So it's been a while. Busy couple of weeks. Not a lot of good news floating around the archives, but on the up side, March 13 is the first Saturday of four that we'll be open with extra hours (8:30-5pm). Take advantage while you can!
It's contest season for those of you who are interested in the National History Day program, and for those of you who want to participate, they always need people to volunteer, whether as judges or simply to post signs. Odds are that there's a contest in your region, going on now. Or very soon. And of course, there's the state contest here in April. Start looking here.
Now, onto the zen of archiving. "Zen" being used loosely here, of course.
I've been chewing over the dichotomy of archival work, specifically that of public history. On one hand, as a professional, you're obligated to protect and defend, as it were, the records that constitute the known history of said particular locale (in this case, a state). On the other hand, you are summarily required to provide access to these records. Very often, these two demands are at odds - excess handling, copying, usage, etc. tends to destroy documents over time. But locking them away in a climate controlled, sterile environment for all eternity is (while perhaps best for preservation) contrary to everything the historical community stands for (knowledge and truth seeking), and in this case, possibly illegal (hence the public in public records).
Trying to find a happy medium, then, is the best one can presumably achieve. But how does one define balance between destruction and preservation, access and exclusivity? At what point is the line drawn, and a decision made: to prioritize preservation over access, or knowledge over future existence, or worse yet, that no one cares? Is there a way to do it all?
Monday, March 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
If an old document sits on a shelf and no one knows what it is or why it’s there, does it really exist? I know there must be countless treasures in the Archives that are buried and/or forgotten (even if they are well preserved), and that problem is almost as bad as physically losing a document. The beauty of the work of the archivist and researcher (sometimes the same person, sometimes not) is the constant potential for discovery and rediscovery. Balance between preservation and access is absolutely necessary, and these two ideas do not even have to contradict each other. Making people aware of some of our notable documents helps to ensure that they remain preserved. There can never be too much emphasis on education (defined broadly) among the general public (and staff!). We are curious beings, and we should be encouraged to ask good questions about our past and to seek out answers in the raw materials of history. What are some good strategies that the staff can undertake (via this blog and other outlets) that will help make the general public more aware and appreciative of our state’s unique history and treasures? I guess I am very much in the “access” camp in that great divide among archivists, assuming there must be one, and I believe strongly that agencies like the Archives should be firing with everything they have to let the outside world know what they are and what they represent as critical cultural institutions. This sort of fervent appeal for outreach and education, in my opinion, should be undertaken no matter the economic climate. I applaud the efforts of the SCDAH staff for the various things it does for outreach (the digitization efforts come to mind as well as the work you do with schools and community groups). All of this is critical. Thank you for your time and this blog. This concludes my two-cent, unsolicited ramble for the day.
ReplyDeleteThe more you can put online the better.
ReplyDelete