Things I Would Like To Point Out Pt. 2

Recently I read “Business History Resources in the National Archives” by Meyer H. Fishbein. This article was a great overview of the resources available to business historians at the National Archives. It basically described the business related records available in most of the major record groups. Published in 1964, Fishbein thoroughly explained what was in the records thru World War II.
Considering that World War II records had only been created twenty years earlier, I was borderline surprised that some of these records had been processed. While I am aware that not everything could be sent to the archives for various security reasons, there was still processed material available in the 1960s. It is now 2011 and I do not research anything past World War II because things are so rarely available and often unprocessed. I think this article is a great example of the great speed in which archivists processed records in the early years. I cannot give one reason why this occurred. It probably was a combination of vigor and funding.
The full house at the National Archives in Washington, DC on Friday is proof that there is a definite demand for records. I guess that these days, it’s a lot harder to meet the demand.

Metal Boxes

I hate the metal boxes that the archives stopped using decades ago. Whenever I touch a metal box, I feel as if I just got tetanus. And its not exactly easy to keep track of files when they are piled on top of each other. I know that it can't be easy for archivists to stack dented metal boxes. I would like to know why any of these boxes still exist at such a major institution. They've re boxed many torn Hollinger boxes, so why not replace metal boxes?

When Purses and Archives Meet

I was super excited to learn that this month’s issue of Elle magazine featured an article about the Coach archives. “The Handbag Hunter” is one of the few articles in Elle that I’ve ever finished (I usually buy it for the pictures; I really don’t care about the articles about what creative directors are currently creatively doing.)
I love Coach. I lost count of how many Coach bags I purchased and did not register between 2006 and 2007. This was my second of three obsessions with particular purse designers. Smashed in between my Dooney & Bourke obsession (2005-2006) and my Juicy Couture obsession (2008-present), Coach is near and dear to my heart and to my budget. Currently in my purse, I have a Coach wallet, sunglasses, eyeglasses, and eyeglass case. I have learned long ago that a classic looking Coach never goes out of style.
But apparently the people at Coach have not always known this. They have not always had an archive and I’m not shocked by this. In recent years, their Classics collection has become popular to the point in which they are now reissuing older designs. A collecting archive is obviously necessary for this company. But the problem I discovered in this article is that no one cares about the provenance. While a Coach archivist can obviously be trained to spot a real and fake Coach bag, a normal archive would not allow an archivist to simply purchase pieces at a flea market without knowing a little bit about the object’s history.

Things I Would Like To Point Out Pt. 1

*I am writing this blog entry not as an extended blog entry but just as one thing that I noticed recently and would like to point out*
Today, I read another R.D.W. Connor work on the National Archives. I have to admit that I have been reading his works a lot lately. I admire his writing style because he had a wonderful habit of incorporating historical writing with his discussions of everything archival.
Today, I read his article “FDR Visits the National Archives” (published in 1949.) This article is typical of his style. He explained how he became the first Archivist of the United States (all thanks to some Photostats of Revolutionary War Navy records that he gave to FDR) and how FDR had been the driving force of the archival movement in the United States. I would just like to point out that a decade earlier, Connor argued that the archival movement in the United States predated FDR. Just look at how the death of a president affects historical thought. Obviously Connor could not be objective like other historians of his time period claimed to be.