Comments on: Editorial: Our Philosophies of Librarianship

By: Librarian Blogs: A Peek into the Career | slm508mav

Librarian Blogs: A Peek into the Career | slm508mav — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 02:01:53 +0000

[...] on one blog. For example, there is one post titled “Our Philosophies of Librarianship” (http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2012/editorial-our-philosophies-of-librarianship/), which contains different philosophies of librarianship from librarians who have very different [...]

By: Micah Vandegrift

Micah Vandegrift — Sun, 21 Oct 2012 19:53:24 +0000

Thanks for the support Sab. I’ve found that my ideas are evolving ever more quickly after being “on the job,” so I think its perfectly reasonable to expect our understandings of the work to grow as we do. We can be idealistic and high-achievers without necessarily having a library-centric worldview, and I think that it part of what makes this profession great – the vastness of experience that can be had.

By: sab

sab — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 20:29:40 +0000

I find Micah’s philosophy-in-progress to be really refreshing. When I was in library school, I found the incredibly idealistic champions of the library-types to be overwhelming, and honestly, I couldn’t help but feel badly about my lack of a well-formed philosophy sometimes. I’m a new librarian too, so it’s reassuring to hear that finding your philosophy is a work-in-progress.

By: Curiouser and Curiouser: What Caught Our Eyes Online this Week | Chasing Reference

Fri, 19 Oct 2012 17:58:13 +0000

[...] share their philosophies of librarianship over at In the Library with the Lead [...]

By: Martin Nord

Martin Nord — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 23:51:53 +0000

I think the point about the difference between a united, universal philosophy of librarianship and personal philosophies of librarianship needs to be explored a bit more. I know that the individual views presented here don’t preclude the idea of that universal philosophy that Emily originally sought. But it would be really great, maybe in a coming article, to place some of these individual ideas in dialogue. None of the authors really disagrees with any of the others, but in stopping with the personal, I feel like we aren’t getting any closer to the universal, and I remain very interested in that. And there are some really good points here that could easily apply to an overarching idea of librarianship. I especially like how Emily touches on the concept of love. She’s right that it’s an abstract concept. Nebulous too. (There’s a reason the Greeks had three words for love). But love is simultaneously a universal conception and also applicable to libraries. Just think about how the concept of conversations is currently applied in library literature and practice. Conversation leads me directly to relationships, and from there it’s not too far to love. That’s the kind of thing we could use as a foundation for this philosophy.