I was not aware that there were multiple meanings to bibliography. I am most used to the bibliographic definition of the word, meaning the categorization of a text. Bibliographical refers to the study of the physical aspects of the text and its historical contexts. Since we’ve been discussing the physical sources of information, I found it fitting that the website for the Bibliographical Society of America had many interactive elements, like the slideshow of different texts with hover text about the physical elements of that text. The website also had lots of citations with links to the information that led to the original sources of information. It drew attention to the fact that I don’t see that type of practice very often on most websites that I visit, unless they are specifically a news organization. 

The further reading section details a timeline of the gradual definition of bibliography. In this timeline we can see that the definition of analytical/critical bibliographical studies has evolved to include a wide variety of critical studies for the sake of “identifying and repairing the harms of systemic racism, settler colonialism, heteropatriarchy, and other oppressive structures” (Derrick Spires, “On Liberation Bibliography” (2022). 
The first definition of in the timeline, from W. W. Greg, “Bibliography – A Retrospect” (1945), Greg describes bibliography as “the study of books as material objects irrespective of their contents.” Greg views the study of the book as something separate from the contents. However, from Borsuk and our discussions in class, I understand the study of books as objects to include the content, considering that the conditions of the object inform the content.

I think the understanding of bibliography as a political practice, as discussed in Lisa Maruca and Kate Ozment’s “What is Critical Bibliography?”, is relevant and useful in the time we live in, where I feel more people are starting to get more comfortable discussing the larger political systems that shape our everyday lives.