There is a stimulating and important conversation going on over at The Geneabrarian Reference Desk in “Eliminating the Hobby from Genealogy.” Not since a large number of posts appeared in the wake of RootsTech roughly a year ago and I wrote about my reaction to them in “Toward a Genealogical Democracy” have I been so compelled to “add my two cents.”
However, as I have tried to write down my take on this issue and the numerous associated issues it brings to mind, I see a chaotic whirl of thoughts that could turn into the monster post that became “Toward a Genealogical Democracy.”
So, instead, I propose to break this loaded and complex subject into two smaller posts: “Genealogy: A Trivial Pursuit?” dealing with the statement of the problem by Genebrarian; and “Genealogy: Vocation and Avocation,” dealing with issues raised by the commenters and possible ways professionals and dedicated amateurs can team up to overcome the problem.
In “Eliminating the Hobby from Genealogy,” Geneabrarian proposes the rebranding of genealogy from a “hobby” (something “nonessential, [...] an extra, a nice thing to have”) into a research method. I believe that Geneabrarian has correctly identified the potentially disastrous fallout from genealogy’s image as a “trivial pursuit”: “... lingering and catastrophic effects such as lower funding for local libraries and organizations that support genealogy collections, limited access to records on a all levels, and other fields looking down their nose at those "name collectors".”
There have been many issues igniting vigorous and heated discussion in the genea-blogosphere lately - the role of genealogical societies in the changing genealogy community, the importance of genealogy bloggers representing the field of genealogy in a worthy manner (and this one is directly related to the issue at hand), and the professional/amateur divide in genealogy, among others - but what concerns and alarms me more than anything is the continually eroding support for libraries and archives and the increase in misguided restrictions on access to records. It may irritate me that genealogical research does not get much respect, but the prospect of records being shut off from the public or even disappearing puts fear into my heart.
The ignorant stereotype of the genealogist/family researcher pops up in the printed media with a discouraging but predictable regularity. In the post “Book Review: The Genetic Strand” the Minnesota Family Historian gives a thumbs down to Edward Ball’s book, The Genetic Strand: Exploring A Family History Through DNA, and quotes the following passage from the book: “Genealogy, a search for family history, is practiced by millions of middle-aged and middle-class Americans, for whom it has traditionally been a way to snatch a bit of glory or a helping of fantasy from the past. It is, after all, the little activities, visiting libraries and surfing Web sites, that allow anyone to acquire "good genes." Most people who do family research are white, and most of them look for ancestors with the goal to unearth the whitest, most moneyed forebears they can. That is one definition of good genes.”
Of course, elsewhere we can find more positive portrayals of the pursuit of genealogy. The Geneabrarian points to the TV show Who Do You Think You Are as a venue wherein genealogy can “show itself to the public.” This is one of the reasons I would like for the show to place a bit more emphasis on the challenges of genealogical research and how much work goes into finding “small details” that lead the researcher to the answers he seeks. I am aware that not too much of this can be included in a show that has to be marketed to a broad audience, but even a few minor tweaks could paint a more realistic picture of what is actually involved in good research.
Ancestry’s current advertising campaign is singled out as another promotion of genealogy as an easy pursuit that can be practiced by anybody - no particular analytical skills or long hours of research required. As opposed to Ball’s broad-brush slander of the motivations of genealogists and family historians, these commercials pander to the “genealogy as a pursuit of the non-intellectual” stereotype. It seems that both those who despise us and those who court us are intent on pushing our beloved pursuit into the realm of triviality.
So what can we do? The Genebrarian and those who commented on her post have pointed out some of the difficulties we confront in dealing with this problem and have also touched on the areas where efforts need to be applied to find solutions. I hope to make some constructive (and realistic) suggestions in my next post.
I would like to thank Genebrarian for her eloquent post and for inspiring such a lively discussion!
Showing posts with label rants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rants. Show all posts
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Thursday, December 22, 2011
The Genealogy Community: Where Everybody Knows Your Names
In this week’s Open Thread Thursday on Geneabloggers, Thomas MacEntee writes about “Defining the Genealogy Community” and cites some recent posts that have inspired a lot of discussion:
“The Genealogy Paradigm Shift: Are bloggers the new “experts”?” (Planting the Seeds)
“Are Bloggers Really the New Experts?” (Marian’s Roots and Rambles)
“Genea-Bodies: The New Somebodies” (Luxegen Genealogy and Family History)
I am no expert, though last week I did receive a lovely message from someone who had found one of my Public Member Trees on Ancestry, thanking me for the information I had provided on a particular family that she had despaired of getting the “911” on in time to get it to an elderly aunt for Christmas: “You must be a genealogist!”
You are so kind to think so and to say so, but I am not - not a professional or even an advanced amateur. Perhaps I am in the early intermediate phase, but for that I have to thank the people who write some excellent genealogy books, who run my local genealogy society, who put on the NGS and FGS conferences, who produce Webinars, who run the genealogy rooms at the libraries I visit, who write to me and provide me with information because they have seen my blog, my website, and my online queries, and my fellow genealogy bloggers, a number of whom I think of and refer to as friends.
I do think there is a recognizable genealogy community, and I include all of these people in it - even if they belong to subcommunities that are completely separate or have only the minutest of Venn diagram overlap with one another.
While the lofty leaders of the community - the top dogs/super-achievers/ professionals/trendsetters of genealogy - may not hang out with the lowest circles of the community - the proliferators of those dubious, deathless, endlessly duplicated online trees - they write the books that may help to turn a newbie or two from a tree copier into a real researcher.
Again, I am not an expert and I do not think that I am a trendsetter. I did not start blogging to become a trendsetter. Yes, I blog about my research. That was the original purpose of the blog and continues to be its main purpose: to further my research.
Should readers take my musings and comments as professional-level advice? Certainly not. I even wrote a post not too long ago entitled “Why I Want to Remain an Amateur.”
What I can offer to the genealogy community is the experience and the point of view of a dedicated amateur - and I think that there is a need for this in the genealogy community:
The companies need to hear what we amateurs like/do not like, can use/cannot use, and will pay for/will not pay for (and that even a very tech-savvy segment of the Genealogical Community will revolt when there is even a whiff of a “No Books” policy).
The professionals need to hear what we amateurs still very much need from the professionals: education, an example to emulate, and yes, services to avail ourselves of when we just cannot get any farther with a particular line of research or need someone to help us navigate the process for admission to a lineage society.
Our fellow amateurs need to hear our expressions of commiseration/ congratulation/empathy and our descriptions of our own research methods, experiences, sources, and much more. What I like most about the Genealogy Community, in its best embodiment, is that everyone can learn from everyone else, professional and amateur alike. An amateur may hold an important document, compile a set of graveyard transcriptions, write about a recent repository where procedures have changed, or share a particular memory that can advance a professional’s research. I wrote about some of these thoughts in two previous posts: “Toward a Genealogical Democracy” and “Sharing and Scholarship.”
What the genealogy blogging subcommunity has offered back to me and to others like me - thanks to some very perceptive, active, and involved people leading the way - has been the big surprise. Friendship, support, instruction, the courage and confidence to branch out and try things I never would have tried before, and especially the sense that I can have a voice and make even a small contribution to improvements in the area of genealogy services, records preservation and availability, and recognition of the educational value of genealogical research. While there are experts among us, I think the kind of influence we may wield as a group is more like that of an advocate, whether a consumer advocate or a public advocate, than that of an expert.
A final thought: Who are the members of the Genealogy Community? They are the people you can talk to about a subject of passionate interest to you - genealogy - and they will not yawn, laugh, or roll their eyes.
As far as I am concerned, everybody in the Genealogy Community is a Somebody.
(Even the Tree Copiers? - Well, take a look sometime at the most recent generations in those trees - occasionally there is a nice surprise or two there.)
“The Genealogy Paradigm Shift: Are bloggers the new “experts”?” (Planting the Seeds)
“Are Bloggers Really the New Experts?” (Marian’s Roots and Rambles)
“Genea-Bodies: The New Somebodies” (Luxegen Genealogy and Family History)
I am no expert, though last week I did receive a lovely message from someone who had found one of my Public Member Trees on Ancestry, thanking me for the information I had provided on a particular family that she had despaired of getting the “911” on in time to get it to an elderly aunt for Christmas: “You must be a genealogist!”
You are so kind to think so and to say so, but I am not - not a professional or even an advanced amateur. Perhaps I am in the early intermediate phase, but for that I have to thank the people who write some excellent genealogy books, who run my local genealogy society, who put on the NGS and FGS conferences, who produce Webinars, who run the genealogy rooms at the libraries I visit, who write to me and provide me with information because they have seen my blog, my website, and my online queries, and my fellow genealogy bloggers, a number of whom I think of and refer to as friends.
I do think there is a recognizable genealogy community, and I include all of these people in it - even if they belong to subcommunities that are completely separate or have only the minutest of Venn diagram overlap with one another.
While the lofty leaders of the community - the top dogs/super-achievers/ professionals/trendsetters of genealogy - may not hang out with the lowest circles of the community - the proliferators of those dubious, deathless, endlessly duplicated online trees - they write the books that may help to turn a newbie or two from a tree copier into a real researcher.
Again, I am not an expert and I do not think that I am a trendsetter. I did not start blogging to become a trendsetter. Yes, I blog about my research. That was the original purpose of the blog and continues to be its main purpose: to further my research.
Should readers take my musings and comments as professional-level advice? Certainly not. I even wrote a post not too long ago entitled “Why I Want to Remain an Amateur.”
What I can offer to the genealogy community is the experience and the point of view of a dedicated amateur - and I think that there is a need for this in the genealogy community:
The companies need to hear what we amateurs like/do not like, can use/cannot use, and will pay for/will not pay for (and that even a very tech-savvy segment of the Genealogical Community will revolt when there is even a whiff of a “No Books” policy).
The professionals need to hear what we amateurs still very much need from the professionals: education, an example to emulate, and yes, services to avail ourselves of when we just cannot get any farther with a particular line of research or need someone to help us navigate the process for admission to a lineage society.
Our fellow amateurs need to hear our expressions of commiseration/ congratulation/empathy and our descriptions of our own research methods, experiences, sources, and much more. What I like most about the Genealogy Community, in its best embodiment, is that everyone can learn from everyone else, professional and amateur alike. An amateur may hold an important document, compile a set of graveyard transcriptions, write about a recent repository where procedures have changed, or share a particular memory that can advance a professional’s research. I wrote about some of these thoughts in two previous posts: “Toward a Genealogical Democracy” and “Sharing and Scholarship.”
What the genealogy blogging subcommunity has offered back to me and to others like me - thanks to some very perceptive, active, and involved people leading the way - has been the big surprise. Friendship, support, instruction, the courage and confidence to branch out and try things I never would have tried before, and especially the sense that I can have a voice and make even a small contribution to improvements in the area of genealogy services, records preservation and availability, and recognition of the educational value of genealogical research. While there are experts among us, I think the kind of influence we may wield as a group is more like that of an advocate, whether a consumer advocate or a public advocate, than that of an expert.
A final thought: Who are the members of the Genealogy Community? They are the people you can talk to about a subject of passionate interest to you - genealogy - and they will not yawn, laugh, or roll their eyes.
As far as I am concerned, everybody in the Genealogy Community is a Somebody.
(Even the Tree Copiers? - Well, take a look sometime at the most recent generations in those trees - occasionally there is a nice surprise or two there.)
Saturday, November 12, 2011
The Problem With Google Reader
I think I have figured out what my problem with Google Reader is. The last couple of days the post numbers were much closer to my usual 120-180 posts a day.
The problem is that it took at least two sessions to pile up these numbers, one in the morning and one in the evening. For the previous three days, however, only 100 to 108 posts were were in the reader when I opened it for a single reading session each evening.
It appears that Google Reader is dropping posts shortly after the number of posts reaches the 100 mark. I cannot just split up my reading, since during the workweek I have no time to do any reading before I leave for work. I’ll check again Monday to see whether the evening number is still near the 100 mark.
I checked my settings to see whether there was any limit on the number of unread posts, but I cannot find anything that seems to be relevant to my problem.
There may also be a backlog problem; see Amy Coffin’s comment to the post below.
Has anyone had a problem like this with Google Reader?
The problem is that it took at least two sessions to pile up these numbers, one in the morning and one in the evening. For the previous three days, however, only 100 to 108 posts were were in the reader when I opened it for a single reading session each evening.
It appears that Google Reader is dropping posts shortly after the number of posts reaches the 100 mark. I cannot just split up my reading, since during the workweek I have no time to do any reading before I leave for work. I’ll check again Monday to see whether the evening number is still near the 100 mark.
I checked my settings to see whether there was any limit on the number of unread posts, but I cannot find anything that seems to be relevant to my problem.
There may also be a backlog problem; see Amy Coffin’s comment to the post below.
Has anyone had a problem like this with Google Reader?
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Missing in Action No More
I hope.
Last week I did a bit of genealogy-related stuff and I spent most of this weekend doing genealogy stuff.
Yesterday I attended the Fairfax Genealogical Society’s Fall Fair on the subject of Military Records, with three presentations delivered by Craig Scott: “Researching Your Colonial and French and Indian War Ancestor,” “Researching Your War of 1812 Ancestor,” and “Reasons for Not Serving in the Civil War.” There were lots of places, dates, maps, resources, and funny stories. It was glorious.
Today I spent half a day researching the George Robert Brinlee family. It is great to be “back in the saddle.” I feel relaxed and relieved.
I’m not all done with chores. 3-4 people and 3 cats still manage to shed a lot of hair and fur and track in a lot of dirt. And two family members are still packrats. And we haven’t really finished our yard cleanup.
But I know where to find stuff now. And I’m putting documents away - in the right place - after I create or use them. It’s like being on a diet. Discipline must be maintained.
Yesterday I read a post on Jennifer’s Rainy Day Genealogy Readings: “Defining Research, Part 1.” A real case study in genealogical bad manners, if not outright plagiarism. Things like this are one of the reasons why I use my own template (different from Ancestry’s) for place names. That way I can see who is “clicking and claiming” my data. I don’t really mind that they do. But posting information someone has freely shared with you without crediting them, as described in this post, is shoddy and low-class.
Last week I did a bit of genealogy-related stuff and I spent most of this weekend doing genealogy stuff.
Yesterday I attended the Fairfax Genealogical Society’s Fall Fair on the subject of Military Records, with three presentations delivered by Craig Scott: “Researching Your Colonial and French and Indian War Ancestor,” “Researching Your War of 1812 Ancestor,” and “Reasons for Not Serving in the Civil War.” There were lots of places, dates, maps, resources, and funny stories. It was glorious.
Today I spent half a day researching the George Robert Brinlee family. It is great to be “back in the saddle.” I feel relaxed and relieved.
I’m not all done with chores. 3-4 people and 3 cats still manage to shed a lot of hair and fur and track in a lot of dirt. And two family members are still packrats. And we haven’t really finished our yard cleanup.
But I know where to find stuff now. And I’m putting documents away - in the right place - after I create or use them. It’s like being on a diet. Discipline must be maintained.
Yesterday I read a post on Jennifer’s Rainy Day Genealogy Readings: “Defining Research, Part 1.” A real case study in genealogical bad manners, if not outright plagiarism. Things like this are one of the reasons why I use my own template (different from Ancestry’s) for place names. That way I can see who is “clicking and claiming” my data. I don’t really mind that they do. But posting information someone has freely shared with you without crediting them, as described in this post, is shoddy and low-class.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Things I Don’t Care About in Genealogy
There are so many things to love about genealogy: the thrill of research, the fabulous social aspects and cousin connections, the OCD satisfaction to be found by filling in all the little boxes, the feeling of power and competence in mastering the neat genea-gadgets and genea-apps (OK, this one doesn’t apply to me), the educational and scholarly aspects, and the opportunity to indulge our artistic side in writing and scrapbooking.
But not everything associated with genealogy holds an interest for me. Here are 10 things I can list right off the bat that I don’t give a fig about.
1. Family crests. Really. Don’t need more junk around the house.
2. The One-World Super-Duper Ginormongous Family Tree. Yeah, I believe we’re all related somewhere down the line. And the OWSDGFT kind of proves it: all families have fights, and this thing causes all sorts of fights, so we must all be related, right? And who wants to have proof that they are related to PeeWee Herman, Sylvester Stallone, Adolph Hitler, and that jerk who cut in front of you on the highway the other day?
3. Being related to Charlemagne. He’s what - my 33rd great-grandfather? I probably have more genes in common with PeeWee Herman. Oh, wait.
4. Having a gazillion people in my family tree. Not only does my computer only have so much memory, I only have so much memory.
5. Having an Indian Princess among my ancestors. I’ll be satisfied with any ole run-of-the-mill Native American.
6. Being related to any living celebrities. See Number 2 above. It would just be my luck.... Besides, judging from old family pictures, we tend more toward the Marjorie Main model than the Katherine Hepburn model.
7. Being able to “jump the pond” with all my lines. Well, yeah, OK, a little interest, at least for a few lines. But really, I’m plenty busy just finding out what the heck my ancestors were up to in this country.
8. Winning arguments.
“Oh, BTW, we aren’t related to Sir Christopher So-and-So. That genealogy is bogus.”
“But I found it on lots of online trees. It must be true.”
“The DNA evidence indicates that we aren’t related.”
“Oh, that DNA stuff is just pseudo-science.”
“But look at this guy here, his mother would only have been eight years old when he was born.”
“It has been known to happen. There was a case in India....”
Waste of breath/ink/time.
9. Having only ancestors who were morally impeccable and totally nice. It’s not that I have a preference for scoundrels and stinkers, it’s just that the scoundrels and stinkers left more records.
10. “Finishing my research.” Where’s the fun in that?
But not everything associated with genealogy holds an interest for me. Here are 10 things I can list right off the bat that I don’t give a fig about.
1. Family crests. Really. Don’t need more junk around the house.
2. The One-World Super-Duper Ginormongous Family Tree. Yeah, I believe we’re all related somewhere down the line. And the OWSDGFT kind of proves it: all families have fights, and this thing causes all sorts of fights, so we must all be related, right? And who wants to have proof that they are related to PeeWee Herman, Sylvester Stallone, Adolph Hitler, and that jerk who cut in front of you on the highway the other day?
3. Being related to Charlemagne. He’s what - my 33rd great-grandfather? I probably have more genes in common with PeeWee Herman. Oh, wait.
4. Having a gazillion people in my family tree. Not only does my computer only have so much memory, I only have so much memory.
5. Having an Indian Princess among my ancestors. I’ll be satisfied with any ole run-of-the-mill Native American.
As close as I'll ever get to an Indian Princess
6. Being related to any living celebrities. See Number 2 above. It would just be my luck.... Besides, judging from old family pictures, we tend more toward the Marjorie Main model than the Katherine Hepburn model.
7. Being able to “jump the pond” with all my lines. Well, yeah, OK, a little interest, at least for a few lines. But really, I’m plenty busy just finding out what the heck my ancestors were up to in this country.
8. Winning arguments.
“Oh, BTW, we aren’t related to Sir Christopher So-and-So. That genealogy is bogus.”
“But I found it on lots of online trees. It must be true.”
“The DNA evidence indicates that we aren’t related.”
“Oh, that DNA stuff is just pseudo-science.”
“But look at this guy here, his mother would only have been eight years old when he was born.”
“It has been known to happen. There was a case in India....”
Waste of breath/ink/time.
9. Having only ancestors who were morally impeccable and totally nice. It’s not that I have a preference for scoundrels and stinkers, it’s just that the scoundrels and stinkers left more records.
10. “Finishing my research.” Where’s the fun in that?
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Putting on My Tinfoil Hat
Over at GeneaBloggers, Thomas MacEntee has correctly stated that genealogists are awfully cranky lately. He is right. We are.
He has also stated that we should take a big breath, pick our battles, and above all, be kind when we can. He is right. We should.
So.
Dear Sirs and Madams at the Big Genealogy Companies:
August seems to have become the month of Big Changes in Genealogy. Unfortunately for you all, not everyone is on vacation right now, so some of us are complaining. I love my genealogy subscriptions and appreciate what you do, but I’m starting to become paranoid.
Dear Geni.com: I don’t have a subscription with Geni.com, so I have not been affected by the changes. But some of my friends have. That sucks.
Dear Ancestry.com: I have a Footnote.com subscription. I also have Pages on Footnote, and many of the Pages are about people who have no connection to the military. I also love the other content on Footnote.com, and I love what they were doing and planning to do with NARA. I made one of my most important “cousin connections” through Footnote. With the new focus, that probably won’t be happening any more on Fold3. That sucks. (And although I understand the patriotic significance of the new name, Fold3 is nevertheless kind of lame-sounding).
Yesterday I was feeling a lot of love for Ancestry because of the free access to the 1940 census thing. (Tinfoil hat on: That wouldn’t have been a deliberate move to soften us up for the Footnote-Fold3 switcheroo, would it? No, that's too devious, even for a mastermind.)
Dear Genealogy Bank: I like you the way you are. Please don’t change. That would suck.
Hoping that there is no such thing as the Genealogy Illuminati who get together to conspire to take over the Genea-World,
Yours truly,
Greta
He has also stated that we should take a big breath, pick our battles, and above all, be kind when we can. He is right. We should.
So.
Dear Sirs and Madams at the Big Genealogy Companies:
August seems to have become the month of Big Changes in Genealogy. Unfortunately for you all, not everyone is on vacation right now, so some of us are complaining. I love my genealogy subscriptions and appreciate what you do, but I’m starting to become paranoid.
Dear Geni.com: I don’t have a subscription with Geni.com, so I have not been affected by the changes. But some of my friends have. That sucks.
Dear Ancestry.com: I have a Footnote.com subscription. I also have Pages on Footnote, and many of the Pages are about people who have no connection to the military. I also love the other content on Footnote.com, and I love what they were doing and planning to do with NARA. I made one of my most important “cousin connections” through Footnote. With the new focus, that probably won’t be happening any more on Fold3. That sucks. (And although I understand the patriotic significance of the new name, Fold3 is nevertheless kind of lame-sounding).
Yesterday I was feeling a lot of love for Ancestry because of the free access to the 1940 census thing. (Tinfoil hat on: That wouldn’t have been a deliberate move to soften us up for the Footnote-Fold3 switcheroo, would it? No, that's too devious, even for a mastermind.)
Dear Genealogy Bank: I like you the way you are. Please don’t change. That would suck.
Hoping that there is no such thing as the Genealogy Illuminati who get together to conspire to take over the Genea-World,
Yours truly,
Greta
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)