REFLECTIONS

I enjoyed my time working on this project and appreciated the freedom to choose and research any topic of interest. That being said, this was not an easy assignment. I initially assumed that the learning curve in understanding Omeka would be the main challenge. However, the struggle in navigating a constant philosophical obstacle course was what left my brain hurting. Deciphering the difference between a work, an image, and a still image had me wondering what physicality even means. Do I know the definition of “creator”? I’m not sure I can say. Is the significance of a photograph the physical print itself or the image captured? I have more opinion on this matter, but still, the line is murky. 

All this is to say that the project truly emphasized the subjectiveness of information and of the ways in which we classify and understand the world around us. Consequently, it revealed the power in naming and relating, which scares me. I got a real sense of the ability to create and perpetuate long-lasting harm within the information profession. 

I was conflicted on using Library of Congress Subject Headings knowing their violent, patriarchal, and white supremecist origins and continuation. Though LCSH is predominant in libraries throughout the country and many parts of the world, such controlled vocabularies simplify complex, nuanced, intersectional identities, and I struggled to move forward while grasping this inherent flaw.

I don’t know if the very gradual and uphill process of correcting harmful headings is the way forward or whether our efforts are better served in finding alternatives to hierarchical relationships in general. I originally wanted to do more research on how I might catalog my collection with alternative systems, but I am honestly at a loss on how to do so. Nevertheless, this is an endeavor I am committed to study and eventually implement.