ABSTRACT

This article explores and reviews some of the literature surrounding the issue of traditional classification methods for queer identities and content in libraries. Particular attention is given to Emily Drabinski’s article, ‘Queering the Catalogue’ and what her proposed methods might look like in practice. The review was conducted through an analysis of relevant literature, especially paying attention to resources which came from the critical librarianship perspective. The literature addressed in this review considered two major approaches: the first involved methods that were part of cataloguing processes, and the second were concerned with complementary library practice. Further to these two approaches, Drabinski uses queer theory to propose a different method in which original classification terminology is used to ensure an acknowledgement of all relevant discourse. My conclusion from this review is that there is no one universal solution and all libraries should critically engage with their collection in relation to the safety and information needs of their community before making any decisions. In the future, there is a need for more librarians to consider their role critically so that they can make informed decisions about cataloguing and classification regarding access to queer identities and content.

IMPLICATIONS FOR BEST PRACTICE

• Provides an analysis of the seminal critical librarianship piece ‘Queering the Catalogue’ (Drabinski, 2013 Drabinski, E. (2013). Queering the catalogue: Queer theory and the politics of correction. The Library Quarterly, 83(2), 94–111. https://doi.org/10.1086/669547[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar])

• Introduces contested concepts within traditional library classification methods, especially in reference to queer identities and content

• Highlights the important role that librarians can play in classifying queer identities and content within their library

摘要

本文探讨并回顾了一些关于图书馆酷儿身份和内容的传统分类方法问题的文献。特别注意 Emily Drabinski 的文章，' Queering the Catalog’以及她提出的方法在实践中的样子。回顾是通过对相关文献的分析进行的，特别关注来自批判性图书馆学视角的资源。本综述涉及的文献考虑了两种主要方法：第一种方法涉及编目过程的一部分，第二种方法涉及补充图书馆实践。除了这两种方法之外，德拉宾斯基还使用酷儿理论提出了一种不同的方法，其中使用原始分类术语来确保对所有相关话语的认可。我从这次审查中得出的结论是，没有一个通用的解决方案，所有图书馆在做出任何决定之前，都应该根据社区的安全和信息需求，认真地参与他们的馆藏工作。未来，需要更多图书馆员批判性地考虑他们的角色，以便他们能够就访问酷儿身份和内容的编目和分类做出明智的决定。

最佳实践的意义

• 分析了开创性的图书馆学评论作品“ Queering the Catalog ”（Drabinski，2013 年） Drabinski, E. ( 2013 )。酷儿目录：酷儿理论和矫正政治。图书馆季刊, 83(2), 94 – 111。https://doi.org/10.1086/669547 [Crossref]、[Web of Science®]、 [Google Scholar]）

• 在传统图书馆分类方法中引入有争议的概念，特别是在参考酷儿身份和内容方面

• 强调图书馆员在对图书馆内的酷儿身份和内容进行分类方面可以发挥的重要作用