Archives Found

 Crossposted from Austin is for Archivists

The Texas Capitol and Visitors Center are worth a visit while you’re in Austin for SAA. The Capitol, built in the Renaissance Revival style, was completed in 1888, and the dome is taller than the national capitol in Washington, D.C. It is the largest state capitol building (360,000 square feet) with approximately 400 rooms and 900 windows.

The Capitol was constructed of “Sunset Red” granite that was quarried in Marble Falls, Texas. Construction was not paid for in cash, but in the exchange of 3,000,000 acres of land in the Texas Panhandle that later became the famed XIT Ranch.

The lush Capitol grounds include, among others, statues to the Heroes of the Alamo, volunteer firemen and Texas Rangers. The Visitors Center is located in the southeast corner of the grounds and has both permanent and rotating exhibits, including Voices from San Jacinto, covering the final battle of the Texas Revolution.

Some links for further reading:

Texas Capitol History- Texas State Preservation Board

Monument Guide and Capitol Grounds- Texas State Preservation Board

Beyond the Dome: Hidden Places and Secret Spaces in the Texas State Capitol (exhibit & video link)

How to get there from the SAA meeting hotel (Hilton; 500 East 4th St):

The distance from the Hilton is close to a mile, but easily navigable on foot or by public transportation, and the process is similar– so if you walk there, but want a ride back, you can take the ‘Dillo. Keep in mind that the ‘Dillo runs from 7am-7pm on weekdays only. The ‘Dillo is 50¢ for a two-hour pass.

Link to ‘Dillo information and pdf map here.
Map of area and distance

 A quick roundup of recent articles about the effects of state budgets on archives and preservation.

 Economy hurts effort to preserve the past- The Columbus Dispatch

“Preserving the past is important, but if governments don’t start spending and borrowing less, there won’t be much of a future left for our kids to enjoy,” Sepp said.

The Ohio Historical Society’s budget has shrunk by 13 percent in the past eight years. The society has laid off its preservation staff and is relying on other workers and outside conservators to monitor and maintain collections.

With all of its storage space filled and no money to expand, the society is going through its collections to decide what not to keep. It has virtually stopped accepting donations of artifacts. In some cases, donors sell or give the artifacts away.

 Gov. Jennifer Granholm to propose pay cuts, eliminating departments- MLive.com

Granholm will propose the elimination of one state department, History, Arts and Libraries, and ask Lt. Gov. John Cherry lead a commission to recommend further reductions. The goal would be to reduce the total number of departments from 18 to eight.

Archives chief cuts own job to trim budget - The State (SC)

The Archives and History agency preserves and promotes the state’s heritage. The archives center houses three centuries’ worth of historical documents. The agency also coordinates historic preservation efforts and history education. The latest cuts reduce its staff to 61 employees, Stroup said.

Historical Society puts microfilming state newspapers on hold- Missourian

“There might be people 30 years from now that will be interested in the same kind of research that I’m doing, and it’ll be impossible if there aren’t any archives,” Meyer said.

Off the records- newsreview.com (Reno, NV)

Guy Louis Rocha may be the only state agency chief in Nevada’s capital who has twice experienced his agency being targeted for total elimination by two different state budget directors.

“They wanted to pave paradise and put up a parking lot,” quipped Rocha, referring to the Joni Mitchell song, in which she sings, “That you don’t know what you’ve got/Till it’s gone.”

For more than a quarter of a century, state archives administrator Rocha—like many state agency directors—has been Sisyphus, pushing his operation into the 20th century repeatedly, only to have it roll back down under the pressure of chronic budget crises or intramural state government politics. He was never able to push the agency into the 21st century.

State erases 1.6 billion budget deficit- The Arizona Republic

Even before the budget was finalized, details emerged on what those cuts mean.

The state parks director has said a $25 million cut will force the closure of five parks; the Parks Board meets Tuesday to decide which ones to close.

The state Library and Archives Department is ironing out details for an agency-wide furlough; it could affect operating hours of the new state museum, which was dedicated just two weeks ago.

Arizona State University has announced furloughs of 10 to 15 days for most of its faculty and staff, but that was when the school thought it would share in a $100 million budget cut. The Legislature authorized $141 million in cuts to the three universities.

Some more information:

Preserving the American Historical Record (PAHR)

Legislation “To authorize the Archivist of the United States to make grants to States for the preservation and dissemination of historical records” will be reintroduced soon (with a new bill number) by Representatives Maurice Hinchey (D-NY-22) and John McHugh (R-NY-23). Talk to your representatives and your state archivist about supporting PAHR.

Heritage Health Index by Heritage Preservation and IMLS- 2005 report on the state of collections in the United States can be used in discussions with local and state boards about preservation. (Does anyone out there know if this is being updated?) Full 2005 report can be found here.

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

Welcome back from the holiday break!

The roads are icy here this morning, and classes won’t start for another two days, so campus is a fairly quiet place. I’ve found that this is a great time to get work done in my office. Sadly, the campus Starbucks has restricted hours until the students return… so I’ve brought my own caffeine supply from home.

So, a few thoughts from the break.  First, an article about the Country Music Hall of Fame, which is relevant because items were given and money promised by a donor who committed suicide and was then sued for swindling investors. According to the article, the museum settled with the estate and paid some of the money back in order not to lose either the donated items or other items purchased with money from the donor. If this happened to your institution, how would you handle it?  Many archives, libraries and museums are self-insured, meaning that a lawsuit like this could be a really big problem.

Next up, an article about the Library of Congress/American Folklife Center’s “Inauguration 2009 Sermons and Orations” project, which aims to collect sermons and speeches made between January 16-25th about the new Obama administration. I think that this is an interesting project, and I wonder what kind of diverse geographical response they’ll receive (if any), and what other outreach has been done to congregations outside of the Beltway?

Last, an op-ed titled “Hard Times, a Helping Hand” that details an old story of a mysterious benefactor in Canton, Ohio. While the op-ed is about the author’s discovery that the man who helped out his neighbors in 1933 was in fact, his grandfather, I was of course also interested in the suitcase full of documents and what they held. I hope that a regional collection like the University of Akron Special Collections or the Western Reserve Historical Society will talk to the author about donating this interesting piece of Canton history.

Do you have collection development plans for the new year? Have your plans changed based on recent economic factors? Now is a good time to reassess the goals and needs of your repository for 2009. What’s next?

I’ve been busy with life over the past week or so, and have several half-finished blog posts (and even more ideas) waiting in the wings, but wanted to point out a few archives-related news items in the meantime.

Recalling a Mission to Capture an Era’s Misery

“Migrant Mother,” Dorothea Lange’s image of a weathered, grimy Depression-era woman in California surrounded by her children, is one of the most famous photographs of the 20th century, as is “Fleeing a Dust Storm,” Arthur Rothstein’s shot of a farmer and his two young sons in the Oklahoma Dust Bowl whipped by the wind, a shack in the background.

The politics and the photographers who shaped those images under the auspices of the federal Farm Security Administration come to life in “Documenting the Face of America: Roy Stryker and the F.S.A./O.W.I. Photographers,” an hourlong documentary on most PBS stations Monday night. The film shows how Mr. Stryker turned a small government agency’s New Deal project to document poverty into a visual anthology of thousands of images of American life in the 1930s and early ’40s that helped shape modern documentary photography; more than 160,000 are now at the Library of Congress.

Full article here.

Under ‘Kafkaesque’ Pressure, Heir to Kafka Papers May Yield Them

 Franz Kafka’s final wish before his death in 1924 — that his papers be burned — was famously defied by his friend, the writer Max Brod. The world got “The Trial,” “The Castle” and the adjective Kafkaesque; Mr. Brod got the papers.

When Mr. Brod fled to Tel Aviv from Prague on the last train out in 1939 as the Nazis rolled in, he had with him a suitcase full of Kafka’s documents.

Here, he took up with his secretary, and when he died in 1968, he bequeathed to her the remaining Kafka papers, as well as his own from a rich cultural career. For nearly 40 years, the secretary, Esther Hoffe, held the world of Kafka scholarship on tenterhooks, keeping the documents in her ground-floor apartment on Spinoza Street, some of them piled high on her desk (it was originally Mr. Brod’s), where she typed all day and took her meals.

The last time a scholar was permitted into the apartment was in the 1980s. Later, Ms. Hoffe sold the manuscript for “The Trial” for $2 million. No one knows what remains.

Full article here.

With regards to the Kafka papers, I’d like to open up a few fanciful questions: what value do you think the papers still hold? Obviously the creator did not wish them to be viewed or used by others. Further, the original order has possibly, perhaps probably been destroyed– no way to know for certain. Will it be possible to differentiate and delineate between papers created and used in different ways by Kafka, Brod, Hoffe, and possibly others?  Given the conditions, story, provenance, knowledge of these papers– how would you approach them? Understanding the wishes of the record creator: should the papers be preserved and opened to scholars at all?

From a statement by the Society of American Archivists on International Archives Day:

The International Council on Archives at 60

 

Sixty years ago, the archives of Europe were just starting to recover from World War II. Records were destroyed, damaged, and displaced; archives buildings were dark and cold if not partially in ruins. In Asia, too, records and archives had suffered grievously during the war, but that story was not yet well known in the United States.

 

The years before the war had seen sporadic attempts to create an international association of archivists, but none was successful. Now, in the wake of the massive damage of the war, the time had come.

 

As the 1946 president of the Society of American Archivists, Solon J. Buck used his presidential address to call for an international association of archivists. “Civilization,” he said, “rests squarely on documents,” and archivists everywhere should be concerned with the preservation of the “archives of mankind.” With the support of SAA, the National Archives, and the Library of Congress, Buck proposed to the then-new UNESCO that it call a world congress of archivists to establish an international association. UNESCO agreed, and the organizing meeting took place June 9–11, 1948. The group, which included representatives from Czechoslovakia, France, Great Britain, Italy, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, and the United States, with observers from Australia, UNESCO, and the military occupation authorities of Germany, founded the International Council on Archives.

 

Today the International Council on Archives is exactly that: international. It has branches throughout the world, and now has as members professional associations such as SAA, archives other than national archives, and individuals. It is a resilient 60-year-old.

 

The Society of American Archivists, as in 1946, is committed to cooperation in support of archives throughout the world. Although the situation that led to the founding of ICA—the massive damage of the Second World War—is long past, archives today remain threatened by war, natural disaster, and the unwitting actions of people. On this 60th anniversary of the ICA, the Society of American Archivists marks its unshakable conviction that, as Buck said, civilization rests on documents and archives truly are the heritage of humankind.

The International Council on Archives XVIth Congress will be held in Kuala Lumpur from 21-27 July, and is titled “Archives, Governance, and Development: Mapping Future Society.” Most of the sessions sound extremely interesting. Because the philosophies and histories of archival development vary between countries (and in some cases, vary quite a lot), conferences like the ICA can be valuable tools for sharing best practices across cultures. I’m hoping to make it to an ICA conference in the next few years… perhaps when it’s a bit closer to home than Malaysia.

I’ve been slowly catching up with the rest of the world with regards to watching the John Adams HBO miniseries. While I’m only up to the third episode (Don’t Tread on Me), I’ve become somewhat fascinated by the choices that were made by the producers and directors in the name of storytelling, and I’ve been doing some poking around online to see what others  think about the series. In particular, check out Boston 1775’s “Quizzing John Adams” posts for some interesting thoughts and links.  
Last year I had a chance to see John Adams: Unbound at the Boston Public Library, and while the exhibit was interesting, I was completely fascinated by the digitized materials. Being able to look at both the transcript and the handwritten notations of Adams throughout his personal library seemed so, well, personal to me. His one-sided arguments with various thinkers of the time could be a valuable resource to researchers looking to uncover his motives in one area or another.

You can check out the digitized Adams Family Papers at the Massachusetts Historical Society, including a new online discussion of documents relating to specific episodes of the miniseries. Due to the hard work of one of my grad school classmates, Jeremy Dibbell, you can now compare your library to that of John Adams on LibraryThing, and you can view a digital version of John Adams’ personal copy of the Declaration of Independence here.

While these important projects were funded generously over the years by a number of foundation grants, I think that they can in some ways serve as a model for smaller but still important collections in other institutions. The level of access to this information that is now provided to researchers using these documents is wildly above the level of access that many repositories have for even their most important collections. Through dogged publicity, grant writing, and support, these institutions have managed to create a model that is much more useful and interconnected than previous incarnations of accessibility. Even though I’m late to the party on this one, kudos to all involved in these projects.

Continuing my thoughts about historical markers in Denver; I noticed something interesting about the front steps of the Colorado State Capitol building. Carved into the fifteenth step (yes, I counted) was the inscription “One Mile Above Sea Level.” Three steps above that on step eighteen, a round, gold-colored marker was embedded in 1969 stating that it is “5,260 feet [1 mile] above sea level.” A third marker was installed in 2003 when the distance was apparently measured again. What’s so special about this?

Well, for starters, in conjunction with the nearby Sand Creek marker, it shows that perhaps Coloradans are more willing than the average bear to admit that they were wrong; a generally admirable trait. Furthermore, I don’t think that it’s stretching to say that both were situations in which the understanding or measurement of the past was regarded as being no longer valid. While the mile-high marker probably didn’t do as much harm to historical memory as the Civil War marker, I think that it would be interesting to learn more about the process by which each was updated. Additionally, I think that by adding markers instead of modifying or removing those that were already in place, the various groups have helped to show that history is not static and that as understanding and opinion shifted, more information was added.

So what does all of this mean when it comes to archives? Well, in some cases, when the understanding of an historical actor shifts, there is renewed interest in reviewing archival material related to the person and their situation. Perhaps a scandal, or a new piece of legislation, or an anniversary compels researchers to take a different tack when approaching various records. Sometimes new materials come to light years after a collection has been accessioned and processed and the dominant version of history has been accepted. As archivists, one of the challenges of providing access to collections is to place the documents within the context of the historical narrative without judging the records or the records creators. I think that in situations where new material is received, or a reexamination is warranted, that it makes sense to not only reevaluate the organization and understanding of the collection as it stands, but also to document the thinking behind any changes that may be made, and the reasoning for doing so. By doing this we can attempt to preserve not only the documents, but also create a new record of shifts in growth and understanding that could ultimately become just as valuable.

I’m going to admit something here: I love to read historical markers, and I generally keep one eye peeled for them because they can be so unexpectedly interesting or intriguing. I can’t seem to resist a bronze plaque. I was in Denver last week for a workshop and for the AIC annual meeting, and I spent some time exploring the area around the Colorado capitol building.

Part of the reason that historical markers fascinate me is that they provide a glimpse of what was thought by some group of influential persons at some point in time, as to be truth so important that it should be immortalized in fifty words or less and riveted to something immoveable. Thinking about the preservation of heritage as a starting point, there are some similarities in intent between this and archives that are readily apparent: obviously the sign shows information that was meant to be preserved, as well as shared with a wider public audience. The paths diverge here; the marker was created with the intent of display, and the preservation of the plaque itself is not necessarily the intent, while documents housed in an archive are generally judged to be of enduring value and were created as a byproduct of some activity.

However, here’s where things meet back up for me: is the plaque a transactional record of an activity? I think that it can be. For example, one of the plaques on the plaza in front of the capitol building reads as follows:

The controversy surrounding this Civil War monument has become a symbol of Coloradans’ struggle to understand and take responsibility for our past. On November 29, 1864, Colorado’s First and Third Cavalry, commanded by Colonel John Chivington, attacked Chief Black Kettle’s peaceful camp of Cheyenne and Arapahoe Indians on the banks of Sand Creek, about 180 miles southeast of here. In the surprise attack, soldiers killed more than 150 of the village’s 500 inhabitants. Most of the victims were elderly men, women, and children.

Though some civilians and military personnel immediately denounced the attack as a massacre, others claimed the village was a legitimate target. This Civil War monument, paid for by funds from the Pioneers’ Association and the State, was erected on July 24, 1909, to honor all Colorado soldiers who had fought in battles of the Civil War in Colorado and elsewhere. By designating Sand Creek a battle, the monument’s designers mischaracterized the actual events. Protests led by some Sand Creek descendants and others throughout the twentieth century have since led to the widespread recognition of the tragedy as the Sand Creek Massacre.

This plaque was authorized by Senate Joint Resolution 99-017

This marker was clearly added more recently, and reflects a shift in both understanding and public attitude, as well as considerable pressure and discussion by various groups. While I’m not sure I’d consider the marker to be something that I’d add to my collection, I do think that a discussion of the historical or informational value is a valid one, and I think that documents created as a product of the discussion and shift in sentiment would be interesting and of enduring value to persons seeking to understand how historical memory can change.

On the front page of today’s Dallas Morning News, the discussion continues over whether documents from the Dallas DA’s office that relate to the Kennedy assassination in 1963 will head to the National Archives in Washington D.C. (where the Warren Commission materials and the other assassination-related documents are held), or whether they will be donated to the Sixth Floor Museum in the former Texas School Book Depository building.
I can understand the desire for Dallas residents to keep as much of the local history and information about the assassination in Dallas as possible. Furthermore, NARA has not yet examined the documents to appraise whether or not they would fall within their collecting scope; ie. whether there is information of historical or evidentiary value that belongs with the other related collections. It’s possible that NARA might pass on this particular collection, anyway. But I think that there are a few more questions to be raised, particularly:

-to whom do these documents currently belong? The creator of the documents (DA in 1963)? The Dallas DA’s office? who has the authority to donate records that belong to the city of Dallas?

-what is the provenance of these records, and why are they just coming to light now? is the collection complete, or has it been ravaged/damaged by souvenir hunters or others?

-what does the collection cover? how much related information is contained, and how much of it is unique versus copies of documents held elsewhere? how much was originated in the DA’s office?

One of my other concerns was also shared by a federal judge by letter to the potential donor and quoted in the article, namely the conditions and continued existence of the Sixth Floor Museum.

The National Archives’ JFK collection “is a treasure trove of information, preserved under ideal conditions and accessible to the public,” Judge Tunheim wrote in a Feb. 22 letter to Mr. Watkins.

He also argued against giving the documents to The Sixth Floor Museum. “I have always been concerned that it may not be a proper archival facility, particularly for documents, and may not continue into perpetuity,” the judge wrote.

From my own visit to the Sixth Floor Museum and a subsequent visit to their website, I noted that many (if not most) of their materials appear to be copies of material held elsewhere or widely available, with the exception of their oral history collection. Without having been there in a research capacity, I obviously cannot comment on the storage of their materials, but I hope that the potential donor/s have been able to view and understand the conditions under which they will be cared for, available for use, and handled. The expectations under which materials are given should be understood by both donor and institution before anything else happens.

Full article here: Dallas DA says unearthed JFK documents will likely be given to Sixth Floor