What does that tell you? Nothing at that point. But I would love to see what would happen at that switchboard:
"Is that Belmore? B-e-l? You said "B"as in boy, not "P"? No, I don't have anyone with that name. Yes, the online directory is up to date, so you could search there. Thank you for calling. You know, I've had 30 calls today about Jennifer Belmore. Is she new? Everyone wants to talk to her supervisor. No, I don't know who keeps calling, but I wish they would stop. No, they won't leave names."
I'm not trying to increase my search results by blogging her, but I just read a few things this week about her blog and anonymous posting in general, so I'm using AL as an example.
So she (the Annoyed Librarian) could lie about who she is (and say she is and works at the above or any other location, sorry, Urbana, I hope this doesn't create a problem, we'll see how stupid people are on Monday) and piss off unknown people who have to answer all the complaints about her. Or for no money at all, she could create a website for the, I don't know, Librarian Futures, the online journal, and generate pdfs of fake articles where every name on the editorial board is fake. She can have ten different email addresses if she wanted. Anyone can do this. Wow, maybe I'll take all my old posts and generate some bogus letterhead and republish it all as pdfs and see who downloads them or uses them at future conferences: "a recent article from Librarian Futures, the online journal said, 'farts, farts, ass, ass, ass.'"
And who would know? Everything is online; I don't need printed matter. And Google believes whatever name I give it. But that would be a lie. And as far as I know, AL doesn't lie.
The right to complain is the most fundamental human right. "Infinite goodness is creating a being, you know in advance is going to complain." (I love that quote.) You absolutely need to defend her right to complain. Yes, I don't care about what.
Here is a recent criticism of AL:
People’s intolerance of views they don’t like (which varies among groups and time periods) is a bad thing, and can provide a general justification for anonymity. But if I think about what I read on Annoying Librarian’s blog today, I didn't find any opinion there that would make her intolerable to the library world if 1) she said who she was and 2) treated her colleagues with due respect.And that blogger calls AL's opinions intolerable, as in intolerable. Again, this whole, "if only you would only tell me who you are" business. So I can put a little sad face next to your name in our Big Book of Librarian Names.
This is why I try to protect my identity. So I don't get labeled. I don't even want to give out my name in person. If you ask me at the library what my name is, I just want to recoil and protect myself. No good has ever come from someone knowing my name; if you want to praise or criticize my work, just describe me and someone will figure it out. Or just put the gold star on the back of my hand.
I feel like I'm being violated when someone (the anonymous public someones) wants to know my name. Tell me your name first. No, didn't think so. A name has value. We meet; we shake hands; we exchange names. Until I can see that you're not a threat, I'm not telling you who I am.
And if you think that's paranoia, do you watch TV and movies? It's always the serial rapist and the murderer who calls to find the names of his victims. Or worse, it's the sales reps who call back every day for two weeks to get you to buy some useless crap.
"But the profession needs solidarity and accountability." What? And conspiracy? If things are wrong with the profession, we need to feel like we can express that dissatisfaction without retribution. When I read how people want to punish AL, it just reinforces how important the rignt to remain private is. Only people who have been victims of attacks can know what giving up your name means.
A recent article on EFF (wow, looks like effing) has this:
The tradition of anonymous speech is older than the United States itself— Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote the Federalist Papers under the pseudonym "Publius," and "the Federal Farmer" spoke up in rebuttal.
Now is AL mean? Of course, she's mean. And often too angry. Like all my exes. But does she write about topics people care about. She's damn popular, so she must. Is that the key here? That her opinions threaten other opinions? That her voice is heard?
When I read these attacks, it's like I'm watching some movie about fifteenth century Europe where some poor schmuck is being tormented by the Church:
"He mocks Rome and the Church by juggling in the square."
"He juggles?"
"Yes, he juggles three balls of varying color. The purple one representing the papal office. The blue representing the politicians. And the red representing the people."
"He juggles the people?"
"Yes, your Holiness."
"And sometimes he holds the red ball between his teeth like an apple while continuing to toss the purple and blue balls with one hand."
"What does this mean?"
"That the Church does not represent the people. That the Church feeds off the labors of the people."
"Oh, surely you make too much of this."
"No, I do not. For sometimes, he drops the purple ball and it falls to the ground and rolls away."
"What?"
"We are sure that he intentionally drops the purple ball. We have witnessed it."
"Maybe all this is harmless. Maybe he's just not a very good juggler."
"The people do not think so."
"What must we do?"
"Do not worry, your Holiness. I shall take care of it."
I'm glad AL remains a mystery. We should all defend her right to hold on to her balls.
[sorry, I couldn't come up with a better title.]
