A Very Short Introduction to Archives: Reaching Out to
an Informed Public
Richard J. Cox
Invited Talk
Queens College
May 18, 2016
Note: This version does not include citations, but it
represents the speaking version delived.
Introduction
American archivists have been concerned about
their public image for at least the past half century and,
in an intensive way, for the past thirty years. David
Gracy, the President of the Society of American
Archivists in the early 1980s, made this his focus,
delivering one of the more memorable presidential
addresses in that association’s history in his trademark
evangelistic style. The Society also worked with an
outside social science firm to determine how “resource
allocators,” the people who hired and paid archivists,
viewed them in their organizations. The Society also
published basic manuals on topics like public programs
and exhibitions and its conferences were full of sessions
wherein archivists discussed how they were promoting
their programs and themselves. It was a heady and
1
stirring time for a young archivist such as myself (yes, I
really was once young).
As we reflect on how archives are viewed today, we
can mull over what progress, if any, has been made in
understanding what we do. When we read newspaper
articles mentioning archives or archivists, we still see a
basic confusion in the roles of librarians and museum
curators with that of archivists. We still struggle to
explain to our friends and relatives what an archivist
does. Even our most intrepid researchers, historians
and other scholars, often possess stereotypical images
of who an archivist is (the oldest) or what an archivist
does (working in the bureau of yellowing paper, as
humorist Dave Barry characterizes it). How many times
do we see in acknowledgments pages references to the
“dusty” archives, a more romanticized sensibility of
these places than what we usually work in (of course,
yes, there are truly dusty archives out there, but these
are by and far not the norm).
What is available to the public and others to
explain what an archives is or what an archivist does?
There is a lot less than is available about libraries and
museums, although what is out there for librarians and
museum curators also leaves a lot to be desired. Most of
what archivists have written about archives, beyond the
technical requirements of practice, has been internally
focused for their own use. Even SAA’s volume on
Understanding Archives and Manuscripts, first written by
James O’Toole and then issued in a later edition with me
as a collaborator, hasn’t resonated outside of the
2
archives community. But there are opportunities to be
taken advantage of, I think, as we look about in various
community and academic bookstores. There is a
considerable amount of writing about cultural heritage,
memory, tradition, preservation, and related topics that
easily connect to archives themes. Moreover, a number
of scholars are beginning to write about archives or the
archive in interesting ways, deepening our contextual
knowledge about the documentary record, even if there
has been little synergy between the work of archivists
and their own.
In this talk I am presenting a hypothetical
opportunity to present archives to an informed public.
It is exploratory, at best, and I hope in our
conversations we can improve what I have developed.
In the first section I describe the hypothetical
opportunity, to publish in one publisher’s “very short
introduction” series. In the second section I consider
different ways of highlighting the significance of
archives. I then consider various challenges, what I call
disruptions, to the manner in which society views
archives. Then I reflect a bit on some major
contemporary challenges, before offering concluding
thoughts. As usually happens when someone accepts an
invitation that is open-ended for the topic, this has
turned out to be more complex than is possible to
comment on in the limited time available. Hopefully, I
will make comments that stimulate your thoughts.
Very Short Introductions
3
Opportunities abound for archivists and their allies
to explain archives. Oxford University Press has been
publishing, for some years now, a series of volumes on
disciplines, events, and trends under the overarching
title of A Very Short Introduction. Reading these
volumes, it is obvious that other disciplines also desire
to communicate to a general public and to other
disciplines the essence of their work and mission.
Coming in about 100 pages each with a standard,
colorful paperbound format, and usually displayed at
university and good local bookstores in their own
display rack, these volumes are intended to be just what
they say, useful brief orientations to their topics. They
are written by leading scholars, focusing on historical
and conceptual aspects of the topic. They are not
practice manuals, but are intended, rather, to provide
critical information to someone seeking a general
orientation to their subject.
The “Very Short Introductions” series has been well
received (indeed, other publishers such as MIT and
Stanford, are publishing similar series) . Started in
1995, and expanded to being offered online in 2014,
this series includes now about 400 titles covering
multiple disciplines. They are intended to offer
“scholarly yet accessible overviews,” and the readership
is intended to be “undergraduate students who use
them for introductory or supplementary reading;
general consumers who have an interest in the subject
or want to learn more about a hot topic; and
4
academics.” Each volume runs about 35,000 words, so
they are indeed very short. The online versions have
enhanced features.
Different Approaches to Introducing Archives
There are innumerable ways one could approach
writing an introductory volume on archives, with each
one possessing its own advantages and disadvantages.
One matter can be solved right at the outset, however,
in that these volumes are not manuals of practice. These
are theoretical, historical, and explanatory orientations
to their subjects. This, in its own right, makes it a lot
easier to frame and carryout. Other than that, it is
obvious that whatever direction one goes it is primarily
a personal choice and one based on one’s experiences
and orientation to the field. With my comments here I
am trying to envision a volume that could be an
important advocacy piece for the archival community;
you may have some suggestions, beyond what I have to
say, that could make this a better tool for such a
purpose.
For today, I comment on these approaches:
defining archives; describing archival functions;
understanding documentary forms; viewing archives
historically; valuing archives; the notion of a cloud of
witnesses; and contemporary issues.
Defining Archives and the Archive
5
Probably the typical place to start is with defining
what is meant by archives and the archive, the former
term being how archivists refer to their field and work
and the latter being what postmodernists and others
have settled on in writing about the preservation and
nature of records. We can discern these definitional
efforts in the history, emergence of new digital
recordkeeping systems, and the discovery by other
scholars of the importance of archival materials. The
complexity of all this can be seen in the re-emergence of
the older archival science of diplomatics as a means to
handle electronic records, best seen in the work of the
International Research on Permanent Authentic
Records in Electronic Systems (InterPARES). This
project produced elaborate methods to handle digitallyborn records in government, archaeology, the arts, and
other realms, providing interesting insights while also
prompting many other questions about the utility of the
old science for the new media.
Very different from those drawing on this older
science of archives has been the postmodernists’
discovery of the archive. Ann Laura Stoler, in her study
of nineteenth century colonial archives, reminds us that
an archival document brings into play many issues of
power, control, memory, forgery and fabrication, and
other such aspects. She tries to persuade us to read
against the grain of what the creators of these archives
intended these records to serve, seeking to provide
archivists and users of archives more insights into the
nature and value of the evidence they give us. Her
6
examination of colonial archives enables us to explore
into a particularly valuable territory about the meaning
of archives as documents, institutions, and memory
repositories. Scholarship such as Stoler’s pushes us to
re-examine our conceptions about the purpose and
nature of archival work.
We also have the efforts by individuals within the
archival community to provide basic definitions. One
interesting essay by Terry Cook built around four
themes: continuity and change in the archival paradigm;
impact of technology; impact of community archives;
and archival use and users. Such issues suggest that
archivists must rethink their most basic assumptions
about their work and mission.
However, we must also go beyond strict, technical
definitions of the record and the archive to consider the
tremendous symbolic value of archives (and libraries),
seen in how often, throughout history, they have been
targeted for destruction. Viewing deliberate efforts to
destroy books and the places where they are housed is a
perverse way of understanding their significance at
various points in history. Indeed, the looting of cultural
heritage has become one of the prevalent features of
modern life and warfare, leading not only to the illicit
acquisition of historical objects, art, and archives but to
a growing activity in forgeries.
Some of the ways the public has understood
archives or the archival impulse have been muddled by
the popularization of other concepts, most notably
“curation.” Within the archives field, the notion of
7
digital curation has caught on, with new graduate
programs, scholarship, and conferences growing in
importance. But many questions remain, such as will
digital curation be a new field, part of other fields such
as archival studies, librarianship, information science,
and museum studies? A notable problematic issue
seems to be the appropriation of terminology from
various fields without full understanding of the precise
meaning of these terms. But the bigger problem has
been the expansion of the use of the word “curate”
everywhere.
We also have been expanding our direction of the
very notion of record. Many different disciplines have
developed working definitions of documents, such as
ethnography and law and public policy. Thinking of
buildings or landscape as documents is important,
especially as such a process also will help archivists or
scholars better understand the limitations of textual
and visual records in documenting any aspect of society
leaving behind such notable physical artifacts as
buildings.
In a short introductory volume on archives, it is
important to consider the various definitions of
archives and records, in order to provide a baseline
point for discussion. Yet, we have to resist the
temptation to devote all of our attention to such
matters. Mostly, we need to reveal that the basic
assumptions are being challenged from many different
quarters, and that some of these debates and disputes
attest to the societal importance of archives.
8
Understanding Archives Functionally
Probably one of the easiest ways to explain if not to
understand what archives and archivists are about is to
describe the various basic functions. It is also the way
many archival educators construct the curriculum of
their programs and teach their students. Most people
associate archival work with preservation, but
archivists also focus on appraisal, representation, and
reference and access. Some functions, such as appraisal,
have caused controversy; Carol Chosky, for example, in
describing records management discounts anything
from the archival perspective, focusing only on
“business requirements.”
The challenge with taking this approach is that it
may be easy to write about, but it can also be rather
lifeless, uninspiring to tell the truth. It is valuable for the
most basic description of the archival mission and the
work supporting it, but it does not always capture the
essential value of archives in society. In a short volume,
I would devote a page or two to these functions, with
perhaps some indication of how these are changing or
being challenged.
Comprehending Documentary Forms
Individuals become archivists by acquiring
knowledge not just about the principles and methods
for managing documentary materials but by
9
understanding the history and nature of those
materials. It is in the documents that we can best see
their value and importance. One of the most prized
documentary forms for both archivists and researchers
is that of the letter. In order to understand the letter, we
have to appreciate the establishment of the postal
service and the communications revolution it generates,
the emergence of the post office as a local institution,
the transformation of the idea of the personal letter, and
the rise of the notion of junk mail. Historians and others
who have used letters from earlier periods emphasize
their significance as evidence and how this evidence is
being lost or altered with latter communications
technologies.
It is critical that archivists know about such shifts
in the nature of documentary forms. The increasing
scholarship on letters and letter-writing from many
different fields both help the archivist and acknowledge
the growing recognition of the importance of
documentary forms. Others, such as linguist David
Crystal, studying related digital forms, such as texting,
also demonstrate why archivists need to be mindful of
such shifts, provoking useful reflection about why
archivists ought to be concerned about preserving
evidence of this communication phenomenon (just as
they have been interested in dealing with the
documentary implications of the telephone and
electronic mail).
We can see other critical shifts in records and
recordkeeping being caused by both technology and
10
societal norms. Diaries, long a mainstay of personal
recordkeeping, has partly moved to online blogging,
transforming the nature of what we used to assume
about the nature of a diary. Likewise, we can see a
transformation of analog personal papers to personal
websites. Technology has changed the way many
writers write, and this has had a profound impact on the
nature of literary archives (even recognizing that such
archives were always jumbled and a challenge). There
are many other traditional archival sources being
changed by technology in fundamental ways
challenging how archivists and others work with and
manage such documents – newspapers, maps,
photographs and other images, moving images,
scrapbooks, and telegraph and telephone records and
implications for recordkeeping. All of these forms or
media are being changed in substantial and profound
ways.
Personally, I see the exploration of documentary
forms as being the most useful way to orient individuals
to the nature of archives and their importance and to
navigate through the present transitional era from
analog to digital. For one thing, archivists are experts on
documentary forms. For another, everyone connects
with such forms in their daily lives. And, finally, these
forms often carry with them very evocative stories of
events, personal lives, and substantial milestones in
human history. Everyone identifies with such
documents. It only takes a few examples of such records
to begin to see why they are so important to us.
11
Understanding Archives Historically
A standard way to understand archives and
archivists is to examine them historically. There has
been an increasing array of research by archivists on
historical matters (as well as historians on archives).
However, there has been a steady stream of publication
because historians and others scholars have found
archives so interesting and so closely related to their
own work. Ever since the emergence of professional
historians, there has been discussion about how and
why these scholars use archival sources; indeed, the
historical community may be the most self-reflective
about its research craft and methodology (close to, but
certainly not surpassed by, the soul-searching by
literary scholars). In the heyday of scientific history a
century ago, archives were viewed as laboratories for
the new “scientific” history. The rise of social, cultural,
quantitative (or “cliometrics”) and other new trends in
historical inquiry over succeeding decades all brought
with them some discussion and debate about the
importance of archives. Such debates have also flared
up in the ranks of archivists as their own professional
development has moved them to more of an
independent status rather than as a part of the
historical community (although some might debate this
assessment of archival independence as well).
12
Historians and other scholars dependent on
archival sources have maintained their faith in archival
sources as the primary ingredients for their work.
Considering archives and archivists from a
historical perspective is also a neat and orderly way to
understand how archives have developed,
recordkeeping and information technologies have
evolved, and the points in which we have witnessed
dramatic shifts in how society documents itself (orality
to literacy, analog to digital). We must always have this
background perspective as we ruminate about the
nature and role of archives.
Providing a historical review of the origins of
writing, recordkeeping, and archives may be the best
way to grapple with the nature of the archival record.
Such scholarship is both rich and expanding, ranging
from the origins of language and writing in the ancient
world to the implications of digital information systems
today. In the ancient world, a scribal culture, driven by
both religion and government, emerged in ways that
dominated these earlier societies; the scribes were welleducated leaders in their time: “The skills of the scribes
– of reading, understanding, and interpreting –
commanded general respect. The scribes held the key to
the symbolic capital of the nation.” Many archivists long
for such good old days.
We also possess clusters of studies about other
historical eras and themes in the development of
records and recordkeeping, contributed from every
conceivable field, again attesting to the general
13
significance of the archival impulse. The public scholar
and travel writer Bill Bryson has given us an
exploration of the contrast between Shakespeare’s
surviving plays, encompassing about a million words,
and the sparse number of documents, about one
hundred, related to him and his family. Other scholars
are studying what is not represented in earlier archives,
suggesting that even as government and other
recordkeeping became more systematized that much
was not captured and even more lost by carelessness,
accidents, and natural events, all related to the nature of
the emerging archival culture.
We know far more about records and
recordkeeping in early America than we ever did
before. Interests in early literacy and reading have led
to studies about penmanship, diary writing, copybook
production, the changing nature of writing materials,
and Native American literacy. Some historians have
focused their work on the nature of documents created
(and not created), such as Jill Lepore’s study of
Benjamin Franklin’s sister, Jane. Jane Franklin
maintained a small book of notes and data about her
life, “her archive,” leading Lepore to ruminate on the
nature of early American recordkeeping. She is working
on a variety of aspects on recordkeeping and
information issues, as can be seen in a series of essays
in The New Yorker.
An increasing number of studies on modern
archives and recordkeeping are viewing these as social
functions going beyond archival repositories and
14
preservation efforts for cultural and historical purposes.
A growing number of historical studies on national
archival policies and politics reveal how complex these
matters have been and how much more complicated
they are becoming. There is no end to the potential
array of studies about the history of archives, and we
could assemble now a good American archival history,
perhaps even a useful international history.
Valuing Archives
There is considerable testimony about why
archives are valuable, some of it quite emotional and
romantic. One English professor (Eric Jager), doing
research at the French National Archives on a 1386 trial
by combat, states, “In all the published literature on the
1386 affair, I had never seen any discussion of this
record, and as I opened the volume, I had the delicious
sense that I was lifting the lid of a box of secrets that
had been hidden for many centuries.”
Examining the many different ways in which
archivists and others assign value to records is another
interesting way to understand the meaning of archives.
One of the most popular routes to the past is genealogy
and genealogists are avid users of archives (even if
archivists often treat them as second-class citizens).
There are, of course, many other ways we identify value
with archival materials. Archives are essential
remembering the past, and social memory has been an
important area of both scholarly and popular endeavors
15
over the past couple of decades or more. We can also
see the value of archives in what can only be termed an
archival turn in scholarship in many other fields.
The growing literature on collecting in general and
in particular archival appraisal is another window into
how archives are valued. The musings on the
psychology of collecting are a helpful backdrop for why
manuscripts are sought out by both private and public
collectors. Stories of collecting quests abound in the
bookstores these days. Personal accounts of collecting
also reveal the significance of archival documents. Such
collecting is also tied to a kind of nostalgia for the
physical manuscript which has become more
pronounced as the digital age and virtual documents
have settled in. Both a popular and scholarly interest in
the persistence of handwriting affirms this.
A perverse way of understanding the value of
archival materials is via the efforts of forgers and theft.
Studies reveal that forgery and theft are not just about
the financial value of such items but also about fooling
the experts and adding to the documentary heritage
(even if such aims are a bit twisted).
After a generation of scholars focusing on the
nature of power in the formation and protection of
archives, this observation suggests another fruitful area
for scholarly inquiry: the role of happenstance,
volunteers, personal connections, and other influences
on the shaping of archival collections and programs. We
also can add to such matters the regular occurrence by
widows and heirs, even individuals on their deathbeds,
16
to destroy personal papers to prevent others from
learning about their activities; this is a recognition that
records possess power and influence.
We have been expanding our notion of how we
value archives. For example, we now recognize how
important oral tradition and oral history is for some
cultures, often being a primary means by which we
document their history and to understand their place in
the world. The relationship of archives, archival work,
and the archival mission to justice continues to be a
growing topic of inquiry around the world, representing
a whole new way of valuing archives. This has added a
different set of values to archives. South African
archivist Verne Harris contends that the stories
emanating from the records in archives are not an
“innocent byproduct, a reflection of reality, it is a
construction of realities expressing dominant relations
of power. It privileges certain voices and cultures, while
marginalizing or excluding others.” For Harris, the
meaning and significance of records are “located in the
circumstances of its creation and subsequent use.” As
news about atrocities inflicted by government and
various groups materialize, news about the role of
records in documenting such events also appear.
Novels, mysteries, and fiction of all sorts are the
windows through which the great majority of people
understand the world, or at least learn to tolerate it.
Exploring bookstores and libraries, one finds increasing
evidence that archives and archivists are part of the
fictional universe (if not the real one). While studies
17
about the book, libraries, printing, access to
information, censorship, privacy, and a host of related
topics abound, there are few about archives and
archivists. The fact that there are some fictional
portrayals of archives and archivists may be more than
satisfactory as a testament to the importance of their
role in society, even if often the worse stereotypes and
characterizations are employed. Of course, most
working archivists become highly annoyed at such
portrayals, but most would agree that some visibility is
better than none. The bigger problem is when historical
manuscripts and the work of archivists are confused
with libraries, librarians, museums, and museum
curators, a problem that is quite common. Martha
Cooley’s novel, The Archivist, criticized by many
archivists for inaccuracies about the principles and
practices of these professionals, is, in some ways, more
noteworthy for its cover illustration displaying a stack
of books, not documents. Somehow the publisher,
guiding the Cooley manuscript through to publication,
still did not have a fundamental understanding of the
difference between a librarian and archivist. The
depictions of archivists in pulp fiction often play on
everything stereotype of these individuals.
A Cloud of Witnesses
One way to assess the importance of archives is by
noting the ubiquity of these repositories in society. In
one of the classic studies on American archives, Walter
18
Muir Whitehill’s analysis of independent historical
societies, there is an interesting chapter about the
immense array of archival repositories, termed a cloud
of witnesses. We have countless local governments with
archival programs, although their success is very
uneven. Some repositories, such as Presidential
Libraries, scattered about the nation, have generated a
wide range of issues, controversies, and crises. Although
not as numerous as other institutions, there are some
exemplary corporate archives in North America and
other parts of the world. Just about everywhere we go
we can stumble across an archives, some in impressive
buildings and others struggling to stay open and to
provide services to researchers and the public.
Contemporary Archival Matters
Archivists, as evidenced by their conferences and
journals, are focused on challenges and other issues
affecting their mission and status.
Even today, in an era dominated by computers,
there is an interest in the use or application of
handwritten documents, extending even to the creation
of programs to mimic handwriting. There is even a
longing for older writing media, such as paper,
revealing how we remain attached to certain traditional
documentary systems. But there are other longings as
well. For example, we have been witnessing a
weakening of the power and influence of professions,
and this is something archivists must keep in mind as
19
they work on developing new approaches to dealing
with emerging and complicated records and
information systems. In fact, the archival community
faces many disruptions to their work.
Archival Disruptions
Arlett Farge, in her study of our fascination with
archival materials, explains that we don’t find in their
midst a “simple story, or even a settled story.” She
contends, “If the archive is to serve as an effective social
observatory, it will only do so through the scattered
details that have broken through, and which form a gapriddled puzzle of obscure events. You develop your
reading of the archives through ruptures and
dispersion, and must mold questions out of stutters and
silences.” Despite what many people assume about
archives, they and their holdings have not had placid
histories. We can perceive this by considering some key
disruptions that have unsettled archives and archivists:
technological changes; the emergence of the citizen
archivist; the impact of war and civil unrest; and
intellectual property and other legal issues.
Technological Disruptions
With every change in the technology of writing
(and reading, perhaps) has come a disruption in the
way we communicate. Even what we now view as quite
primitive, such as the typewriter, brought profound
20
implications for our everyday behavior and ways of
communicating. Archivists have tended to view
technological shifts as challenges, perhaps because as a
society we are so accustomed to technology changes
being associated with obsolescence and a loss of
control.
We also can understand the importance and nature
of archives by the analysis of documentary forms. In
some cases the analysis of certain famous documents,
such as the Declaration of Independence, provide
cogent understanding of how our views of archives have
been transformed over the years. Most documentary
forms have long histories. The scholarship on the letter
ranges from the ancient world down to the present day.
Archival documents have long been the target for
both looting and purposeful destruction. Even the
famous Rosetta Stone, the key to deciphering
hieroglyphics, has been the topic of debate about its
legitimate ownership. And we are seeing the interest in
personal archives in every nation and culture across the
globe. Despite the acknowledged public lack of
understanding of records and archives, there are
persistent reminders of why documents are important.
The biggest possible disruption may be the
fascination with Big Data. This is somehing we
experience everywhere we go or watch or listen –
television advertisements, conferences, classrooms, and
faculty meetings (to name a few) – where we hear about
the importance and promise of Big Data, as if it is the
answer to solving all of our problems. To a certain
21
extent, Big Data is just the latest digital era buzzword to
capture our attention, and, like others, it will pass away
(or it should). Big Data seems to be part of an evolving
society where machines will be expected to make all of
our decisions, from what we eat to what we read or
what we are expected to like in fashion and art. To me,
this seems both boring and dangerous. I am not alone in
this opinion. Some, like Sven Birkerts, term the focus on
data as a kind of technological determinism, reducing
everything to what can be measured. If we can’t
measure something or capture it digitally, it can’t be
important.
The Rise of the Citizen Archivist
There has been, in recent years an increasing
interest in the role of citizens in preserving their own
papers. There are historical precedents, of course, such
as in the efforts of individuals in times of social and
political crisis and stress, such as the Holocaust, to
safeguard their own materials. Most of us have been
fascinated by even the most extraneous material left
behind. We see similar evidence of this in commentary
on the archival impulse, sometimes in the form of
compulsive recordkeeping, usually mentioned in
memoirs.
Of course, individuals have been scratching away,
compiling records of all sorts, for a very long time. A
quick glance around a baseball stadium will find
countless people religiously keeping score. And then
22
there are the many accounts of individuals saving the
papers of deceased family members. We also see this in
the manic way many people compile lists and keep
records of all their activities. And as new technologies
emerged, such as home movie cameras, individuals and
families flocked to use them to document their every
move. As time passes, we are seeing more and more
basic guides on how to organize and preserve both
analog and digital personal records, and this trend will
undoubtedly continue. Moreover, guides on how to keep
personal journals are also appearing just as rapidly.
War and Civil Unrest
One of the greatest disruptions to archives and
archival work has been warfare, bringing with it
destruction of records and other cultural materials but
also generating many new recordkeeping ventures.
Sometimes archivists have been complicit in such
nefarious activities employing their skills to help in
prosecuting and controlling various aspects of society,
such as can be discerned in the large numbers of
archivists who were members of the Nazi party. Yet,
archivists, often with the aid of new technologies, also
have helped to restore documentation seemingly
destroyed in order to understand past events or to hold
individuals and groups accountable.
The vast literature on the Holocaust is replete with
explorations of the importance of archives, both in their
deliberate destruction and in the numerous efforts to
23
create them in order to provide memory of its victims.
Not only has the murder of millions led to new kinds of
searches in state and other archives, but it has
increased the sensitivity to the importance of family
archives and memories that only could be captured
through oral interviews. Diary writing, and often their
hiding for future generations, became an important
means for perpetuating memories and stories of those
persecuted. In some cases, entire communities
organized and created archives, hiding them as best
they could in order to survive for future generations.
Records and other documentation have become
more important because of issues of restitution of
looted possessions and reparations for losses. The
evidence and accountability values of records have been
enhanced and become more noticeable.
Intellectual Property, Law, and Ethics
Intellectual property has become one of the most
salient aspects of the modern Information Age. In an era
when great promises have been made for enhanced due
to shifting social, cultural, economic, and other factors.
Some even describe the present situation as one
characterized by “information malpractice.” Archival
ethics may be the next professional crisis. For the past
two decades, archivists have assumed that the primary
crisis was dealing with digital documents and electronic
records systems, and they have written hundreds of
thousands, maybe millions, of words in both print and
24
digital venues. While such concerns continue to be a
challenge, and may always be so, I personally believe
that ethical matters will consume more and more of
archivists and records managers’ time and attention.
The eroding of government openness, intellectual
property contests, corporate shenanigans, weakening
professional associations (in terms of resources, if not
other matters), the transformation of universities into
businesses, and a host of other issues will affect
archivists in every sector where they work. Archivists
will be confronted with increasing difficulties of making
records available, of capturing them in the first place,
and in knowing what to do with proprietary or
controversial evidence they hold.
Ethical issues are far more difficult to grapple with
then technical or other professional activities, especially
in an era when ethics codes have been weakened,
personal morality contested or held in uncertain regard,
and professional associations backed away from them
fearing legal and other conflicts they are unprepared to
handle. While professional associations, such as the
Society of American Archivists, have been pretty good in
issuing statements about some of these matters and
even presenting testimony in Congressional hearings
when needed, the real difficult task ahead is how
individual archivists and archival programs are going to
deal with the practical consequences of this
commercialization of our heritage. And here there are
no simple answers.
25
A Generation of Challenges
As we have moved into the twenty-first century,
archivists and archival work were challenged on many
fronts (as were many other professions). Many of these
challenges were generated by the continuing
development of new and robust information
technologies. The convergence of fields, such as
museums, libraries, and archives, became a prevalent
topic of discussion and debate, with many promises and
predictions about the transformation of these fields.
The rise of ubiquitous networked computing also built
on a centuries old interest by government to manage
personal identity, such as the evolution to passport
systems, to become intrusive in this function. Indeed, as
government has increased its bureaucratic processes in
controlling identity, we have also seen increasing efforts
by individuals and groups to subvert such systems, from
forgeries to identify theft. From the late nineteenth
century to the middle of the next, Chinese immigrants to
the United States led these immigrants to create an
elaborate fictional world, inventing descriptions of
Chinese locales, family relationships, and even names –
“paper families.” And the blurring of real and virtual
worlds has caused archivists to question what they are
doing and what their mission is or ought to be.
The issues of government secrecy and surveillance
have become far more critical and contentious since the
events of September 11, 2001. As a result of all this,
privacy has become a far reaching issue for archivists to
26
deal with, something that was barely thought about a
generation or two ago. Archives and archivists have
always been politicized, despite their best efforts to be
objective and neutral. Access to government records
have long been immersed in controversies about every
aspect from creation to classification. Even repressive
societies have had a fixation with recordkeeping, never
assuming that ultimately they would be overthrown and
the records used against them. Sometimes even
seemingly benign activities, such as the creation of
presidential libraries, turn out to be fraught with
political issues.
Some challenges have nothing to do with the
prevalence of digital technologies. We still struggle
with the diversity of the profession and how to be
culturally sensitive to different communities and
groups. Continuing debates about the nature and
relevance of truth, such as how memoirs contribute to
or distract from matters of truth, raise questions about
the veracity and relevance of archives and the
difficulties posed in recovering the past. Archivists
working in appraising and subsequently describing
documents such as diaries, journals, and memoirs will
find these volumes useful in understanding how such
sources are employed by various kinds of researchers.
Archivists might also reflect a bit on how they describe
such materials. While archivists are careful to follow
descriptive standards and to be sensitive to archival
principles such as provenance, they might also consider
utilizing various theoretical frameworks in describing
27
the nature and contents of these sources. This might
highlight the potential value of such sources better than
mere discussion of their content, especially if it could be
done online with digitized portions of their texts as
examples. As the notion of truth in our public affairs and
the media seems to be on the decline or of little concern,
the role of records and other sources seems to be more
important than ever. We must remember that all the
claims about the power of information and value of
having access to it is of little use if truth is a casualty.
Concluding Thoughts
It may surprise some to know that the majority of
individuals attracted to graduate archival education
programs still come with romantic notions of what
archivists do and what they work with. While some get
energized with deep challenges posed by the digital
documentary universe, others complain and sometimes
drop out. Our task is to engage them intellectually, as
well as to build new bridges to the public. If one is
looking for fascinating challenges, these are good times
indeed. Archivists need to work to make sure that their
mission is not lost in the cacophony of voices in our
digital era, but, having stated this, I am positive that the
mission will always be there due to the innate human
need to preserve memories and evidence.
Archivists have a lot of opportunities and
challenges ahead of us. Patricia Zimmerman’s
contribution to a recent volume of essays on home
28
movies describes how “home movies constitute an
imaginary archives that is never completed, always
fragmentary, vast, infinite.” She also adds that, “In the
popular imagination, archives often are framed as the
depositories of old, dead cultural artifacts. But archives
are never inert, as they are always in the process of
addition of new arenas and unknown objects. The
archive, then is, is not simply a depository, which
implies stasis, but is, rather, a retrieval machine defined
by its revision, expansion, addition, and change.”
The most important thing for us to remember is
that we need to speak out. Writers have been the most
consistent in pushing this. Writer Sara Paretsky
declares that “The only way to keep ourselves free is to
speak, not to let ourselves be silenced, either by
pernicious laws, or by mob screaming.”. There is,
however, always reason to hope. Paretsky also notes,
“When I enter a library, when I enter the world of
books, I feel the ghosts of the past on my shoulders,
urging me to courage.” Archivists need volumes such as
a very short introduction, ones that reach a broad
readership in clear and forceful ways.
And we need to remember that many have made
kind comments about archivists and their work, such as
"Archivists are angels in charge of an author's afterlife:
a flick of the wing and they can either disperse it to the
winds or whoosh it into the right hands; they stand with
feathers, not matches, between an author and the
vultures who want the author's remains."
29
So, in conclusion, in introducing the public to
archives we need to capture their significance and their
magic, without being whiny about their perceived lack
of support. It may be that this support s lacking because
we have not made a strong enough case to the right
people and at the right times. Infiltrating into
publication series, like Oxford’s short introductions,
would be a good place to start anew.
Thank you.
30