Course:ARST573/Personal Archives

From UBC Wiki

Personal archives are the records pertaining to a private individual. They are distinct from public archives which are the records pertaining to a individual or corporate body operating in the public sphere. The Society of American Archivists defines personal archives as "Documents created, acquired, or received by an individual in the course of his or her affairs and preserved in their original order (if such order exists)" or "Nonofficial documents kept by an individual at a place of work."[1] Personal archives can touch on almost any sphere of human activity and they tend to be donated to archives by notable individuals or their heirs or executors.

History

Personal records have been collected by archives, museums and libraries for many centuries and in the second half of the 20th century, they became more valued in research circles and by the general public. There has been a movement in history and the social sciences away from an emphasis on the social, political and ecomomic elite and towards accounts of other groups in society, such as workers, immigrants, minorities and women.

Selection of letters

These voices rarely feature in the dominant historical narrative so researchers are increasingly using personal archives to uncover their histories[2].

There has also been an explosion of public interest in genealogy, particularly in North America. Websites like Ancestry.ca provide easy (although not free), online access to records relating to family history. Many of these records are held in archival repositories.

Position in Archival Theory

In the English-speaking tradition, personal papers were not considered truly archival until the second half of the 20th century. The preeminent English archival theorist, Sir Hilary Jenkinson said, "they are not in any primary sense Archives”[3] T.R. Schellenberg, working at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in Washington D.C., developed the ideas of the evidential and informational values of records but, like Jenkinson, his focus was on the institutional records in his care. Personal papers often do not display the level of organization of institutional records, nor are they always created as a result of a transaction between two entities. People are generally not required as part of their business or legal obligations to keep a personal diary, for instance.

Despite the theoretical position that personal papers were not archives, they were still collected by many repositories. Canadian archival insitutions are notable for having espoused the 'total archives' concept from their inception, introducing personal archives as a responsibility of government archives on a national scale. The theoretical landscape, however, began to change in 1996 when Sue McKemmish published an article titled "Evidence of Me[4]." McKemmish's article offered the beginnings of a theoretical support for personal archives and invited other archivists to continue the work. McKemmish argued that personal archives provided evidence of the self and that personal recordkeeping was a form of memorializing. Personal archives that are included in the larger narrative of community by being accepted into an archive can constitute "evidence of us"[5]: evidence of the wider societal group. Her concept of personal archives focuses on the external characteristics of human life; the relationships that individuals have with other people and the rest of society.

Another stream of thought in archival theory sees personal archives as reflecting something more personal and intimate than the daily transactions of a person in society. Catherine Hobbs has been a leading figure in this few, publishing "The Character of Personal Archives : Reflections on the Value of Records of Individuals" in 2001 and "Re-envisioning the Personal: Reframing Traces of Individual Life" in 2010. Hobbs looks at personal archives as intimate reflections of a person's self and thought process. "Here we have the psychology of archives more than their transactionality". [6] Personal records are not always created as part of transactions and are reflections of the individual character of the creator. Hobbs calls for archivists to acknowledge the significance of the “flotsam of the individual life”[7] Personal recordkeeping is the site of the construction of identity and of a particular world view, echoing McKemmish’s narrative of the self. However, where McKemmish privileges the “public and interactive side of a personality” Hobbs evokes the inner life of the creator [8] She suggests that through examining records created free from mandate or authority, the careful reader can find hints of the inner personality of the creator.

Challenges to Archival Theory

Personal archives challenge historical archival theory in many ways. Many authors, such as Jennifer Douglas, Jennifer Meehan, Heather MacNeil, and Catherine Hobbs, have argued that archivists may need to consider personal archives on different terms than are currently in place for institutional archives.

Original Order

How original order applies to personal archives has been one of the more contentious issues in recent years. The archival principle is to keep records in their original order when they are stored in an archival respository. This is based on the conception that records will be part of business functions or transactions and therefore will be filed and kept in a meaningful order. However, because personal records are often not part of a deliberate and external recordkeeping system, original order can be much more difficult, if impossible to determine.

"Original Order".

An early debate arose between Graeme T. Powell and Chris Hurley. In a 1976 paper, Powell asserted that original order could not and should be applied to personal papers.[9] He refers to the frequent disorder of personal papers when they are acquired by archival repositories (or, in his context, by Australian manuscript libraries) and the practice of donors, custodians or biographers to rearrange personal papers before donating them, thus destroying 'original order.' In the few cases where original order has been maintained, Powell says that the archivist only needs to preserve that order if it is "significant."[10] He also argues that "the librarian [re: archivist] is only obliged to consider the needs of the historian."[11] Therefore, manuscript archivists should order material in whatever way is most helpful to historians and researchers.

Hurley provided a rebuttal to Powell's paper the following year. He points out that, in order to support Powell's notion that the regular principles of arrangement and description need not apply to private papers, one must first accept that there is a critical difference between private and public papers[12]. Fundamentally, Hurley argues that the archivist will see the same level of disorder, the same confusion and have the same difficulties in applying original order to public records as well as private. The fact that some records have discernible order and others do not is not, he argues, a reason to discard the principle of original order. Original order has the benefit of maintaining the evidential value inherent in the relationships between records and within the aggregate of the records as well. "The value of original order is the insight it gives into the purposes and activities which the records originally served and does not depend on its efficiency as a filing or retrieval system."[13] Hurley also takes issues with Powell's position that the arranger only retain 'significant' order. As Hurley points out, this judgement will inevitably be subjective and informed by the person, time period, and current opinion on significance. Archivists must consider the user of tomorrow who may have very different needs and opinions from those of the original arranger.

Original order continues to be a polemical issue in the study of personal papers. Jennifer Douglas[14] interviewed Canadian archivists who work closely with writers' archives about their ideas around original order. She discovered that confusion exists over the meaning and significance of the principle. Archivists use the term original order to refer to many different kinds of order, including physical orders and logical or intellectual orders. Interviewees suggested that preserving original order (however defined) reflects the essence or personality of the creator in some way. However, this 'essence of personality' has yet to be identified or defined in a clear way. Douglas also addresses the effect that archivists themselves have on record order. She uncovers a contradiction in how archivists perceive the series: as “both a naturally occurring phenomenon and an archivist’s creation."[15]

Appraisal

McKemmish's early article proposed that archivists could appraise personal records using an equivalent of functional analysis. ‘Just as they can identify significant business functions and activities’, she states, ‘so they can analyse socially assigned roles and related activities and draw conclusions about what records individuals in their personal capacity capture as evidence of these roles and activities’[16]. Current literature regarding appraisal of personal archives generally divides it into two camps: material that supports the research interests of users and material that fits the 'collecting policy' of the institution[17]. In her literature review, Pollard identifies weaknesses in both strategies. She shows that by prioritizing use as a means of determining value, archival institutions will end up with unbalanced, narrow, and possibly biased collections.[18] Furthermore, future fields of research are unknown and may require archival materials that, currently, are not in high demand. In his study of Australian manuscript repositories, Graeme Powell points out "a preponderance of papers of political figures and writers" [19], He notes that this emphasis is “partly due to the fact that political and literary historians have always been conspicuous in reading rooms and have worked closely with librarians and archivists."[20]

Referring all acquisition to the collecting policy moves the decision making to a different level but does not help in developing the collection policy itself. The question of how to determine the value of personal archives and their place in the mission of the institution is not answered by suggesting archivists follow policy. Acquisiton guide often focus on logistics rather than the theoretical basis for policy decisions. On the other hand, having a broad acquisition mandate can also be helpful as it was in the case study written by Amy Tector. In her case, the broad mandate of 'national significance' with the National Archives (now Library and Archives Canada) allowed her sufficient leeway to make a case for the inclusion of Magdalena Raskevitch's papers.

Provenance

One of the core tenets of archival theory, particularly in Canada, is respect des fonds. This demands that the archivist respect the unity of the fonds, and not mix together diverse materials or separate materials that were created together. The boundaries of the fonds are defined by the provenance of the material. In other words, materials created by one individual, family or organization form the inviolate fonds. This is distinct from a collection which is material "arbitarily or artificially brought together from a variety of sources."[21] The provenance of personal fonds can be more complicated. For example, personal records may contain materials created by people other than the 'creator' of the fonds; they may contain official or semi official documents, or items collected on the basis of subject matter [22]; they may also have been contributed to, arranged by, or collected by various family members, descendents, third party collectors, or other institutions. Geoffrey Yeo looks at how the changes in custodial history might affect archival ideas of provenance[23]. He suggests that a continuum runs from aggregations that have survived to the present day largely intact and those whose shape is "partly or wholly the product of collecting activity." [24] Yeo says that archivists should acknowledge the complications of provenance in detailed custodial histories, particularly when changes to the fonds/collection have occurred over a period of time and transfers from one custodian to another.

Creighton Barrett demonstrates another challenge the sanctity of the fonds in his case study of personal and business records in Nova Scotia family businesses. He observes that "individuals and families who create and organize their personal archives alongside those of their family business assemble heterogeneous bodies of records, which defy the rigid distinction between personal and corporate archives."[25] Arrangement and description practices often 'mask' the existence of personal records in a corporate fonds, due to strict notions about provenance. As Laura Millar points out, "provenance and the fonds are not the same, nor do they represent a constant, one-to-one relationship."[26]

International Approaches

In Canada, the archival system uses the "total archives" theory. This means that national, provincial and muncipal archives are responsible for both institutional records and for personal records. Archival institutions have the responsibility of preserving archives both for accountability in government and for cultural and heritage purposes. Personal archives fall more readily under the latter mandate. While government archives: national, provincial and municipal, have responsibility to preserve Canada's heritage, personal archives are also kept in other places, such as libraries or community archives.

The archival landscape in the United States is split between archival collections and the historical manuscript tradition. Personal archives fall under the responsibility of historical manuscript collections, often housed in universities or by historical societies.

Yale University's Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library

From the 1930's to 1980's, American institutions collected widely, especially from contemporary literary figures. American universities such as the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center in the University of Texas were financially able to offer large sums of money to entice donors and used their high profile acquistions to attract scholars and improve their reputation.[27] Many British writers, including Iris Murdoch, Graham Greene, and Tom Stoppard, deposited their records in American institutions. This was assisted by a British attitude which focused on authors whose reputations were already firmly established. Until 1963, the British Library did not accession the papers of any living writer, even when offered as a gift.[28] Literary Archives are discussed in more depth here.

Digital Personal Archives

Personal archives, perhaps more so than organizational archives, are high risk in terms of digital preservation. Archivists have intervened in organizations to improve recordkeeping, both for the sake of the organization and the benefit of the future archival record. However, unlike organizations which usually have a legal responsibility to maintain certain records, there is very little that private individuals are required to document. Most of the material that makes up personal records is discretionary. This is a peculiar problem for digital records which are increasingly at risk for digital decay and hardware/software obselescence. Even regardless of the preservation risks to digital records, there are also unique problems relating to the quantity and organization of personal digital records.

One characteristic of digital records is their enormous volume and lack of clear organization. How individuals manage their personal records is not completely understood. Looking to research in other disciplines might help archivists in this case. One example is Anna Chen, who looks at the psychological behavior of hoarding, the current culture awareness of this behavior (largely from contemporary reality television shows) and its application to personal digital recordkeeping. She points to a trend of individuals to characterize their personal digital recordkeeping with the vocabulary of hoarding. She argues that this self-characterization of hoarding “offers valuable insights into the psychologies of personal archiving practices”[29] which can be of great use to archivists who strive to understand various personal recordkeeping behaviours. She argues that archivists should begin to accept and embrace the emotional aspects of personal digital records, rather than lamenting the disorganization of personal records and the trouble this causes archivists. As she points out, “traditional organization is no longer necessary to ensure digital accessibility."[30] Chen recommends that archivists have conversations with donors about the practical and emotional factors in their disorder.

Another example is using Personal Information Management (PIM) research as a framework for managing personal archives. PIM research has uncovered a number of information management practices such as "Filing," "Piling," and "Structuring" or using location- based finding versus logical (text-search query) finding.[31] . PIM research has also looked at specific applications like email [32] [33] [34], which has long been a troublesome area for archivists.

Diversity and Representation

Personal archives have lately been seen as a way to balance archival collections by including the records of historically underrepresented groups. Collecting personal records is a way for archives to address the imbalance of cultures, genders, sexualities, occupations, ideologies and faiths often present in 'traditional' archival collections.

"Archivists choose which records to preserve and discard, using the power of appraisal to consciously or unconsciously assert chosen narratives as truth while ignoring or reframing others. And through arrangement and description of their acquisitions, archivists impart narratives and knowledge structures to explain the relationships among records in a collection"[35]

Personal archives can offer the opportunity for underrepresented groups to be represented in their own words and through their own documents. This is explored more fully at: Archives and Repatriation, First Nations Archives, Postcolonial Archives, and LGBTQ Archives
Examples


Feminism

Personal archives have been a rich source for researchers wanting to work on women's histories or issues. Womens' voices are being rediscovered in the archives after a long history of being subordinated under male relatives or associates. "Many of the collections containing unpublished material by women writers are headed by the names of men."[36] Amy Tector provides a poignant example of this with her case study of the Marlena Raskevich papers. The papers were accepted as a part of Raskevich's husband's (Wilfred Eggleston) fonds. The archivists at the National Archives (now Library and Archives Canada), including Tector, had to determine whether or not to accept Raskevich's papers. Tector acknowledges that "her husband’s position in Canadian literature was a factor in the National Archives’ interest." [37]

Another perspective on archiving feminism is Maryanne Dever's experience in acquiring the papers of Merle Thornton, a key figure in second-wave Australian feminism. The project was a cooperative venture between scholars (Dever and co-researcher Margarent Henderson), activists (Thornton) and collecting institutions (the National Library of Australia). Thornton had, as Dever reports, a “penchant for personal recordkeeping,” so there was minimal archival intervention in the order of her records.[38] Dever and her colleagues were faced with a different challenge: the complicated relationship Thornton had with her own records and their transfer to the NLA. There was a sense of loss, which led Thornton to hesitate and delay. Dever also considers the complicated role of inserting these specifically feminist records into the national memory. The discourse of second wave feminism debates its purpose and memory; it is seen as the forgotten generation of feminism and positioned in terms of loss and amnesia. Thornton’s records would both provide sources for history and contribute to the national archival memory. Dever engages with theoretical conceptualizations of the archive in which archives are no longer passive receptacles of history, but active contributors and producers of meaning.

References

  1. ↑ Richard Pearce-Moses. “Personal Papers.” A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology. Chicago, 2005. http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/p/personal-papers.
  2. ↑ Williams, Caroline. “Personal Papers : Perceptions and Practices.” In What Are Archives? Cultural and Theoretical Perspectives: A Reader, edited by Louise Craven, 53–69. Ashgate: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2008.
  3. ↑ Pollard, Riva. “The Appraisal of Personal Papers: A Critical Literature Review.” Archivaria 52, no. 1994 (2001): 136–150.
  4. ↑ McKemmish, Sue. “Evidence of Me.” Archives and Manuscripts 24, no. 1 (1996): 28–45.
  5. ↑ Ibid. p. 29
  6. ↑ Ibid. p.127
  7. ↑ Ibid. p. 131
  8. ↑ Ibid. p.131
  9. ↑ Powell, Graeme T. “Archival Principles and the Treatment of Personal Papers.” Archives and Manuscripts August (1976): 259–268. p. 280
  10. ↑ Ibid. p. 263
  11. ↑ Ibid. p. 262
  12. ↑ Hurley, Chris. “Personal Papers and the Treatment of Archival Principles.” Archives and Manuscripts February (1977): 351–365. p. 351
  13. ↑ Ibid. p. 357
  14. ↑ Douglas, Jennifer. “What We Talk about When We Talk about Original Order in Writers’ Archives.” Archivaria 76, no. Fall 2013 (2013): 7–25.
  15. ↑ Ibid. p. 23
  16. ↑ Pollard, Riva. “The Appraisal of Personal Papers: A Critical Literature Review.” Archivaria 52, no. 1994 (2001): 136–150 p. 156)
  17. ↑ Ibid. p. 140
  18. ↑ Ibid.p. 142
  19. ↑ ibid. p. 142
  20. ↑ Ibid. p. 142
  21. ↑ Yeo, Geoffrey. “Custodial History, Provenance, and the Description of Personal Records.” Libaries & the Cultural Record 44, no. 1 (2009): 50–64 p.57
  22. ↑ Ibid
  23. ↑ Ibid. p. 53
  24. ↑ Ibid. p. 57
  25. ↑ Barrett, Creighton. “Respect Which Fonds? Personal Archives and Family Businesses in Nova Scotia.” Archivaria 76, no. Fall 2013 (2013): 75–92.p. 77
  26. ↑ Laura Millar, “The Death of the Fonds and the Resurrection of Provenance: Archival Context in Time and Space,” Archivaria 53 (Spring 2002): 5.
  27. ↑ Dicken, Judy. “Twentieth-Century Literary Archives : Collecting Policies and Research Initiatives.” In New Directions in Archival Research, edited by C.P. Lewis and Margaret Procter, 49–82. Liverpool: Liverpool University Centre for Archive Studies, 2000.p.49
  28. ↑ Ibid. p. 53
  29. ↑ Chen, Anna. “Disorder : Vocabularies of Hoarding in Personal Digital Archiving Practices.” Archivaria 78, no. Fall 2014 (2014): 115–134.p. 118
  30. ↑ Ibid p. 132
  31. ↑ Bass : Marshall, Nardi & Barreau, Henderson etc.
  32. ↑ Steve Whittaker, Victoria Bellotti, and Jacek Gwizdka, “Email in Personal Information Management,” Communications of the ACM: Personal Information Management 49, no. 1 (January 2006): 68.
  33. ↑ Nicholas Ducheneaut and Victoria Bellotti, “Email as a Habitat: An Exploration of Embedded Personal Information Management,” ACM Interactions 8, no. 5 (September/ October 2001): 30–38.
  34. ↑ Steve Whittaker and Candace Sidner, “Email Overload: Exploring Personal Information Management of Email,” in Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) (New York, 1996), 276–83
  35. ↑ Shilton, Katie, and Ramesh Srinivasan. “Participatory Appraisal and Arrangement for Multicultural Archival Collections.” Archivaria 63, no. Spring (2007): 87–101 p. 1
  36. ↑ Gerson, Carole. “Locating Female Subjects in the Archives.” In Working in Women’s Archives: Researching Women's Private Literature and Archival Documents, edited by Helen M. Buss and Marlene Kadar, 7–22. Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2001.p. 14
  37. ↑ Tector, Amy. “The Almost Accidental Archive and Its Impact on Literary Subjects and Canonicity.” Journal of Canadian Studies 40, no. 2 (2006): 96–108. doi:10.1353/jcs.2007.0024. p. 101
  38. ↑ Dever, Maryanne. “Archiving Feminism: Papers, Politics, Posterity.” Archivaria 77, no. Spring 2014 (2014): 25–42. p. 29
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Course:ARST573/Personal_Archives&oldid=364786"