Archives Found

One “solution” that I think we’ll be hearing more about as the economic climate gets tougher: attempting to sell parts (or all of) a collection. The General Motors Heritage Collection has announced that they are selling cars from their collection this month, including hundreds of concept and rare vehicles that have been stored by GM since being built. One way to look at this is from an appraisal and collections management standpoint: is this sale accomplishing goals such as the narrowing of the collection scope or removing vehicles that do not contribute to the strength of the collection? Perhaps the two-millionth Saturn from 1999 or the 2007 Yukon “CSI Vegas” aren’t the most important pieces of the collection– but it depends. Showing the progression of Saturn as a car from the first one in 1991 to the two millionth one in 1997 could be vitally important for some reason– it’s the job of the curatorial/museum staff to figure out what makes sense, and perhaps also to figure out whether the original reasoning for keeping these vehicles is still sound. Articles in the media seem to focus on the fact that GM is having a crisis, and the sale of these heritage vehicles could raise a little bit of cash– but even if they sold all of them, it would be a drop in the bucket (probably less than $5 million dollars by one estimate). I think this is more important in terms of discussing history in broader terms: whose responsibility is it to make sure that history isn’t being lost by selling off pieces to the highest bidder? Are we still able to understand and interpret in the same manner without having the physical object? What is the import of a single object, and does that differ from the importance that it holds within the context of the rest of the collection, particularly considering that all of the items in this auction have an ironclad provenance attached? (They’ve been in the custody of GM since they were conceived and “born”). I think we’ll see a lot of individuals trying to part with items perceived to have historical value, and probably more institutions doing the same, particularly corporate collections.

A few articles and posts about the sale:

Cash-Starved GM to part with trove of historic, unique vehicles- Detroit Free Press

Museum: Portion of GM heritage car collection up for sale- Lansing State Journal

GM’s own heritage collection is up for sale- Huffington Post

Classic GM cars to go on the block- Los Angeles Times

There are a lot of ways that an economic depression can affect archives, libraries, museums, and other cultural institutions. Many of these are detrimental to the work that we do– including cuts in funding for staff, programs, and projects, and I don’t wish to downplay the effects of those things. However, let’s think positively for a moment.

I think that this can also be seen as an opportunity for us to rediscover ourselves. One of the fundamental truths about being an archivist is that there is never enough time, money, space, or staff to accomplish everything that we would like to do. I think that’s probably true for museum staff and libraries, too. When we’re forced to consider how we spend our money, time, and resources, we’re appraising how we work and what we need most. This can bring us down to the most fundamental level: when was the last time you revisited your collection scope, policies, and mission statement? Do your recent/future/past accessions conform to your institutional goals? When was the last time that you revisited your policies, and do they still fit?

This can be a good opportunity to take a look at your backlog, your processing priorities, and your outreach plan for 2009. How much space do you have for future accessions, and what kind of plan will you have for processing? Which resources are used most often by researchers, and how does that information fit into your desired outreach and institutional mission? Have you objectively assessed your needs and wishes for the coming year?

Most importantly, how are you advocating for your collections? What are you doing to reach stakeholders inside and outside of your institution, and how do you plan to get or keep a seat at the table when decisions are made about funding? Even with reduced funding, how can you create and hold positive attention for your collection and your staff? Are you making a case for continued funding on a daily basis through both your work and your advocacy?

Not all of these things require money, but they do require planning and intention. Food for thought. Have you changed the way that you do business because of funding issues? Will you?

I’ve been reading Advocating Archives: An Introduction to Public Relations for Archivists (ed. Elsie Freeman Finch), and one of the first things that she talks about in her chapter (Talking to the Angel) is the different, overlapping roles that archivists play with researchers and each other. The three user models that she discusses include archivist as servant, gatekeeper, or partner. All of those have different values in various circumstances. However, I’m wondering if it’s time to think about a fourth, somewhat overlooked role: archivist as decider.

In the context of the article, which was published in 1994, appraisal doesn’t fit into the definition of gatekeeper because the models are geared towards reference functions and interactions with specific patrons. However, appraisal is a huge piece of any archival puzzle. Basically, if the collection is not processed or minimally accessible, does not have even a collection-level description, doesn’t have any digital representation– does it really exist from the perspective of the user? Because archivists spend much of their time making decisions that indirectly and directly affect future researchers, I don’t think that appraisal can be left out of the equation.

Here’s why: as we make more collections digitally available, we are directly affecting the reference experience of users who do not seek the help or guidance of an archivist. While some patrons will still contact the archives for assistance, many others will assume that “everything is online,” particularly if no disclaimer exists on the website to remind them otherwise. Therefore, the act of deciding to emphasize one collection of records through additional access, whether by processing, digitization or cataloging access points has a profound effect on the experience of the end user/patron.

I’ve spent some time recently thinking about the relationship between archivists and researchers, and particularly enjoyed two articles by Catherine Johnson/Wendy Duff  titled “Chatting Up the Archivist: Social Capital and the Archival Researcher,”  and “Accidentally Found on Purpose: Information-Seeking Behavior of Historians in Archives.”Depending on the focus of your collections and the types of researchers that you typically have (or seek), I’d like to hear whether others have found these to be interesting, too. While I don’t think that patrons are at the forefront of every appraisal decision, I think that exactly where they fit into a collection or digitization discussion could be interesting to discuss further.

An article in the LA Times this morning stunned me: Reagan Library unable to fully account for 80,000 artifacts. I’m interested in finding out more about this, because I’m wondering about the status of the Reagan Papers. I think that the museum/artifacts staff and area is separated from the artifacts and donated items, but it obviously raises a lot of questions about security, access, and proper recordkeeping procedures. Talk about terrible publicity– and right before their C-Span broadcast, too. I wonder if any of the allegations will be addressed during their live broadcast tomorrow night? Unfortunately, I won’t be able to watch, as I’ll be traveling, but I’ll definitely look forward to catching it online later. I really hope that C-Span decides to rerun the episodes before the elections next year, and potentially at a better time/day of the week.

I’ve been poking around in the public beta sandbox of Archivists’ Toolkit in the past month or two, and I’ve found a lot to like there. While I don’t have a local instance installed with our data just yet, I think I/we may take the leap towards further testing on a dedicated server soon. So far, I’m the only one playing with this, but we’ve initiated the hiring process for some actual IT support (fingers crossed). I’ve only glanced at Archon and ICA-AtoM so far, but I haven’t been as impressed. I’m thinking about trying out a trial version of Past Perfect this week, and I’m also trying to look at less-discussed software like Re:discovery’s Proficio. Any insights would be useful! I’d like to find something that integrates accessions, donor letters and files, catalog records, processed/unprocessed collection lists, provenance and condition reports, and other stuff, and especially allows export of finding aids in XML/EAD.