Preface

Even a cursory review of the committee membership reveals a group of individuals with considerable experience in cultural diversity. In addition, each of the committee members has a unique history and body of knowledge. In fact, the majority of the Committee members had not had the opportunity to work with each other on a committee before. The Committee quickly became aware of its unique knowledge and cultural differences. We came to the realization that the work of the committee was both cognitive and emotive. In order to address issues of cultural diversity it became important for us to develop a social bonding between us as members of distinct and converging communities. With V. Sykes' leadership, we developed group processes that validated a diversity of voices. This is not to suggest that there were no differences; there were, but the committee learned to respect those differences. We are sharing this with the larger LAUC membership for two reasons. First, because it is easy and dangerous to lump individuals under an umbrella term such as "minority." While we may share common concerns we come from different cultural formations. Secondly, in order to implement the recommendations contained within this report, it will be necessary for a group process to emerge that facilitates and promotes dialogue, trust and respect. It means creating a safe space in which the experience of different people can be expressed. We see the workshop and the report as the beginning of that process and invite LAUC members to continue it.

The Many Voices of Diversity

The struggle faced by this committee has been the struggle of language, culture, and politics. One question the committee could not avoid was whether the concept of cultural diversity was ultimately liberating or oppressive. From the beginning the committee struggled to hear each others' voices; struggled to establish a common vocabulary and a common language that was representative of the many voices of diversity. It is painfully obvious that each person brought to this committee and to this discussion a personal construct of what diversity means based on that person's experience in American society.

Each member struggled to establish a place for oneself and others on the committee. Trust was an issue because diversity is difficult to define for people not knowledgeable about one another. This preface is an attempt to approximate the voices of a working committee on diversity.

For me there is a sense of urgency. Diversity must be seen through the framework of race, class, and gender.

The dynamics of the committee have been a problem because it has been a struggle to be heard. At times I have felt like an outsider.

How does one liberate oneself in the middle of oppression?

Under-represented groups; what does it all mean?

Racism is an ever evolving force in this country. At times it is overt, at times it is covert.

Multiple diverse voices struggling to be represented and heard.

The constant problem of being the warrior scholar; the constant emotional oppression; the daily tight for legitimacy; the daily struggle with invisibility.

Never being heard; comments only heard, accepted and made legitimate when repeated or restated by a white person.

The need for strategies for survival; strategies of resistance.

The perplexities of coming to grips with trying to change the image of librarians.

Constantly confronting internalized denials of victimization, forcing oneself to give regular affirmations to soothe the ever invading sense of non-humanness.

These are the voices of the people from this committee, struggling with issues of race, class, gender, internalized oppression and combative wars on their humanity. Always struggling for a wholeness of being that represents their race, class, their sex, and the profession they have chosen. There was no singular voice or definition on the meaning of diversity: there were many. The committee experienced the absence of Asian American and Native American voices in our deliberations. Diversity will remain undefined as long as there are no common languages, no common vocabularies, and no safe spaces for defining what is diversity and what isn't. The question remains: Is the definition of cultural diversity a liberating act or an oppressive one?

May 1991