The readings for this week will be:
In Jimmerson, pp. 475-494 & pp 519-548
In Cook: pp. 217- 240Choose one of the 3 essays assigned and describe one in depth-- what interested you most about the topic? What challenges related to professional archival practice can you see?
I do not have my book in front of me so I am not sure what the title or author of the essay was but it was about preservation and it was i nthe Jimmerson book, page 475-494.
ReplyDeleteChallenge one: mistaken identity
Archivists are often confused with wizards. People believe that can bring back something that, well, just quite frankly can't be brought back. "No, I do not know what it said on this charred 200 year peice of paper. It has been lost to history."
Challege Two: where did you come from?!
Technology changes constantly and archivists are probably more aware of this than anyone. Twenty years ago the CD was a miracle. It was something that would always be around.
Well, hello there USB port! You are our miracle! You can hold so much more! We will treasure you forever.
Oh, whats that? A virtual cloud that can hold our docuements!!!! Yay!!!!
With the ever changing technology, how are archivists supposed to keep thier records. In a very paraphrased quote from the essay, "a clay tablet keeps better than an oral history." Indeed this is true, but even clay tablets eventually fall apart and so does paper, but it still stands a better chance of surviving than technology. For instance the archives/collections I worked for in undergrad had something (I can't remember what it was) but the only thing that could read it was in the Smithsonian!
Challenge Three: they were born this way...born digital that is....
With the technology change comes digital born files! How are archivists supposed to keep pages that are born digital safe and sound. Links break which means those pages are gone to history. Do they print them out and keep them with the ever increasing paperwork archivists already have? Do they use "Print Screen" and keep them on the cloud? I don't have the answer and most archivists don't have the answer. This, instead of lost to history, is an answer for the future!
Challenge four : It burns!
I learned something that blew my mind a little bit. I learned that it is not a accepted practice that everything is acid free in the archives. When I was in undergrad I made the arguement that the documents that were in acid free folders, you know the stuff that we didnt want to touch the acidic boxes, were safe. The folders would be the only thing that would touch the acid boxes. I was very curtly told that this was not the case and everything in the archives needed to be acid free. Well, hmm.
I forgot the part about why I chose preservation. I have loved preservation since I learned what it was! It was history! It was how we knew what happened (minus oral histories). I once fancied myself becoming an archivists but then I found exhibits and research fascinated me more!
DeleteDisclaimer for challenge four: I find it intriquing that what I propsed in undergrad was acutally mentioned in the article! I knew I my thoughts had some merit. :)
DeleteNice work, Melanie.
DeleteYour observation about dead links is an important one.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJimerson’s essay discusses the issue of the archivist’s role in controlling the past. His philosophy is grounded in the ethical archival representation. His argument emphatically implores the idea that archivists hold power—the power to control the archival records of the past, and to effectually corroborate historical accounts of events where collective memory may fail. His social justice view of the archival practice creates a powerful argument for archivists to “fill in the gaps” for marginalized groups. Jimerson reminds us that the original architects of the archival structures and principles were created by those in power, and that understanding the biases inherent in the creation of archival records as well as recognizing our own biases is paramount. Understanding that the presentation of records is socially constructed and affected by personal, political, and social bias may not be universally understood as a key role in archival practice. Jimerson’s essay creates a dialogue for librarians, curators, record managers, and other records practitioners to collaborate and commit to “public accountability, open government [records], cultural diversity, and social justice.” In addition, the author makes the claim that by controlling the records of the past, they are indeed controlling the future. An undertaking that should be professional, unbiased, equal, and performed with great integrity.
ReplyDeleteThe most interesting aspect of Jimerson’s topic is the social justice and inequality that can be found in the way that archival records are presented. The responsibility of archivists to engage, and go the “extra mile” to ensure that records are trustworthy and that previous biases are uncovered and corrected is a concept that I had not attributed to archival presentation, or records in general.
I see many challenges related to professional archival practice. Many that I had never considered such as arrangement and description, representation, and the power of archivists to create and re-create, or destroy the integrity of the original meaning of the records. The social consequences, and the evolution of the arrangement of records across time as well as the standardization of principles internationally across disciplines seems to be some of the greatest challenges that I have identified.
Thoughtful and articulate summary here, April.
ReplyDelete"An undertaking that should be professional, unbiased, equal, and performed with great integrity." Yes, and subject to review over time.
Jimmerson promotes the importance of setting the record straight for groups that have no record or whose record is neglected. While this idea seems lofty, it stands in contrast to Jimmerson's overall message of remaining unbiased. To promote one group's history over another or to use records to grind a personal axe does not keep the professional, unbiased mission of the archivist pure. High ethical integrity separates true archivists from social engineers seeking to use their positions to prey on unsuspecting researchers, educators, and students. The dedication to remain unbiased is a crucial challenge that must be met by professional archivists that wish to be respected and followed. It appears that Jimmerson understands but then takes a step back when promoting the settling of social scores.
ReplyDeleteLogan Beam
ReplyDeleteJimerson explains in his article presented on page 519 on the troubling revelations of preservation within audio recordings and furthermore speaks volumes on what the process may be life for visual recordings. The understanding of the introduction alone allows for the reader, being myself that is to understand the stressful nature it is to preserve audio recordings especially under the knowledge that many historians don’t know how to preserve the recordings. The manner in which Jimerson speaks about the detailed destruction that each audio material can have just in terms of age can moderately speak on how audio recording must be held. Take in point acetate or instantaneous recordings are prone to serious destructive concerns as opposed to type 78’s which are both before the time of cassette players. The handling of these different recordings would determine how much care would be needed and even if to handle some of these objects would be needed. I understand that historians would need for historical evidence to be taken from acetate recordings but if at this moments, the handling of these recordings were to be destroyed, the recordings would then be left alone.
Jimerson also explains as previous explained in my last paragraph, the different type’s audio recordings. The one that surprises me is the Magnetic Tape Recordings and how that has been the audio recording that have historically lasted the longest and were considered the sturdiest. This is understandable in the sense that every audio recording is going to have plastic or tape somewhere within the audio recordings but within Magnetic tape recordings, this is very minimal which proves effective. The reason for this being so successful is due to deterioration being so provident in other recordings but not so much in magnetic recordings.
Jimerson also takes an interesting look at the preservation of formats, size and speeds, and priorities needed within each different type of recordings from the instantaneous to the LP’s, to the Magnetic, to the modern day recordings. The format obviously being how the recordings were made, the size and speed meaning how the audio recordings were processed and how much data is controlled within each disk or cassette, and priority meaning. He also speaks of determining when to re-record and the preservation of re-recording. These two measure can determine whether the audio format is able to re-record and if the recording itself will be able to be transferred without the chance of diminishing the recordings or erase them all together. You have to take a chance when you are either re-recording or transferring and audio recording to another format. You run multiple risks of damaging the audio recording, erasing it, or destroying the tape all together especially if you transfer for an LP to and cd-r by todays means. Could be the background sound or the introduction, or even the defying moment of historical authenticity.
He does speak of the pros and cons of each situation and each one has their place in Jimerson’s work. I can only assume it is up to each historian to take their chance in the audio recordings and the transferring of data. You have it now that you can preserve a recording for the 1920’s and preserve it in an audio file that could last generations more by putting it in a modern digitalized file or through an internet source. This can be seen as the living Rebel Yell produced by actual Confederate Soldiers from the 1920’s is forever recorded through a digitized source. However if this would not have been properly recorded or transferred, then the Rebel Yell may never had been heard by this or the last’s generation. This is only one example that I know to be true. I also understand that without the attempt then it also may have never been heard as most museums don’t have a machine for the type of audio file from the 1920’s. It’s all risk or reward with audio files and that is what I believe Jimerson is speaking of. Not in those words of course but that would be the general message that I understand.
Disclaimer, I posted this last week and on time. I do not know what happened to my post, it is no longer there! Thankfully, I had it saved in a word document.
ReplyDelete