AO: The analysts are worried that values of mutual respect, equity, intellectual generosity, difference, and care are not being incorporated into open-access (OA), digital scholarship and publication.
AO: The analysts highlighted that there are successful Open Access projects but that the goal of OA should not be OA itself, rather dedication to fostering respect and care for divergent communities of scholars, an attention to unremarked-upon inequalities that are fundamental to disciplinary lineages, the material conditions of academic labor, and the economies of citation, prestige, and affiliation.
AO: The analysts of this short piece are engaged in a collaborative project but do not necessarily describe explicitly the collaborative processes themselves, so it is hard to say concisely what is collaborative although it is assumed the collective decision-making regarding Somatosphere that is the collaborative aspect. They focus largely on questions of the value of labor and how to value volunteer labor in relevant ways other than financial capital. The analysts underline that open access should not be the goal in and of itself but should be about the values of the academic work: values of mutual respect, equity, intellectual generosity, difference, and care. However, they do not go into detail on the practices that fit such values and so it is still unclear exactly what they describe by the term “respectful.” Does this entail agreeing to disagree or simply coming to agreement? They value “diversity” within the boundaries of the shared values put forward. They put the values forward as if they are quite stable values and intuitive notions.
AO: I find this quote to be very important because many of the recent discussions about Open Access and HAU focused on the open access business models, the individuals and their abuses of power, etc. but failed to talk about the broader systems of inequality on which all academic work is built upon. For example, I find it especially ironic when papers and work talking about social justice and inequalities are behind closed paywalls and cannot be read without payment or particular membership to scholarly communities. If we are true in our intent to decolonize, strive towards greater equity, etc., then we must take a look at the infrastructures that we use everyday and ensure that those are also in line with the same values of care and respect.
What we find vital in the most significant OA publishing projects is a dedication to fostering respect and care for divergent communities of scholars, as well as an attention to the engrained and often unremarked-upon inequalities that are fundamental to our disciplinary lineages, the material conditions under which we and our colleagues presently labor, and the economies of citation, prestige, and affiliation that continue to make anthropology and its kindred fields hierarchical and exclusionary places.