The problem is the idea that the alternative to making is usually not doing nothing—it’s almost always doing things for and with other people, from the barista to the Facebook community moderator to the social worker to the surgeon. Describing oneself as a maker—regardless of what one actually or mostly does—is a way of accruing to oneself the gendered, capitalist benefits of being a person who makes products.
Debbie Chachra, “Why I Am Not a Maker,” The Atlantic, January 23, 2015.
In her article, Debbie Chachra explained why she doesn’t label herself as a “maker”, and emphasis the importance to focus on the contributions and responsibilities of everyone in the society.
Just because one wears a label like a “maker” or something else doesn’t automatically make them more important to the society. I think part of the reason why people perceive “makers” as “different” or “better” than everyone else is that the their labeling somehow implies their outstanding creativity that made them a “maker”. It is no doubt that creativity is crucial to the success of human society, but being a “maker” isn’t proof that one is more creative: one can call themselves a maker by creating many useless products and not contribute to anything. On the other hand, not being a “maker” doesn’t show that one is somehow less creative. Fulfilling many different roles of the society requires creativity: an educator like the author herself needs to be creative to make her teaching more effective, just like a barista needs to be creative to efficiently serve their customers to provide a pleasant experience.
Back in high school, I enjoyed lounging in our school’s maker-space. I think my past self would happily embraced the label as a novice maker and enjoyed the idea that I was “different” or “smarter”. Realistically, anyone could do what I did and make those mediocre projects if they had the time, education and resources that I fortunately received. What I have come to realized is that a “maker-space” isn’t just for the “makers”. One can utilize the tools in the workshop to repair, improve, or learn from things that have already been made. Every component, not just the making, is important to the overall process, just like being makers don’t make one different or better in society. Moving forward, I think I am very eager to explore the curation and analysis aspects of the Digital Humanities. I want to contribute to the digitalization and preservation of important artifacts and other things that are already made, and to improve the education for both myself and others while learn during the process.
