Recently I've discussed what I call "the cult of the individual" with several colleagues and friends. I realize that I did not coin this phrase, but I find it quite an intriguing idea to discuss. To me, basically, the cult of the individual is visible in many areas of our culture and society. Shirts that say "princess," cell phone conversations in public places, facebook accounts, etcetera. All of these things are meant to draw attention to the person. To show how very important we are to other people.
One might argue that cell phones are for convenience and maintaining contact, but why would someone subject other people to an otherwise private conversation, no matter how insignificant? Also, why disturb other people by talking on your phone? What about all those Jazzy ringtones? Ah, how nice it is to let other people know how cool/hip/ironic/[insert something here] we are with our unique ringtones. The answer is because people think that they are important to everyone else.
Okay, so I don't like cellphones (you can read about it on my facebook page) but I hope the idea is clear. Society seems increasingly concerned with what everyone else is doing and everyone else seems to want society to notice.
Now, why does this belong on a blog that discusses Information and Librarianship? To be honest, I am trying to figure that out too. I recently had coffee with my friend Steve, who asked me how the Cult of the Individual affects librarianship/Information Literacy. I know the connection is there I just can't seem to find it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
The link between COTI and information illiteracy, I believe, lies in the culture of 'soft relativism.' If you deny an assertion that I feel is correct, then you impinge on my authentic self. The whole idea of authority is suspect in this view, so information literacy is impossible.
If you don't know his work, may I recommend Charles Taylor? His The Malaise of Modernity is a highly readable analysis of 'COTI.'
Christopher, first of all I want to think you for taking the discussion in this direction.
I am not too familiar with soft relativism. I do think the description is dead on when discussing COTI and look forward to reading Taylor's work.
Another question is raised by introducing soft relativism into discussing the link between COTI and Information Literacy. Is Information Literacy a form of authority? I realize it represents a set of guidelines that apply to a very specific area of knowledge, but can we really call Information Literacy an authority? I think this was true for "Bibliographic-Instruction," but feel that Information Literacy is a paradigm shift in how we perceive ourselves as information professionals (ninjas?) as well as, and perhaps more importantly, how we perceive the patron.
My consideration of authority in relation to information literacy would be, I suppose, of the old paradigm. I'm thinking in terms of leading patrons to authoritative/reliable sources. If that patron is instinctively suspicious of authority (as a result of living in a culture which praises the Cult of the Individual) then it's hard to formulate an argument they'll understand for choosing the Britannica over Wikipedia.
I would be out of my depth to elaborate on the philosophical concept of soft relativism, Nick-- I borrowed the phrase from Taylor, and it seemed appropriate to your question.
Consider the historical space of the library: it's big, labyrinthine, and silent. Far from being a space for displaying one's importance, it's a place for confidentiality and personal betterment.
The inherent tension between that past and the current Cult of the Individual underlies library interactions with patrons. The question, then, is whether libraries accommodate the cultural shift or doggedly stick to their guns.
Post a Comment