It wouldn't be a week on the AL without a political post, so here goes.
I've been "persuaded" by the clever "reasoning" of the Regressive Librarian thugs. I say "persuaded," but obviously I caved in under duress. They threatened to call all the libraries in the country and say they had the Annoyed Librarian working on their staff and should just fire everyone in the library to make sure she was punished for daring to deviate from the Party Program of regressive harassment and intimidation. Heil, Regressive Librarians! Obviously, when the Regressive Librarians speak, people listen, and the thought of all those poor librarians fired from their jobs and out in the streets begging for videos to catalog or directing people to publicly available restrooms was just too depressing. So I capitulated.
I'm thus now in complete agreement with the "truthiness" logic of Snipey Fellow Traveling Dude. You might remember him as the guy who thinks that if enough people believe something, then it's true. Other people have weighed in on the argument saying they can't see the distinction between library and non-library issues that seems perfectly clear to me. With this democratic truthiness argument, the incapacity to make logical distinctions becomes a de facto argument that every issue is a library issue, if enough librarians believe it is. As we all know, democracy is a wonderful thing, and applied to the concept of truth it becomes completely fantastic.
I'm an academic, which means I still value things like logic, evidence, argument, reason, civility, debate, deliberation--crazy stuff like that. I didn't realize truth was just what enough people believed, but then I hadn't been through the totalitarian reeducation camp of the Regressive Librarians Guild and taught that truth is what they say it is. In the immortal words of Cole Porter--anything goes. The world has gone mad today. Good is bad today. Black is white today.... Sorry, I got carried away.
So I have a resolution for the ALA Council to pass, one of vital concern not just to me, but to civilized people everywhere. I realize this leaves out the political thugs in the Regressive Librarians Guild, but I don't mind leaving them out. I don't think they'd be very fun to share a drink with, anyway.
And speaking of drink, my proposed resolution is, of course, about the proper definition of a dry martini. What do we mean when we ask for a dry martini? I've been writing a lot about martinis over at the Relaxin' blog, but now that I've leaped headfirst onto, or perhaps under, the Regressive Librarians' subintellectual Cluetrain, I can write about issues of real importance and interest, instead of ALA politics.
The AL's ALA Resolution:
WHEREAS, the dry martini is civilization in a glass; and...
WHEREAS, the dry martini is the most significant American contribution to world culture; and...
WHEREAS, the dry martini is for those with established values and a liking for purity, even in their vices; and...
WHEREAS, one is alright, two is too many, and three is not enough; and...
WHEREAS, anything enough librarians believe must be true;
RESOLVED, a dry martini is made with gin and vermouth at any ratio between four and eight to one, shaken or stirred with ice, and strained into a chilled cocktail glass with either a lemon twist or an olive for garnish. In a spirit of ecumenism, vodka may be substituted for gin and the garnish is optional.
There. I hope the ALA Council takes this up at Annual. Remember, if enough librarians decide this is a library issue, then it is, so start lobbying the ALA Council today!
So have a good weekend, and I'll toast you all with my first martini tonight.