A Very Short Introduction to Archives: Reaching Out to an Informed Public

Richard J. Cox

Invited TalkQueens CollegeMay 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 digitally-born 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).

Historians and other scholars dependent on archival sources have maintained their faith in archival sources as the primary ingredients for their work.

12

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 well-educated 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 significance of the archival impulse. The public scholar and travel writer Bill Bryson has given us an exploration of the contrast between Shakespeare’s

13

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 preservation efforts for cultural and historical purposes. A growing number of historical studies on national archival policies and politics reveal how complex these

14

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 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.

15

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, to destroy personal papers to prevent others from learning about their activities; this is a recognition that records possess power and influence.

16

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 about the book, libraries, printing, access to information, censorship, privacy, and a host of related topics abound, there are few about archives and

17

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 Muir Whitehill’s analysis of independent historical societies, there is an interesting chapter about the immense array of archival repositories, termed a cloud

18

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 they work on developing new approaches to dealing with emerging and complicated records and

19

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 gap-riddled 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 implications for our everyday behavior and ways of communicating. Archivists have tended to view

20

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 extent, Big Data is just the latest digital era buzzword to capture our attention, and, like others, it will pass away

21

(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 there are the many accounts of individuals saving the papers of deceased family members. We also see this in

22

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 create them in order to provide memory of its victims. Not only has the murder of millions led to new kinds of

23

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 digital venues. While such concerns continue to be a challenge, and may always be so, I personally believe

24

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.

A Generation of Challenges

25

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 deal with, something that was barely thought about a generation or two ago. Archives and archivists have

26

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 the nature and contents of these sources. This might highlight the potential value of such sources better than

27

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 movies describes how “home movies constitute an imaginary archives that is never completed, always

28

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."

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

29

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