Week 11 – Preserving History: Archives
The personal first-hand experiences recounted by the authors in Archive Stories: Facts, Fictions, and the Writing of History do a first-rate job of illustrating the strengths and weaknesses of the role of archives as guardians of history. Further the international range of the essays speaks to the fact that all archives in all places have many of the same problems and provide the same valuable resources as they try to preserve the records of society. The stories from Uzbekistan and India in the first section might lead the reader to believe western archives are more open or less manipulative of the information. This notion is immediately quashed by the next essays focusing on the U.S. National Archives and its exclusion of passport information, which of course beg the question of who decides what is worthy of inclusion and Tony Ballantyne’s experiences from Australia where changing cultural focus is altering the perceived value of a collection of Samuel E. Peal.
One of the overall observations made by the book is the recognition of the fact that differing factions often use archives as ‘tools’ as they try to fashion history to their benefit. The choice of what is or is not considered worthy of inclusion can have a lasting effect on how history is viewed. Archives each have their own individual missions. Government archives try to collect the paper that supports and explains the government’s accomplishments. Business archives concentrate on documenting the business of that business. Each archive therefore will choose to keep what fits their mission and pass by what does not. So from the very outset there is a choice of what gets kept. Beyond the ‘mission’ there are other influences at work such as pleasing (or not upsetting) the powers holding the funding for the institution. Or in extreme cases, not upsetting the ruling despot who might take offense and throw the archivists in jail or worse. Understanding the forces that affect archives can work both to give more value to the holdings and to point out possible biases in the holdings. All of which goes to help historians and other researchers to make better use of the valuable information found in archives.
I completely agree with your observation about archives having individual missions. As Professor Koslow pointed out today, sometimes archives are known as 'special collections,' implying that their contents are unique. So deciding what is going to be part of that unique collection is a great responsibility, as it shapes research for the future. It becomes difficult to study something that no longer exists. I also like your point about how outside influence has an impact on archives. Is it possible to have an unbiased collection? Someone makes the decisions about what to keep and what to disregard, and that person is most likely feeling pressure from external forces to present the archives in a certain way. The Peal Collection is one example. Since it didn't fit the national narrative of the moment, it gets pushed to the fringes.
ReplyDelete