In Defense of Allowing Scanners in Research Rooms

At the Modern Archives Institute this past winter, lecturer after lecturer mourned the fact that the National Archives allows scanners in its research rooms, often citing that once you allow scanners in, you can never turn back. They encouraged us to ban scanners in our own research rooms and to only let staff/volunteers digitize records. I have never agreed with this concept, for a number of reasons. I believe that the damage done by researchers scanning records is negligible and in this economy, we are wasting money by trying to control things.

One argument against scanners is that researchers do not know how to properly handle records while scanning them. However, most researchers who bring scanners are not new. They are aware that they need copies of a large amount of records and have to make an investment in scanner. These researchers have used records before and therefore know how to handle them. And if they don’t handle records properly, shouldn’t your reference staff be monitoring them? By and large, the majority of the digitization staff hired by archives that I have met had little to no training or experience with records. I’ve seen staff handle records in a very poor manner, mainly because they are not qualified to work in an archive in the first place.

Another argument against scanners is the light exposure. It’s true that extended light exposure, like other bad environmental conditions, can damage certain types of records. But one scan isn’t going to do much damage. Yes, we should be worried if a record is so popular that it is copied fifty times in one year by researchers. But if a record is this popular with researchers, then shouldn’t it already be a priority for digitization for the repository?

Let’s face it; the vast majority of archives don’t have the funding to create the ideal situation for its records. If your institution’s HVAC breaks on a regular basis, if you don’t have enough space to properly store your records without causing damage, or if you can’t afford to retain qualified employees, you are not justified in banning scanners because of the damage risk. Maybe we need to accept that our institutions aren’t perfect and we can only demand so much when we ourselves have the funding to do very little.

*This is a special blog post related to self-motivation and trust for school*

I’m in the process of completing a unit of my technology course for MARA, and there are two things that I can’t seem to stop thinking about: self-motivation and trust. These two subjects, which were both discussed in the unit, are what I have decided to write about. They show how different online learning is compared to traditional learning and how the MARA degree will help me in the workplace.

I think that the most important part of online learning is self –motivation because it can be so unnecessary in traditional classrooms. The “Tips for Success” mentioned that this type of motivation is essential. Before starting this program, I completed a Master’s Degree in Applied History. In that program, I felt as if my biggest responsibility was showing up to class. Professors constantly reminded us what work needed to be done and what the deadlines were in class. A significant part of the final grade of each course was showing up and participating. Sure, there were readings and papers to be done, but in general we were given a set period of time to get everything done, as outlined by the professor. Because there is less (and sometimes no) scheduled time for classes in an online environment, I have to make sure that I participate on a daily basis. Ironically, I had a very high score on the online learning readiness assessment. I believe that this is because I know that I am going to have to be self-motivated in order to succeed in this program and am forcing myself to be self-motivated.

In my other Master’s program, there was almost no teamwork necessary. It is clear that in the MARA program, I will have to be a member of successful teams. I have been a member of many teams in various working environments, and one thing that struck me as extremely important in Dr Haycock’s lecture was the 5 dysfunctions of teams. The first dysfunction, the absence of trust, has recently been an important issue of mine in the workplace. I naturally trust almost everyone I meet (I know, that is bad.) Usually, only negative actions will break my trust. However, I have recently been a member of a team that was not trusted. Another team member had obvious issues with trust and could generally be described as a control freak. Even though everyone on the team had either equal or more experience than her, she would not trust anyone to do any important tasks and treated everyone else as her underlings. She would insist on doing everything herself, and if she was not doing a particular task, she would go out of her way to oversee it. This created issues because she wasted time since not every task needed her assistance. It also hurt my confidence as a team member because it made me feel as though she had reasons to not trust me when I had done nothing to destroy her trust. I eventually had to have several meetings to find a solution to the problem. I specifically remember discussing the lack of trust with my supervisor. I feel that the products of our team would have been much different if trust had been established in the beginning.

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.

I'm Back...And in Need of Stuff

So after being on hiatus for the past year, I've decided that it might be worth it to do this whole blog thing because for some reason, people have actually read this blog. The Internet must be getting really boring...

Anyway, I'd just like to let everyone know that I'm currently obsessed with Coach's Nala pumps (see above) for the following reasons: 1) I would like to point out that they are named after a Lion King character. 2) Their classic shape means that they are totally wearable to work.

I want a pair in each trendy color!

Things I Would Like To Point Out Pt. 5

This past week, NARA launched its Citizen Archivist Dashboard. The dashboard is NARA’s newest foray into the digital world. While this is a great way to do digital and engage the public at the same time, I’m a little concerned with the name. I get the whole Citizen Archivist thing, but it’s not the easiest thing for lay people to understand. But as far as the term “dashboard” is concerned, I don’t get it. It is a database that anyone can work on. Usually we find dashboards in cars. Not a lot of people can work on them. Just saying.

Archivists vs. Historians

Today I read “The Archive(s) Is a Foreign Country: Historians, Archivists and the Changing Archival Landscape” by Terry Cook. Cook, a Canadian archivist, sought to explain why there is so much distance between archivists and historians. He argued that historians do not understand how much archivists influence and control history. Obviously this can be applied to the National Archives in the United States and around the world. But Cook basically ignores the historian’s perspective.
For one thing, the two professions are separate professions for a reason. Without archival training, the historian has no knowledge of how archives evolve over time. This is very similar to how archivists do not need to know historiography. It is simply not part of their profession. Historians and archivists have different professions because they do different things.
Cook also failed to realize that historians’ time in the archive is often limited due to time and financial restraints. I consider myself lucky that I can spend so much time in the National Archives. But most researchers do not have this luxury. Last week, I overheard a researcher say she was a doctoral student doing research for her dissertation on Civil War camps. She only researched at the National Archives for two days. This researcher, like many others, did not have the time to explore all avenues of research. Reference archivists know what is often requested and only tell researchers about the most popular records related to their research. In this way, they continue to control what becomes history. Often, having a large amount of time to research, experience researching, and the willingness to look everywhere can yield results that are not controlled by an archivist. But few have this opportunity.
Cook needed to realize that archival work is not one-sided. While historians are not trained to understand the archivists’ craft, historians can choose to impact history by expanding their research.

Things I Would Like To Point Out Pt. 4

I would like to point out that 49 years ago today, the Constitution and the Declaration made it to the archives. Yes, that's right, it wasn't always in the rotunda.

Go Out and Listen

Today is the 70th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor. It is also the day which the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association officially stated that it would cease to exist at the end of the month. I was saddened when i heard the news, but it makes sense. The dwindling amount of 80-something and 90-something year olds in the organization are quickly dying off and those who are not dead are often home bound or in a care facility. Its crazy to think that in my lifetime I am witnessing the death of the World War II veterans. I remember the 60th anniversary like it was yesterday. So I would just like to say this: listen to the World War II veterans! We as historians need to get as much information out of them as possible, before it is too late. The more records the better! The anniversary of Pearl Harbor is a great time to do this. So go out and listen!

I Should Probably Write Something About Purses

I've realized that I haven't written anything about purses for over a month. Since this blog is called The Purse Whisperer, I figured that I should write something about purses. This past week, I learned that certain kate spade bags are not made with leather. This is great for those of us who aren't always comfortable with leather. Most kate spade cloth bags have pvc trim. This was great news to me, however I should point out that the majority of kate spade bags are all leather.

Things I Would Like To Point Out Pt. 3

Yesterday, there was a user meeting at the National Archives in College Park. Although I didn’t attend, I still heard all of the terrible ideas that came up during the meeting. My primary concern is that they want researchers to mail in requests a few days before they come in to do research. Wow! I didn’t realize I live in the year 1940! There is no reason why it is necessary to further delay the pulling process unless they plan on getting rid of the pull staff. While this works for large agencies and possibly vets, it is not at all what any researcher wants. It’s hard enough to wait for pull times. I hate to reiterate the fact that the archives are supposed to be there for the researcher as a service. Now they want us to pay postage to pull records! Am I going to have to send a telegraph when staff gives me the wrong box? And wait a fortnight for the correct box to arrive?

The History of the Future of the National Archives and How Accurate Predictions Can Be

Recently, I read an article entitled “The Future of the Archival Profession” by T. R. Schellenberg, published in 1959. He wrote

“One of the future developments that I see is a more rational, a more orderly, and a more enlightened policy of accessioning and a freer interchange of copies of documents among documentary repositories. The function of an archival institution, I believe, is not one of collecting and hoarding research materials, but one of serving the needs of scholars and other users; and these needs can be best served by having documentary resources preserved in the places to which they pertain and where they are most likely to be used. It is not the function of an archivist to complicate the problems of research by dispersing research resources; it is his function to bring them together.”

As a researcher in the twenty first century, I have a few opinions on this matter. First off, I have a hard time saying that the working in the archives is anywhere near rational. The National Archives is a bureaucracy. I have seen plenty of archivists not chose the rational choice in matters because they did not want to get into trouble. They did not chose based on what is the current archival standard. The hoops that I have had to jump through in order to get a few documents are just proof that the National Archives can be a little irrational.

Secondly, the free interchange of copies of records is a great idea. That is what the citizen archivist dashboard will be all about. Unfortunately, I think that the National Archives may simultaneously be restricting this by charging for copies of material. I am aware that copiers and scanners cost a fortune and require a lot of money to keep them going. But putting costs on copies only restricts access to materials. In an open access age, charging for copies just should not happen. Archives need funding to survive, but charging for copies goes against the initiative of open access at the National Archives (and realistically, charging for copies cannot pay the bills of such a large institution.) There are not guarantees that we will be allowed to use our own scanners and cameras in the future, so this is something that every researcher should be worried about.

Third, the National Archives should be here to serve the researcher. But I wonder if archives employees hide behind preservation instead of supporting research. I know records need to be preserved. I know records are in danger of deterioration. The conservation department at the National Archives tries to preserve, but it is woefully understaffed and underfunded. Often times, the researcher is restricted for preservation reasons when realistically, preservation may never happen for a particular record. So what is the point? The researchers are not being paid to preserve. While researchers should not actively try to destroy records, we are not the ones who should be responsible for them. The National Archives is responsible for the preservation of records. In the end, the researcher is not supported in their endeavors because the massive hurdle of preservation may be in the way.

In conclusion, although Schellenberg had high hopes, not a whole lot has actually been achieved.

Cool Photo

http://todaysdocument.tumblr.com/post/12239082707/dated-november-2-1934-this-photograph-shows

The new opa record:

http://research.archives.gov/description/2637539

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.

Commies! And Other Threats

Today I read an interesting article by R.D.W. Connor. For those of you who do not know, Roosevelt appointed Connor to be the first Archivist of the United States. In March of 1936 the Minnesota Historical Society Press published his article entitled, “Our National Archives.” Connor’s article originated as an address that he presented to the historical society earlier in 1936. From a historiographical point of view, I love this article. It not only showed how different the definition of “archive” was in the 1930s, but it also showed how ingrained the fear of communists and anarchists had become.
I am one of those young people who do not remember the Cold War (however I do have the misfortune of knowing one too many commies.) I find it fascinating how people found communism so terrifying in the 1920s and 1930s, especially since we now know that it does not work so well. Connors began his article explaining that if we wanted the freedoms of a democratic society, we needed an archive. He argued that the preservation of records will always be necessary for a functioning, truthful government (3).Connors alluded to the fact that there would be an awful lot of confusion if records did not exist. He used the example of an earthquake in Nicaragua in 1931 to prove his point (2). The earthquake (and the fire that resulted) destroyed most of Nicaragua’s records (3). We now know that an earthquake will probably not destroy our nation’s records, but I still think that Connors made a good point. Without records, mistruths and disorder will prosper. To mainstream society in 1936, Communism had become a scary mistruth and anarchists threatened disorder. Not everyone could understand the importance of preserving records for historical needs. But they could all understand the threat of Communism and anarchy. Connor showed that a threat to records had become a threat to the democratic liberties of all. I believe that this is a pretty typical statement of the period especially since it would easily have the support of the majority in this country in the 1930s.
Now, I know that anarchy kind of fizzled after this period, but I know that the fear of communism only increased after this period (especially after World War II.) Communism became the main reason why our civil liberties were threatened because a communist government eliminated many of the things that we considered to be liberties. Therefore, communism became a pretty good excuse for maintaining an archive. But I have to wonder what happened after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of communism in the late 1980s. Did our needs for an archive change? Certainly, by the 1990s, the majority of Americans did not feel that their civil liberties could potentially be threatened by a few rouge commies that may have not given up hope. Without fear, can an archive survive?
I have fear. I do not think that the commies are going to take over, or that any terrorist organizations are going to take over either. I fear for the records because few other people do. I feel as if we take our civil liberties for granted these days since we have basically eliminated any major threats. Without the threat of our civil liberties, the only other purpose of an archive is to store information. And while the National Archives gives access to information to many different researchers and agencies every day, the average American may not see this as an important task. However, I do but I also realize that not everyone cares about records. Without the threat of losing our civil liberties, the National Archives has little to connect itself to the general public besides genealogy (which is not something that the majority of Americans care about on a daily basis.)
I cannot point out any clear solutions to this problem. But I can point out that the solution will routed in the way in which we define archives. The definition of the term “archive” has evolved due to the purpose in which archives serve. Today, we consider archives to be a place where records are stored, preserved, and made accessible to the public. Connor’s article showed that this has not always been the case. He argued that the main purpose of an archive was to store and preserve records (13). In that sense, the American archival movement really gained momentum in the 1880s when, after inquiries, Congress realized that the depository system of the late nineteenth century failed (13-14). Connors found a whole lot of archival history in the early depository setting that current archival historian would consider being storage settings and not archival settings. I found it interesting how Connor used the word “depository” over the word “repository.” Today we consider archives to be repositories because they repurpose old documents. In 1936, the National Archives had just opened, and although researchers had used the facilities in the first year, Connors had not yet experienced the flood of researchers that would come in the following years who would turn his depository into a repository.
But without hindsight, it is understandable why Connors would have used the word depository. As Archivist of the United States, Connor combined the contents of over 250 different storage facilities in the National Archives building (7). He also contented with the results of deplorable storage conditions. Early archivists found empty liquor bottles and a dead cat mixed in with federal records (8). The National Archives in 1936 was not at the stage in which it could have been receiving researchers.
These are some of the many insights which I discovered after reading this article. Connor’s work is chock full of interesting tidbits which I am certain I will use in the future in my assessment of the National Archives

* Please note: All citations are to the following article:
Connor, R.D.W. “Our National Archives” in Minnesota History 17 (1936) 1-19.

An Update on the Teeth

So there isn't much else to say about the teeth I found. They are the plaster cast of Albert McCall, who tried to enlist in the army in 1906. For reasons unknown, he had a metal plate put in his lower jaw and a bunch of fake teeth. Since he could not "masticate meat except the choicest cuts" the army wouldn't take him. He tried to fight this decision and failed. That's pretty much it other than the fact that there are now better photos.





In news related to the archives and this blog, they've refurnished 203 west. Apparently, one day we will also have a reasonable amount of electrical outlets. This will mean that the floor will be ripped up since all of the useable outlets are currently in the floor. I can only wonder what the replacement floor will look like and if they will feel obligated to replace it with similar flooring.

Nordstrom Rack sale

For all the savvy shoppers out there, I would just like to remind you that Nordstrom Rack is having a clearance sale. As usual, they have a great purse collection (including kate spade!)

I Foundzit in da Archivez!

I'm going to explain why some of NARA's outreach programs just don't suit me. My main excuse is that I'm just too cool. Today, I was going thru a box when I found a smaller box. I obviously had to open the box. So I did, and I was temporarily horrified. I found teeth!!!! In shock, I immediately brought it to the attention of the staff.
I soon realized that it was not a human body part; I found the plaster cast of the inside of a guy's mouth. As it turns out, the teeth had been part of a file related to a painter who tried to enlist in 1906 but had too much work done on his lower jaw to eat meat. Therefore, he could not be accepted into the service.
Currently, the National Archives has a competition called I Found It In The National Archives. Its usually some new user who found their great great grandparent's record and wrote in to say how neat it was. NARA usually post the finds on their NARAtions blog. I would just like to point out that a) this is a total copy of SAA's I Found it in the Archives competition that ended a while back and b) I clearly find cooler stuff all the time! What's cooler: grandpa's record or his teeth?