Heather MacNeil, Associate Professor and Chair of the Archival Studies Program in the School of Library, Archival & Information Studies at The University of British Columbia.
Heather challenged archival institutions to recognize that the materials which they preserve are not the best reflection of original intent, nor can they ever quite be. Primarly, this is due to the nature of a “work” itself. Heather observes that textual critics struggle with this same issue. Those in the Authorial school argue that the job of the textual critic is to defend the ideal instantiation of a work against the corruption of editors, meddling family members, institutions, and even the author himself (when he is not being himself at his best, presumably). This is an extraordinarily difficult task; consider James Joyce’s Ulysses which has multiple publications with a variety of edits, many under Joyce’s own authority. The Sociological school of thought advises against the emphasis on an ideal text and instead advocates the collection of all variant editions. Authorial Intent should no longer be the only legitimate rationale.
The same reasoning applies to archival practices. Heather points out that the Archival mindset is the preservation of an object such that it best reflects its state when it was last in “active use”. As a result, many archived objects carry a well-developed history of evolution, ownership, etc… which cuts off once the object is archived. The error here is that one must recognize that archival institutions themselves have their own ideological perspectives and particular forms of display.
Acknowledging this, Heather recommends that such institutions ought to publicly record the descision-making process they go through in steps such as artifact appraisal and conservation. As well, the continuing history of that object as it is passed from one archival institution to another or ‘restored’ and reinterpreted over time.
Some questions:
Do you have recommendations for the online display of archived objects?
- When an archived object is displayed online, that is yet another transition in context. What is missing for online collections are selection criteria and other context.
A discussion that came up:
The work of an archivist is often seen as one of authentication. By describing an object, they are seen as having authenticating it. Even if archivists deny this, one survey has shown that users perceive that archivists have authenticated what they are viewing. Heather would rather connect archival description with accountability rather than authentication.
Also, responding to a question about the user-perspective, Heather recommended the book, Archive Stories: Facts, Fictions, and the Writing of History
