Thursday, September 22, 2011

Article Reflection

In the article “Trippin’ over the color line: the invisibility of race in library and information science,” Homna uses an interrogative method of questioning to attempt to answer why the issue of race has been neglected in the library and information science field. Specifically, Homna asks in the introduction “Why is the field so glaringly white yet no one wants to talk about whiteness and white privilege?” (p. 1)

I find this question ironic. No one talks about whiteness and white privilege because the field is so white. The privilege of being white is not having to think about race. It is a non-issue, because white is the default, the unmarked, the “normal” category. Thus, whiteness remains unseen, and is not scrutinized to define its purpose, affect, or value. This in visibility is why many do not recognize white privilege is an issue in the 21st century.

The “glaringly white” nature of the field’s demographic is an issue. At a time when libraries are struggling to prove their value, conducting services that cater to the white demographic will not be enough for libraries to increase usage and survive. In catering to the white demographic, the library has aided in “reproducing and perpetuating racist social structures found throughout the rest of society,” p. 2. These issues of ethics and survival are why whiteness needs to be talked about. Librarians cannot ignore the issue of whiteness because libraries contribute to the institutionalized perception of culture and race on a larger scale.


Homna T. (1995). Trippin’over the color line: the invisibility of race in library and information science, InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 1(2) (2005), Accessed on June 19, 2007 from http://repositories.cdlib.org/gseis/interactions/vol1/iss2/art2



"With their claims of color-blindness, whites are self-exonerated from any blame for current racial inequalities, and thus people of color are blamed implicitly (or explicitly) for their own condition." (Lewis, 1996, p. 636)

I remember the term “color-blind” being used as a catch phrase in the media when I was little. I read an article on what it means to be color-blind in elementary school, and I vaguely remember the concept used as the lesson to learn from a family sit-com. The idea seemed so obvious to me. Of course, everyone should be treated equally.

This concept may have seemed like the solution to the world’s injustices due to my young, idealistic, and naïve nature. But adults have hoped for this, so, why not? I do think that color-blindness self-exonerates white people from the blame of racial inequality explicitly because allows one to forget the history of social injustice the current problems that remain. Without recognizing the problem, a solution is not being actively sought out.

I also remember wanting to have a strong nationality or ethnic identity when I was young. Speaking a different language, practicing a custom or tradition, and eating exotic food seemed fun. But it was more than fun that I wanted, I also wanted a sense of identity, a sense of belonging. It is hard to maintain racial and ethnic identities, and the benefits if them, with a color-blind mentality.

These sentiments are also true within the context of librarianship. Having a colorblind mentality does not proactively work toward equality. And, without a multicultural perspective, the collection would not only be unrepresentative of the community, but also bland and boring.


Lewis, A. (2004). "What group?": Studying whiteness in an era of colorblindness.

Sociological Theory, 22(4), 623-646.

No comments:

Post a Comment