Imposter syndrome
I took a lot from the other sessions on the day, but I won’t go into my feelings about every session here. There was, however, an interesting discussion about imposter “syndrome” (which was recognised as a problematic term due to the connotations around clinicalising the feeling) that got me thinking a lot about class and the marketisation of our role. This arose as a result of a couple of blog posts by Elly O’Brien and Laura Woods. What was interesting was hearing how this feeling manifests itself in those from a middle class background. I’d roughly characterise this as:
"I shouldn't be here" (working class) vs "I’m not measuring up to the expected professional norm" (middle class)
That’s a rough approximation (obviously nothing is as binary as that), I’d be interested in how others view the distinction.
It was also interesting to consider the disconnect between a marketised version of ourselves and the 'real' and the potential disconnect that can provoke stress and anxiety which feeds into a feeling of being an imposter.
Staying outside the mainstream
As always, I took a lot away from the day and it will take me some time to process things fully. What I have identified, however, is that sense that these discussions are becoming accepted and there have been efforts to try to incorporate them more widely in the discourse (see the recent CILIP Conference). As I have argued before though, this is a dangerous moment for those of a radical persuasion. The more ideas are incorporated into mainstream discourse, the further away they move from their radical roots. In essence: be aware of co-option. The ideas and concerns that lay behind RLC are radical in nature and sit outside mainstream discourse – that should not be forgotten.
My attention was drawn yesterday to a mis-attributed quote (to Schopenhauer) I wish I had been aware of when I wrote about the journey of radical language a little while back:
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
I think this is something I can certainly identify with as things have developed over the past two years.
I feel very fortunate to have been involved in two entities that have had at least some influence on general discourse relating to our practice. Both Voices for the Library and RLC have been (and continue to be) things I feel fortunate to be associated with. Not only because of what they represent and what they have achieved, but also because they have enabled me to collaborate with people I hold in high regard and have a huge amount of respect for. Whilst I do reflect on what they have achieved thus far with a certain degree of "how on earth did this grow into something?" my focus is always on the process of building and pushing things forward. So I look forward to the continual construction of infrastructure with fellow radicals in order that we can continue to build solidarity and mutual support in the face of an ideology to which we are united in opposition.
This is an edited version of an article first published on Ian's Infoism blog.
You can find out more about the Radical Librarians Collective here.
Ian Clark is Librarian and co-founder of a leading national library advocacy campaign. He has written articles on a range of professional issues for a number of publications including The Guardian, Library Journal and the Open Rights Group – and of course Information Today Europe.
Image courtesy of Andrew Mason via Creative Commons Licence on Flickr.