Hornberger 1
Sarah Hornberger
February 6, 2011
INFO 560
Literature Review
Archival Accountability: A Question of Ethics and Justice
A popular view of the archivist is that of the neutral record-keeper. This is a perception that many recent scholars are trying to work against, especially when it comes to the archivist's own ideas of professionalism. In the past and present, archivists have altered, prevented access to, and destroyed records at the behest of an individual, corporation, or government. Record keepers have also remained neutral while caring for the records of ongoing atrocities and human rights violations. Archivists should be held accountable for their actions and should not be neutral at the cost of their humanity. The archivist's ethical responsibility is to maintain the complete truth for present and future use.
In his 2004 article Archives and Historical Accountability: Toward a Moral Theology of
Archives, James O'Toole calls for archivists to create an archival theology that has philosophical, symbolic, and applied ideas and practices to guide archivists through their profession. Until recently, many archivists had been thrown into the profession without archives-specific education and had not been taught by educators, but by archivists. These archivists trained their students on the how of archives, but not the why of archives. What are the ethical standards and the “broader moral vision” under which all archivists should operate?
1 O'Toole believes that the answer to this question lay in historical accountability. Archivists should appraise and acquire documents not to serve one group, but to serve all, and must not destroy or deny access to records that speak of atrocities or injustice. Historical accountability refers to how archivists will
1 James O'Toole, “Archives and Historical Accountability: Toward a Moral Theology of Archives,” Archivaria 58
(Fall 2004): 15.

Hornberger 2 be judged for their record-keeping, and whether they maintained an ethically sound archive or are complicit in using records to maintain or aid repression, terrorism, human rights violations, atrocities, genocide, et cetera. O'Toole's call for a more official moral and ethical framework for archivists is grounded in examples of “archivists” who have complied with reprehensible regimes and organizations in order to maintain their power or cover up past crimes. As such, this idea of an “archival theology” is necessary to maintain the integrity and the social relevance of the profession. This article is a great starting point in developing the moral framework under which archivists should operate so that they do not become villains in the historical record, but heroes, who preserve the truth, further democracy, and defend the right to access for all.
John M. Dirks helps to clarify the archivist's responsibility towards historical accountability in his article Accountability, History, and Archives: Conflicting Priorities or
Synthesized Strands?
According to Dirks, “historical accountability is how records help to hold yesterday's organizations and institutions accountable for their actions today.” 2
The increases in digital records, economic distress, concern for efficiency, and the demand for transparency in public records have created this demand for historical accountability; archivists need to expand their view of their professions to include social consciousness. Ethical record keeping “serves a society's need for the prevalence of justice, and the preservation of [rights] and values.” 3 The goals of historical accountability and the preservation of memory are not mutually exclusive as some archivists think, but work in tandem to create a sound archive. The maintenance of past information frequently shapes our current laws, morality, and sense of justice. Dirks' article creates a vision of both the archivist's and the public's perception of archives and calls for more
2 John M. Dirks, “Accountability, History, and Archives: Conflicting Priorities or Synthesized Strands?”
Archivaria 57 (Spring 2004): 30
3 Ibid., 38.

Hornberger 3 accountability without removing importance from preserving memory. His call for archival records to be viewed as evidence is not unfounded. Many records have revealed past and present injustices or have been destroyed to protect those who do not deserve protecting, such as when records of the Catholic Church were destroyed to cover up abuse. In this way, archives can be viewed as evidence lockers, and the archivist protects that evidence from being misused, lost, or destroyed. I admire Dirks' call for legislation in democratic societies—this would reinforce the need for ethical archivists and would increase public faith in a more transparent bureaucracy.
While both O'Toole and Dirks call for reform in archival accountability and morality,
Randall C. Jimerson takes these ideas a step further in his 2007 article Archives for All:
Professional Responsibility and Social Justice.
Like Dirks, Jimerson contends that the control of records and memory has been used to maintain power in the past, and as such, archivists have a moral responsibility to prevent the improper use of archives by repressive institutions. Jimerson states that:
Archives and records have contributed to the public interest in four ways:
1.
by holding political and social leaders accountable for their actions,
2.
by resisting political pressure in order to support open government,
3.
by redressing social injustices, and
4.
by documenting underrepresented social groups and fostering ethnic and community identities. (Jimerson 2007, 256)
Jimerson also explores the concepts of neutrality and objectivity, asserting that they are not synonymous ideas. He states that neutrality is not an obligation of archivists and encourages activism and public advocacy in the archival profession. The archivist should not be detached and can”engage in moral or political advocacy without sacrificing his or her professional standards.” 4
While Jimerson's article is repetitive at times, it brings social consciousness and
4 Randall C. Jimerson, “Archives for All: Professional Responsibility and Social Justice,” The American Archivist

Hornberger 4 awareness into archival discourse. In a profession that is thought of as logical, neutral, and cutand-dry, Jimerson calls for archivists not to sit idly by and give no opinion on social injustices and human rights violations. In the past, remaining “neutral” has actually perpetuated these crimes, and turning a blind eye makes an archivist just as complicit in atrocities as the work camp guards or the sexually abusive priests. Jimerson wants archivists to be viewed as moral and ethical, not as a part of “the system”, which all archivists should strive for in their work.
Jimerson's ideas should be adopted by archivists and archival organizations in order to create a world in which archivists are champions of truth and social justice.
As these articles maintain, the future of archives is not an army of record-keeping, neutral robots. An archivist's first responsibility is to the truth of the records they maintain, not to the whims of an individual or organization with their own best interests in mind. “We were just following orders” is a common excuse for those who participated in a genocide or other atrocity, and archivists who follow orders that compromise the integrity of an archive or help to maintain social injustices are as complicit as those who commit the actual crime. Archival organizations and educators need to work to create a new image of archives as bastions of truth and justice for all, not secretive tools of the government or unnecessary to maintain. O'Toole, Dirks, and
Jimerson have helped to create a theology and guidelines for archivists, and now they need to be implemented. Accountability needs to become as much a part of the archives profession as the preservation of memory is.
70 (Fall/Winter 2007): 272.

Hornberger 5
Works Cited
Dirks, John M. “Accountability, History, and Archives: Conflicting Priorities or Synthesized
Strands?” Archivaria 57 (Spring 2004): 29-49.
Jimerson, Randall C. “Archives for All: Professional Responsibility and Social Justice.”
The
American Archivist 70 (Fall/Winter 2007): 252-281.
O'Toole, James. “Archives and Historical Accountability: Toward a Moral Theology of
Archives.”
Archivaria 58 (Fall 2004): 3-19.