This year's March Madness started off with a bang from March 6's antisemitism/hate uproar on OCLC-CAT, an online listserv for catalogers worldwide to help each professionally.
It began with an innocent question from a librarian at the Master's Seminary Library at Sun Valley, California, on how to create original records for a couple Festschrift (plural: Festschriften). Shall she add an added author field for the honored? Minutes later, she received helpful confirmations from UCLA and University of Washington libraries, to create a 700 added entry for the honoree ($e honoree).
An hour later, the tide turned when Liu Xiping, a librarian from University of Houston posted the following,
"I would be really careful not to mix the author with the dead people. Besides what Christopher said about using the fixed field, I usually don't do anything because it's not worth it and no one is searching by the dead people for the resources. Unless like Adam suggested, the book talks about these dead people's works, for example, the history and criticism of a dead monk's theological work. In that case, I would add the name of the dead monk in the 600 field, subdivided by history and criticism, to bring out that part of the content, so it can be indexed properly by the system."
Half a dozen librarians wrote back to clarify the broader usage of Festschriften, but the Houston librarian did not back down, "I said the works that I have been working with so far are for dead people. It’s not a narrow interpretation. It’s one half of the interpretation of festschrift. Come to face it. The other half will be dead one day and it will all be a festschrift for the dead for future readers."
The debate would have remained within the boundary of academia without the Houston librarian's message, "I searched in OCLC with the subject heading "Festschriften" and did find some work honoring their husbands in the 19th century. I'm pretty sure the husbands were all active and alive at that time but they are quite dead now. I have never heard people ask such question as "Do you have the xxx Festschrift"? Is this a smart Jewish way of asking research questions? We the common people only know to ask "Do you have books on the history and geography of Palestine?" There are quite a few in OCLC that's a Festschrift and worth celebrating, like you explained. "
A librarian from Yeshiva University did not agree, "Hey, my husband was just honored with a Festschrift, and he is very much alive! A Festschrift is very often a collection of articles on the subject interest of the xxx Festschriften. Often it’s written by colleagues and students. We find it useful to have a heading Festschriften. [Name] because people will come in and say, “Do you have the xxx Festschrift?” Festschriften are usually in honor of a person in academia who is celebrating a significant milestone birthday or is retiring, etc. A book in honor of a dead person I would characterize as a memorial book.
The Houston librarian was cautioned about her anti-Semitism remark of a smart Jewish way of asking research questions, but continued nevertheless, "I meant every word I said to the original sender. By the way, the original sender didn't say anything yet about being offended. So weird. Are there any Palestinian librarians on this list? What's their take on my reply and my 'antisemitism'? As long as there are people who continue to ask 'Do you have the xxx Festschrift', I will continue to ask mine 'Do you have books on the history and geography of Palestine?'"
The accusation and criticism intensified especially with a a long message from a Marist College librarian who was going to report to OCLC about the Houston librarian's attempt to justify this by focusing on the supposed big vocabularies and smartness of the (presumably) Jewish people in question is also—you guessed it—antisemitism. It plays into "bookish" and "model minority" stereotypes often leveled at Jewish Americans, among other groups. Furthermore she was going to report her to the OCLC listowners.
The Houston librarian did not back down,
"I have every reason to believe that the original sender posted these comments towards me because of her associated demographic background and I responded in a corresponding way so she can get my message. The silence so far from yhe sender proves that I was right and she deserved every word that I said. The question that I asked was based on fact. Please stop associating “big vocabularies” and “smartness” with only the Jewish people. There are smart people with big vocabularies in every demographic group in the world. I have never seen other people to use it as their shit on other people and to praise themselves in such a brazen way.
"My examples with the Palestine set as a warning to the original sender so she can be careful of what says to me in the future. You can elaborate however you want. Comments like this even with big vocabularies are a pile of garbage to me.
"Feel free to report to OCLC as your time allows. I didn’t know you work for a Catholic University. Do they allow for capital punishment for spewing hatred? I think you and I can finally agree on one thing: there is enough hate in this world and I don’t want to see it anymore.
"Are there any Palestinian librarians on this list? What's their take on my reply and my "antisemitism"?
"As long as there are people who continue to ask "Do you have the xxx Festschrift", I will continue to ask mine 'Do you have books on the history and geography of Palestine?'"
The Houston librarian was reported to her employer, the Dean of University Libraries and Elizabeth D. Rockwell Chair. The saga of March 6 anti-Semitism uproar did not stop with the dean's apology, or removal of the Houston librarian from OCLC-CAT. Two days later a Hebraica Cataloging Librarian at University of Pennsylvania compiled a chronological list of OCLC's negligence in responding to the incident. Another University of Washington librarian questioned that “Should there be a review process for metadata created by someone who has insistently and repeatedly expressed hate on a professional listserv? Do we have a collective responsibility to do an ethics spot-check when something like this occurs?” But sanity prevailed, "Isn't correction and education the answer?"
The Houston librarian was banned on March 7, but resurrected on OCLC-CAT with her personal email address on March 14. She was spotted and taken off right away by a couple of sharp-eyed subscribers. On March 20, she popped up on AutoCAT, another listserv, with another personal email address. After due deliberations among participants, she is allowed to stay as long as she remains professional. Both OCLC-CAT and AutoCAT have been peaceful ever since though. Hope it is the same with the world arena. There is enough global aggression to be No. 1 and Mr. RIGHT. Hope the Houston librarian will learn from the past.
