"I choose to use the word lineage, rather than the more academic “genealogy,” in order to step away from the Critical Theory framework of scholarly parentage. I have never been comfortable with the idea of a family tree of scholarship....I follow [adrienne maree] brown in reframing it as a way to locate our work within the family we choose." - Hannah Alpert-Abrams, "Finding Your Purpose: A Higher Calling workbook for justice-oriented scholars in an unjust world"

When Pam and I first started meeting to discuss friendship as a methodology, one of our earliest conversations turned to our academic lineage, the path that had led us to this healing and fierce friendship that fueled our collaborations.

We recommend: When you think of your academic lineage, trace the friendships, the heartache, the loss, and the triumphant joy that human connection in this profession has put on/in your path.

1) What are all of the things you couldn’t do because the beast devours? 

2) What are all of the things that the beast devours (present and past)? 

3) What is one thing that you retain that the beast can't take or erode?

Being friends with Liz has made me a better digital humanist AND a better human being.

I don’t believe in laziness. I see it too often used to goad more productivity, urgency for profit at the expense of wellness. I see it get used to disrespect boundaries, rights, care; and frame a negative “you’re not enough” instead of a positive “is this a thing that I’d like to do more, and if so can I, how could I do that in a healthy way?”. I love the Nap Bishop’s work around rest as lacking, critical, liberatory.

And I don’t think it’s a helpful personal framing either! I think I got this from Kelsey Piper’s blogging: berating oneself for “laziness” often doesn’t address the real factors keeping you from doing a thing, when it is something you need or want to do (though also asking myself if I really do need to do something: what’s the real not hypothetical impact on me and others, vs. rest or other activities instead?). It just says “you’re immoral and you need to be more moral”; "try harder!", which is... not a clear path of how? why? with what energy & resources?

Instead, Piper suggests reframing things you use "lazy" for, around needing more “convenience”: how do I make this thing more convenient for me to do?

(Simple, low barrier, on my existing path, the easier option, fit into what I already do not what I wish I’d do…) This overlaps a lot with how folks talk about “urgency” as white supremacy (does this have to happen immediately, at the expense of health/other goals/stress, and in this specific way?).

This reframing of laziness to opportunity for better convenience has been effective & kind, for me. Instead of like “Why don’t I spend more time with my dog, who I love?” => ways I could do that most easily, like leaving out her toys so it’s easier to take a play break between work zooms. Or putting healthy snacks into individual containers, because I know I’ll grab a jar of carrot sticks but not scoop a bunch out of the wet bag even though "I should really just do that instead of continuing to let them rot uneaten". Or researching ways to do contribute to advocacy that best fit my availability & disability (and particular strengths!), like making spreadsheets or monitoring social media or civics zooms from home.

Things I’m thinking about related to this:

1. Money makes convenience easier: buy a thing. How can we avoid convenience as capitalism? What definition of convenience cares for everyone regardless of (and fighting) barriers of safety, financial security, other privileges?

2. When does my convenience unfairly mean another person’s increased burden? What is fair here? Is there a better word than “convenience” that helps us attend to communal impact and personal boundaries, not in an equal way but an equitable, always changing one? One that focuses on our strengths & desires, instead of lack or perceived demands?

3. How does disability justice help here: for disabled folks, and for all folks? How do we notice programmed beliefs about what is “easy” for some and not others (through various privileges too) playing into assumptions about what is communal good? (And capitalism—e.g. does “everyone should contribute” mean we should all serve stockholders or make sure every retail store stays open?)

Thank you Liz and Pam for this beautiful work!

I work on a unionized campus, where faculty and staff are in different unions. I was just speaking with one of our facilities staff, who told me that the staff contract expires today, and they don't have a new contract. They're fighting hard for a better contract, and (as we had to do) might have to strike to get it. If they do, it will be at the start of the fall semester. Our library is fueled by poorly-compensated staff labor, and I will absolutely support them if they walk.

Whether you work at a unionized place or not, how can you show up for others? What work are you willing/able to pause or end in support of collective solidarity?