Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Stuff I Learned At Work Today



Today at work, I learned the following things about the National Archives in the 1940s: archivists had to count the amount of records they gave researchers; in 1941 property passes were first issued; and upon exiting, archivists were required to check researcher’s notes for accuracy.
Originally, reference room staff was required to count the amount of records they gave researchers and check that there was the same number of records upon return. Considering how much time this would have wasted, I’m not shocked that this practice is no longer in place. Staff would spend a considerable amount of their day counting records. It would also seriously limit the amount of records a researcher could go through. So I think we are all glad this practice has ceased.
In 1941, property passes were first issued to researchers. Apparently, things like books needed a pass back in the day. These property passes were used similar to coat checks. I remember when they got rid of property passes (roughly two years ago) and I was both relieved and frightened. I know they were a hassle, but at least they prevented property theft. And I had no idea property passes had been around for so long.
But the thing I find craziest is that archivists were required to check notes for accuracy. Needless to say, this is basically the opposite of what archivists are supposed to do today. But as a person who has been paid to prove other historians wrong, if this much detail had been paid attention to in archives over the years, there would be a lot less controversy in history. But it would also explain why so many early archivists were trained as historians and not librarians. They believed that it was necessary to understand the content of the records. I still think this is true, even though I know that no archivist could possibly know the content of all the records within their archives. Knowledge of the records creates an ease of access for researchers. But I won’t get into the generalist vs specialist debate today, especially because we all know what the current researcher views are about the topic.
As a conclusion, I would like to reiterate that I learned all of this at work today. I didn’t actually read the records that contained this information; they were read to me by my supervisor. So if any of it is wrong, I apologize.

No comments:

Post a Comment