peter > martino
Why is 'unbound libraries' suggesting that the unbinding has already been done? what about unbinding / rebinding

F_S11:07 AM
unbound - to be unbind - unbinding
to be unbound i guess
anice11:09 AM
bound texts as a small library shelf
F_S11:10 AM
The unbinding libraries worksession
anice11:11 AM
rebinding is important too :)
Clara11:13 AM
was thinking of unbinding = unmooring, not feeling tied, drifting.. in the case of ships and boats not usually a good thing, but what of people who are unbound and what happens to their libraries in the process... what happens when one is migrating, afloat, unable to feel grounded in one's context, lifetime artifacts/collections. migratory condition.
F_S11:13 AM
de-anchoring
wendy11:13 AM
I was thinking on https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verzamelhandschrift
peter11:13 AM
agency of classification
F_S11:14 AM
tactics for dealing with the dilemma between binding, rebinding, unbinding
F_S11:14 AM
dilemmas
peter11:15 AM
books need a place
Donatella11:16 AM
maybe one classification is not possible, open to multiple classifications or criss-crossing classification?
Donatella11:16 AM
how do you show this multiplicity physically?
Clara11:17 AM
classification as a form of binding? or a place upon which to moor

anja > anita
.dychotomy of classification systems..?
.responsibility for the classification. bokks need to have a place, a shelf..
bibliographical practices put pressure on classification

anita > eva
--> in a physical libraries they do this in a physical way

its a process, a practice, a trial and error, The experiment with the Library of Inclusions and Omissions is limited, because of its context. It is an "art" practice, perhaps remains a symbolic gesture rather than something that can be a new instituional method.

attempts to find right naming is not working. presumptious to think there actually is a right name. the ideay of the perfect catalog and "correct" naming and framing does not work. 
The catalogue is meant to be a tool, that works without us being present, as an autonomous agent, 'doing' stuff without us ...
Emily Drabinski: Teaching the Radical catalogue: http://www.emilydrabinski.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/drabinski_radcat.pdf

Emily Drabinsksi: Queering the Catalog: Queer Theory and the Politics of Correction
https://digitalcommons.liu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=brooklyn_libfacpubs

(more on the question is assembled here: https://pad.constantvzw.org/p/unboundlibrary_infrastructural_manoeuvres )

eva > 
What do we do when toxic e
What does it mean "to make public". Is "public" just about access/free circulation? Such a loaded term: Public sphere, public debate, etc, etc...

Could our understanding of "public" be replaced by the metaphor of compost pile? 
eating, digesting, excreting... an ecology.
What do we do when toxic elements enter and damage the milieu? Do we need deliberate exclusions? Extractive practices, openness (when its out its out) or control (licences). Roel: "Set up structures that invite also unwanted participation." (I (Eva) would like to talk more about this, Roel)  

> femke
give up the pure environments.. --> povinelli? :)
There is no purity. No clean hands!
Work with toxicity to recognising coresponsibility for toxicity to exist
We are all in the compost, and that is a messy place to be

> clara
Connecting chaos and toxicity: 
Mooring, toxicity
structure as a kindness, you know where to find things
a library without catalogue / index is for the
erudites and unintimidated who do not fear a library without structure (this is very tyranny of structurelessness, right?)

reading with the manual .. 
chaos and order can both be toxic

digital libraries : easier order, physical libraries are more likely to become chaotic
corruption because lack of a digital counterparts.

mia > rosemary
Losening up suffocating structures, while at the same time remembering care support that structures can give
structurelessness easily confirms biases
balancing structure and openness, embracing the bias in a non-book collection
enhance the political tactics through structure (?)
Was it pleasurable to categorize ephemera, and to make 

partizan categories

MARC training session .... only solution: escape to the pub
systems trying to represent things
archiving from below -> start from ephemeral traces that don't make sense unless they hang together...
https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/

> annette (Read-in)
Thesaurus vs categories. Homosaurus: a vocabulary next to the categorization and classification 

Giving books a place? how can one find it back - Findability

At Iliah (LGTBQ) desriptor terms (thesaurus) are used to fill in the MARC records.This adds more depth. Different terminology. Descriptors are political.

Anja11:42 AM
https://www.ihlia.nl/search/?q%3Asearch=homosaurus&lang=nl
Classifications are artificial and there is already actual violence
How can we speak to both?
....

clara: archipelagic constructs, porous borders, dividing waters between islands of obsession/interest/definition... to describe or define is to locate

Roel:
chaos can be dangerous, structure can be generous
"tyrany of structurelessness" Jo Freeman
https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm

Set up structures that invite also unwanted participation.  
structurely removing the toxicity is maybe not possible .. 
[I think it is also asking about response-ability?]

Donatella:
can an index be welcoming? How can a structure be kind, open and hospitable? How can we reproduce multiplicity of voices in a structure? How can we offer gentle 'guiding'? Can we think of different paths throughtout different entries, connections, intersections, relations,...?
Structure as Hospitality:
"Infinite Hospitality" by David Senior. Text on facet classification (Ranganathan)
http://www.dextersinister.org/MEDIA/PDF/InfiniteHospitality.pdf



****************************

Eva sees possible connections:

> public (conversation above: openess, toxicity, hands dirty)
Roel: "Set up structures that invite also unwanted participation." (Eva would like to talk more about this)  

> Eva wants to talk with Clara about "pain of collective authorship" (from her intro conversation).----->>> Clara also wants to talk w Eva :) Will try to be at your session

> collectivity: attribution, bibliographical, cataloguing practices. Complexity of escape or confirm the need of attribution, visibility, anonymity. 

> cultural extractionist appropriation (when do we speak of "using" and when of "appropriating"

> Licences: reading decolonial licences and texts Femke has gathered on inbound.licence pad. https://pad.constantvzw.org/p/unbound.license


++++++++++++++++++++++++++

To be unbound, spineless. The index or the table of contents is merely an initial formation, a suggested navigation. It is not a prescriptive order with a punitive end. "You must, or else." The order is left in the hands of the reader or visitor or owner. Mess, restructuring, disrespect to the initial intention. How can the author, collator, orderer let go of the need to insist upon an order, despite offering it for those who need initial points for triangulation? The writer must conceive of a textual object without a spine. 

To be the spine is to fulfill secretarial functions. To connect and hold. To be small articles, pronouns and connectors in a sentence clause (the a and but I you etc), often endlessly. The nouns and the verbs, they are the large bones that get credit for work (or enjoy leisure of play) that without vertebrae would be impossible. To file, to send messages to all those involved, to collate information in a single place. To do the diligence that is so often framed as menial. How to be of spinal value and come to terms (or not) with invisibility, with dwelling in the substrate, beneath the membrane. How to make peace with the responsibility of the spinal function, that of holding limbs and organs, that of being supple, that of holding the head that droops. If the head initiates, the spine doesn't just hold, it coordinates and organizes. The spine is an administrative function. The spine is the secretary, sending information throughout the body. If the secretary is severed, unassisted mobility is impossible, the mind is trapped within a body that doesn't listen. Liberated as well, but only if an extra-spinal system of mobility is afforded.

In order to free the archive or library or publication (conceived often, in this place, as an archival labor) from its restrictive bodily limitations, one must understand the limbs, organs, system, or senses that make up its entirety. And understand what happens when one limb or organ or system or sense disappears. The other(s) work(s) harder. When the book has no spine, there is increased mobility in the innards, the guts work harder. When the system has no mandatory command flow, no closed menu options except for an initial suggestion of navigation, a map of cardinal points that may be ignored... how do the other systems work harder/better? Because they must, and they do. What other senses/systems/limbs are discovered when a supposedly fundamental body part is lost?

The parts of the body public I am considering: The face (la cara, cover). Circulation. Guts. Spine. Foot(notes, -ers).
There are others, but for now these are the parts I have been considering. It's maybe been a year or two. Perhaps longer if you count the time I was thinking just about circulation, in humourous and architectural and urbanist terms. And I'm not entirely sure if it's "correct" to fleshify this question. Flesh is, nonetheless, my response to this haptic crisis. 

Something spineless. Like a sentence diagram. Something that looks more like roots than spine, or trunk, or monolith, or column, or menhir. 
https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/183032/sentence-diagramming