The ways in which genocides, war crimes and atrocities are recognized by history can often depend on political considerations and alliances, and are, as a result, reflected in the language used to describe them. So it is with conventional library knowledge organization practices (i.e., LC and DDC) which often display problematic biases that do not always reflect the contents of the materials they seek to describe. This is particularly the case when the incidents in question relate to violent colonial encounters with Indigenous peoples. This session examines how the Library’s ideologically-situated and euphemism-prone power to name can help to reinforce politically convenient but unjust narratives regarding historical and contemporary atrocities, and instead identifies sources of radical, progressive and Indigenous alternatives that can promote more accurate retrieval of — and, more importantly, honest engagements with — literatures of both the past and present.
Learning Outcomes
Participants will learn:
How the ideological nature of controlled vocabulary in libraries can formalize and institutionalize certain political narratives while excluding others;
Critical perspectives on classification and subject heading schemes;
About socially and politically progressive alternative terminologies and classifications.
