatigue. In short, it was exhausting for April to be herself in this field and her experience is not an isolated incident. Fobazi Ettarh took to her wordpress (2017) to express her frustrations with ALA Chicago and the library environment that fosters racial micro-aggressions. Fobazi writes “I cannot love a vocation that does not love me. I cannot love a profession where I cannot thrive due to facets of my identity. And I do not want to…I will not put my whole self into a field that does not accept all of me. All of my blackness. All of my radicalness and attempts at decolonization” (2017).

That’s tolerance: when an institution makes the active choice to allow the presence of a population without uplifting, encouraging, or supporting them; that institution is merely allowing that population to co-exist separately, but not equally. An open door does not erase historic oppression. Tolerance of populations breed the systemic hierarchy into being. Tolerance is a scapegoat for diversity, multiculturalism, and inclusion. There is no action in tolerance but silence.

If the experiences of April Hathcock and Fobazi Ettarh aren’t proof that tolerance in the LIS profession is an egregious error, let’s take a look at the concept of repressive tolerance. Oxford Reference cites repressive tolerance as two key concepts. The first being “the unthinking acceptance of entrenched attitudes and ideas, even when these are obviously damaging to other people, or indeed the environment”. Think about the long road to women’s suffrage, for example. The second being “the vocal endorsement of actions that are manifestly aggressive towards other people (the popular support in the US and the UK in the aftermath of 9/11 and 7/7 for the respective government’s attempts to override or limit habeas corpus is a clear example of this)”. Remember: libraries were tolerant of the social-political environment when we segregated our stacks. We were tolerant—silent—wrong.

The idea of tolerance in libraries is inherently good-natured, but having looked past the feel-good façade of the idea, I can see now that tolerance has no place in the library. We need to replace tolerance with education, empathy, and understanding.

By Kimberlee Roberts

 

 

 

References

Black people aren’t making things up: The science behind “racial battle fatigue”. (2015). Retrieved October 1, 2018, from https://thinkprogress.org/black-people-arent-making-things-up-the-science-behind-racial-battle-fatigue-9726fcebc938/

Ettarh, F. (2017). Post-ALA Fatigue and “Nice White Ladies”. Retrieved October 1, 2018, from https://fobaziettarh.wordpress.com/2017/07/03/post-ala-fatigue-and-nice-white-ladies/

Hathcock, A. (2017). Post-ALA Race Fatigue. Retrieved October 1, 2018, from https://aprilhathcock.wordpress.com/2017/06/27/post-ala-race-fatigue/

Jensen, K. (2017). Libraries Resist: A Round-Up of Tolerance, Social Justice, & Resistance in US Libraries. Retrieved from https://bookriot.com/2017/02/10/libraries-resist-round-tolerance-social-justice-resistance-us-libraries/

Repressive Tolerance. Oxford Reference. Ed.   Retrieved 1 Oct. 2018, from http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100414515.

It’s a new quarter and a new course with new students, so it’s time for a new Blog!  I am very excited to see what we are able to create.  After the first round of blog posts are submitted, they will be posted here to allow for comments.  So, stay tuned and get ready for an engaging and informative quarter of social justice discussions!

Dr. Kawanna Bright