Michael Gorman shitstorm

I heard Michael Gorman speak for the first time last year as president of the ALA at the annual conference in Chicago. I don't remember what he said, because I didn't really listen, because everything he's penned for American Libraries has rubbed me the wrong way. I agree in principle with some of the things he's said, but he has this way of saying things that seems to make a LOT of people see red and not what he's actually getting at. Take his latest screed in the May 2006 issue of American Libraries:

If you believe, as I do, that there is a crisis in library
education that threatens the very existence of libraries and
librarianship, you are likely to draw a negative reaction
from a variety of people. First, there are the millenniarist
librarians and pseudo-librarians who, intoxicated with selfindulgence
and technology, will dismiss you as a “Luddite”
or worse. They and their yips and yawps can safely be left
to their acronymic backwaters and the dubious delights
of clicking and surfing.

I'm not even going to comment on the "self indulgence and technology" bit except to say that after finishing my program at this particular 'I school' I am a little sick of the attitude that technology will save the world. I do believe, however, that technology is transforming the world in ways we can hardly envision, and that it's important to harness that technology so that it does our bidding. (Yes, I do fear the coming robot uprising/apocalypse, but that is for a different post...) It pisses me off that Gorman perpetuates this dichotomy between techies and librarians--even if he's not doing it intentionally, this is how it comes across. At a recent conference I sat in a room full of techies talking about APIs (I know what they are and how powerful they can be, thank you very much, and I'm just a lowly librarian) and bitching about how librarians grumble at the introduction of new technology. I am SO not going to go into how technology that is useful is SO much better than technology that is merely cool, that too is for a later rant. I mean, geez, some of us are working with folks who have a tenuous grasp of the printed word at best; asking them to deal with computer technology can be incapacitating. I will teach them in time to wield the power of the mighty computer, but give me something simple to work with to start...

I DO believe there is a crisis in library education, but I also believe there's a crisis in the profession of librarianship in general. What is it that we're about, now that anybody can pretty much cull information from anywhere? Why are there no standards for educational/teaching skills? I came to library school with a strong grasp of the core principles behind libraries--what they stand for, why they exist, the freedoms they represent and are bound to protect, etc. I learned tons of stuff about organizational theory and decision-making, about the life and death of collections of all kinds, and about how to study how people work together--stuff that will serve me well in basically profession I choose to pursue, and for that I am grateful. But I also took electives so that I could do usability testing, design websites that talk to databases, and understand computer networking so that I can speak geek when needed. In addition, I took some classes at the School of Social Work, since I wanted to figure out for myself how libraries can contribute to communities and further civic engagement, being civic institutions and all. This is all great, this is why 'I-schools' are great. They don't pigeonhole you into that cataloging *yawn* and reference *yawn* stuff. I like working with people. I have a commitment to free and fair information access. I have a deep appreciation for the need to have an orderly information organization and management system, as well as a deep understanding of the fucked-up inability of LCSH and Dewey to fully represent everything to everybody. Got it, check, teach me something new.

These classes I took--these were electives. They were not required for a library degree. WHY NOT???? We all need to know this shit. Not only that, but where are there no courses on teaching? During my field experience, I sorely wished for some grounding in teaching theory because that's what I did 80% of the time. Why is field experience only recommended and not required? The theory meant so much more to me after I saw it in action. Why is there so little community engagement formalized into my program? More and more, libraries are being called upon to serve as a community anchor; they are platforms for community participation and civic engagement; they are instrumental in community (re)development. So here's the crisis I see: library schools need to show students that we really need to get out more, both in the community and in the world of technology, and duly prepare us. I know not everybody wants to be a militant community-engaged librarian who is armed with the best new tools of technology like me. (But why not? Who applies to library schools these days? What are they in it for? I sure as hell am not in it for cutesy storytimes and mere readers' advisory, though these are important components.) There is a war on for free access to information, Google notwithstanding. Are the troops prepared to fight?

More shitstorming here.