In a conversation the information scientist Nora Schmidt talks about the prevalence of colonial structures in European libraries and exploring ways to disrupt those structures. Drawing on her PhD «The Privilege to Select. Global Research System, European Academic Library Collections, and Decolonisation» (2020) she traces processes that sustain coloniality and explore methods to actively reject those processes and the privilege attached to them such as forming networks to create awareness for the need to de-colonise the library or campaigning for the time to do this work. The conversation took place in the framework of the artistic research and education project «Teaching the Radical Catalogue: A Syllabus 2021–22», which investigates the process of information retrieval as a political project (syllabus.radicalcatalogue.net).
Lucie Kolb, Eva Weinmayr (Q): As an information scientist and sociologist you’ve worked in libraries and conducted research on them. We came across your research in the framework of the series of events «Finders Keepers» at Sitterwerk where you gave a talk with the title «decolonise libraries» and shed light on blind spots in libraries and their search catalogues. In our project «Teaching the Radical Catalogue» we’re exploring possible methods and tools to create a discourse about the prevailing systems of coloniality that are perpetuated in Western libraries. Against this backdrop we wanted to talk to you about the need to decolonise libraries and ways forward. Let’s start by looking at today’s organisation of knowledge in libraries in the Global North. What implicit beliefs are at play here?
Nora Schmidt (NS): Most importantly, it’s the idea that institutionalised knowledge and its organisation is universally true, and that it applies to every community in world society. Through colonialism, the knowledge organisation system of the colonisers was forced upon the people being colonised. It’s very clear to see that institutions of teaching and learning
in formerly colonised places are almost entirely organised according to that system. Together with the system came elite production, which is hard to get rid of or replaced, as soon as there are powerful profiteers from the system.
Q What do you mean by «elite production»?
NS Elite production means that the colonisers, when they came into those communities, they also selected people for certain functions in the colonial system. They needed those entry points into the community in order to make the system work. And this is something even though the colonisers are now gone, this kind of class-based system remains. This is part of coloniality. It has been introduced by the colonisers, but it’s still there because it structures society and their profiteers and those who have the power won’t go voluntarily.
Q And what has this to do with patriarchy?
NS Patriarchy is related to this constellation because the knowledge organisation system is not only based on the perspective of the colonisers as communities led by enlightenment and Christianity but also, by the perspective of men. All other genders are conceptualised as deviation from this norm, while knowledge and its organisation are meant to be universal, even though they’re obviously not.
Q How do you define coloniality? And how is it related to racism?
NS Coloniality denotes the current social structures, which follow from historical colonialism. Most people think that coloniality is something that lives in the communities of those who have been colonised. «So this is not us.» If you look at descendants of the colonisers, German people might say: «Okay, well, this could be me», but Austrian and Swiss people can easily think: «Oh, this doesn’t concern me.» But that’s not the thing. Everyone is involved in this because it’s a society-wide structure. I think it’s important to realise that also racism is nothing that only people who don’t have light skin colour and a European name are confronted with. It’s really everyone involved because racism can also be to be privileged. That’s, like, the other side of the coin. So if there’s racism as something negative, then somebody must profit from this, and this is somebody like me. This privilege needs to be actively rejected. And there’s no other way of going about it, I’m convinced. So we cannot just leave this task to those people who are affected negatively. It’s everyone who’s concerned. And that’s what German-speaking people, most of them, didn’t understand so far.
Q You titled your PhD thesis «The Privilege to Select», which refers to the privilege of libraries in the Global North to decide on what is relevant knowledge. Could you explain your understanding of your personal privilege in this context?
NS I criticise the system, which made it possible that I could write this thesis. Also, it’s the system that made you aware of my thesis. So I can now talk to you because of this, because of my privilege. And I can’t opt out of that being a profiteer. This is nothing that I can decide not to be.
Q With profiteer, you mean…?
NS I was funded by the Swedish State during writing this thesis, and currently, I work for an Austrian library. And it’s a public academic library, funded by the state basically. My salary is more than sufficient, and I can live a comfortable life. I don’t need any more money, I don’t want to accumulate more money, and especially not if I earn it, because of my privilege. I don’t believe in intellectual properties. Even if it was me writing this thesis, it’s based on so many contributions by other people that are not like invented by myself. It is social knowledge, knowledge is always social, it cannot be my property. That’s why I believe I shouldn’t profit from this.
Q What is the role of libraries in this context?
NS As public institutions, I think, libraries also try to do their very best to further social justice, at least, this is what you can read in their self-descriptions. But if there’s no awareness about coloniality, then there’s also no way to really consider this. When our focus is on knowledge organisation, it is certainly not sufficient to concentrate on information professionals and researchers. I think, it’s important to never forget that decolonization and depatriarchalisation are society wide tasks that won’t be solved within a short timeframe. In short, coloniality is a giant global social injustice. And in the case of the library, it addresses everything, which furthers the privilege of the Global North. Most obviously, an example is bibliometrics, which more and more University Libraries introduced as a service to demonstrate that the own institution is better than others. This adheres to the idea of supremacy. Social justice won’t be reached through competition, but rather through cooperation. So this is definitely something that won’t help cooperation if you try to show to others, you’re better than them.
Q Can you explain bibliometrics a little?
NS Bibliometrics is statistics about publications. So, if this happens within the frame of a university or some research institution, then most bibliometrics that is done there really looks at the researchers of this institution. How well are they doing in the competition? How many publications? Which journals? Looking at impact factors and so on.
Q Many people think that «decolonising the library» means taking off the narrow Western selection of books from the shelves. You talk about decolonising the processes and workflows… Could you give an example of a workflow at the library that sustains coloniality?
NS Bibliometrics is an example for those processes because it’s not like some specific thing that you can pin down. It’s people who are at the institution, at the library doing this all day. I mean, that’s the case with all day-to-day work, right? You do not question very often what you’re doing if you’re used to what you’re doing. So, that’s what I mean by processes. It really starts with the most basic librarian’s work.
Q Are there specific technical workflows that need to be addressed, or subtracted?
NS Technical criteria that I came across in my research are, for instance, that in order for libraries to come across certain publications, publishers need to distribute their publications through certain channels. So shops that libraries have contracts with, usually. And if a subscription is required for journals, for example, it can cause a lot of work for librarians if the subscription data cannot be handled in specific software. So usually, some libraries have guidelines which say, Okay, if this data is not coming across in this format, then we won’t subscribe. And this is, of course, highly problematic, because that’s not what the user community would care about. We should care about our user community and not about the technical infrastructure that we have or not have or use or don’t use. Also, it’s about metadata formats. It creates a lot of work for librarians to catalogue publications. Usually, it’s only done very low level, because we get metadata from providers from networks. This is, of course, very practical and saves a lot of time. But if we created workflows that make us NOT catalogue stuff that we would like to have in our collections, because it takes too much time – this doesn’t make sense to me. It’s highly problematic, we have introduced a lot of standards, which are very helpful for our work. But if the consequence is that we don’t include stuff in our collections because they are not standard conform, then it’s a contradiction to our purpose.
Q Do you know of instances where libraries are trying to break with Eurocentrism?
NS I’m glad you introduced some examples in the exhibition «Reading the Library» at Sitterwerk. UK university libraries have been working on several fronts for some years now. There are «diversify your bookshelf» initiatives, for instance. Or Cambridge University Library started holding workshops for their own librarians in 2018. And this goes back
to the year before that, when an open letter by Cambridge English faculty students requested an inclusion of non-white authors in their curriculum. Those Cambridge librarians, they maintain a very rich web platform where you can find a lot of information about their activities. It’s called «Decolonizing Through Critical Librarianship» and many other UK libraries develop their own initiatives inspired by this. There’s also information on this platform about them. So I’m very glad to observe that this happens in the UK, but I also have to admit that I feel a bit uncomfortable, that it’s, again, the Cambridge flagship, which is at the centre of action. For initiatives that take off in Europe right now, I really hope that we can create something that is not attached to such a flagship, but a more independent floating network.
Q Could you tell us about this critical librarian network that is forming at the moment?
NS It is a German-speaking network, and we meet online in a monthly videoconference, and through a mailing list at «Groups.io». It can be found when you search for «Decolonize the Library». Everyone can join. But again, it’s always an issue of allocating time to this work. A matter of convincing the leaders of the institutions that librarians actually can spend time on this topic that requires a lot of reading, thinking, self-observation, observation of other institutions. A topic that is really hard to grasp because it’s included everywhere. This is the main defining issue of coloniality.
Q What are the plans for the future?
NS We hope for more participants, for more ideas on how to solve this major challenge. Historical colonialism created a structure that is deeply embedded into everything we do in society as such, and it creates global injustice. And I don’t want to live in a socially unjust system. So, we need to decolonize! Of course, the hope is, as more people talk about it, it becomes more and more obvious that something needs to be done, that time needs to be allocated. But it’s just a hope.