Intro Bridget (and some early reactions to the readings)
During my one week of doing readings for this class I’m pretty sure that I’m not going to go into historical research (but I’ll give it another week just in case). I found the readings fascinating, but I feel like historical research is like pulling a string out of a piece of cloth, focusing in on it, and drawing conclusions. But what about the rest of the string in the cloth? Your view is incomplete. I realize that it’s impossible to look at history in a holistic sort of way because there are too many things that influence each other and that you can never look at all of them at once, so this one string research is important, but this way of looking at the world drives me crazy.
Fain’s article criticizes Harris and Garrison for not having their arguments carefully enough framed. Harris agrees and goes on to focus his comments with an interpretive framework. But all he’s really doing is telling us just what string he pulled and why he pulled it. Right? What about the bigger picture?
So I guess my answer to KT’s question is that I don’t think that you can look at librarianship in a gender neutral way. I would say that gender influences the whole of librarianship – it’s one of the brighter strings in the cloth.