Multiple Perspectives
As a student interested in archival management, this week’s reading was quite enlightening. However, as Hedstrom’s article noted, there needs to be an open dialogue between scholars, scientists, and preservationists. They cannot create archival solutions in a silo. Therefore, while reading the materials I tried to view preservation from different perspectives – the archivist’s, the historian’s, and the tech guru’s.
For archivists, it is clear that digitization is not preservation and similar standards for selecting hard copy objects for preservation should also apply for the online world, even if storage options are greater. By preserving a letter or a photograph, the archivist is setting it apart from other objects of its period; the object is special enough to preserve.
For historians, I was not certain if greater capacity for digital archival storage is a good thing. As we’ve read, unless searching technology becomes more cost effective and efficient, it may be challenging for researchers to wade through an infinite number of online documents to find the one he or she needs. Even in the offline world, historians encounter difficulty tracking down archival materials, blaming poor or incomplete finding aids or the sheer volume of material. However, greater storage capacity allows for historians to have access to untold numbers of primary materials, a treasure trove for research.
When I thought about techies and preservation, I wondered if the very idea of preservation is contrary to the entrepreneurial spirit of technology innovation. For instance, tech innovators are always trying to develop smarter, faster, more efficient and cutting-edge technology. It’s about inventing the “next big thing” before the next person. Conversely, preservation is about literally freezing an object in time so it can be enjoyed for generations in as close to its original form as possible.
Thinking about these different audiences really complicates the digital preservation picture.
February 13th, 2006 at 1:13 pm
All my comments seem to start with the words…I agree. Nevertheless, the different audiences that interact with archives and historical materials does complicate the digital preservation picture. What struck me about the reading–and in thinking about OCR and scanning technologies is just how many different ways that it can be done.
I suppose that’s part of the reason why figuring out an industry standard is so hard. With so many constituencies its a battle between $$, basic preservation and satisfying everyone.
February 14th, 2006 at 12:13 am
I think you put your finger on a central tension here -> the more you archive/preserve, the better our searching algorithms (read: finding aids) need to be in order to be able to move through the corpus…
I also really like your point on the opposition between “progress” and “preservation” (thrown into sharp relief by visiting the Heurich Mansion this past weekend)…however, I think it’s complicated by the fact that many preservationists will rely on new technologies to preserve the past (think of climate-controlled chambers and treatments for acidic paper)…
February 14th, 2006 at 10:41 am
When I thought about techies and preservation, I wondered if the very idea of preservation is contrary to the entrepreneurial spirit of technology innovation. For instance, tech innovators are always trying to develop smarter, faster, more efficient and cutting-edge technology. It’s about inventing the “next big thing” before the next person. Conversely, preservation is about literally freezing an object in time so it can be enjoyed for generations in as close to its original form as possible.
While I agree with your description of the tension between innovation and preservation, there is at least one aspect of preservation that tech-types should appreciate and recognize — the need to back-up multiple copies of a piece of digital information. Perhaps if preservation were explained to the tech world (and the rest as well) as simply a very practical form of “backing up” information, historians and archivists might find willing and able partners?