Librations

I was talking with a friend last night (one from my high school teachering days) and mentioned that librarianship was good for “people like me.”

When he asked me to elaborate on what I meant by “people like me,” (as we had both gone into teaching for similar reasons, and he is still fighting the good fight in a Michigan high school) I realized I had a number of answers.  Here they are, in order of realization and by no particular importance…

1)People who just CAN’T get up at 5am every day without needing a nap by 3pm.  We enjoy a leisurely post-8am start to our workday.

2)People who like helping out-we’re quick to give directions, share a recipe, or introduce you to a friend who might be able to help.  We often post articles or links on your FB wall after you mention a problem or curiosity.

3)People who geek out about multiple areas of interest.  Maybe we love writing AND movies AND teaching AND science fiction AND graphic novels AND technology AND sharks.  We have probably considered academia as an option for exploring one of these interests in depth, but may have opted out because we don’t have the time, money or patience to get 5 unrelated PhDs.

4)People who *heart* teachable moments.  I’ve encountered a lot of almost- or post-teachers in LibraryLand.  Some of this like to teach passively through blogs, readers advisory tools, etc, while others jump at opportunities to stand up front and lead educational programs or technology classes.

5)People who like books.  Not only do I get to buy books, but it’s my job to keep up on what’s up in the publishing world.  Reading the new Mary Roach book for work?  I’m in!

6)People with hard-to-pronounce last names.  Seriously, getting 150 teenagers to remember and pronounce Esseltine correctly was just a BEAR! Now I just wear a nametag and remembering my last name is kinda optional.  (Ok, so this was an afterthought.)

I’m curious: what interests/characteristics makes your career the right one for you?  I know this list doesn’t apply to all librarians, and I’m coming specifically from the Public Library world, so comment away, people!

Okay so I just saw this so I am admittedly engaging in a knee-jerk reaction but I ran across a completely new term today: High-Tech Anthropology®. It was created and registered by a computer programmer, analyst, architect, manager, and executive and addresses the lack of community/cultural/people sensitivity in software design. I’m all about cultural sensitivity and I think that programmers and professionals creating tools for people to use should know the user very well. And since anthropologists study pretty much anything related to humanity, especially including tools, the idea of merging these two fields isn’t really that far-fetched. My problem, however, is with this term…its implications and its use.

I wonder about their methods:

“Interestingly enough, many of the best practices did not come from computer science; they came from anthropology. So we began to talk to anthropologists, study their techniques, and learn from their discipline. Eventually, we even called our practice “High-Tech Anthropology®” and our team members “High-Tech Anthropologists®.”

I got my undergraduate degree in anthropology. I’m getting an MSI to become an ALA-certified librarian. I like titles and I do, generally speaking, like the educational landscapes I must traverse through to get these titles. Talking to an anthropologist doesn’t make you one.  I feel like this organization, however well intended, has made the same mistake they seek to redress: they are making assumptions that their methods and approaches are correct and appropriate without taking into context the paths that are needed to properly use these approaches and methods.

Besides, anthro is in DDC 301 and computer programming is in DDC 005. That’s like stacks and stacks away.

I espouse interdisciplinarity, the intellectual weight of non-expert knowledge and I like the idea of a practice of High-Tech Anthropology®, I just have a feeling that this is well intended but ultimately kind of misses the point. That or I just pointed out how much of a hypocrite I am and that I really am a Category Nazi who doesn’t like to shake up her p’s and q’s. Probably my reaction is a bit of both.