The Archive(s) Is a Foreign Country: Historians, Archivists, and the Changing Archival Landscape

Historians and archivists approach the documentary past differently, as they consider, respectively, the "archive" (singular) and "archives" (plural). The former focuses on issues of power, memory, and identity centered upon the initial inscription of a document (or series of doc...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American archivist 2011-10, Vol.74 (2), p.600-632
Main Author: Cook, Terry
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Archival preservation
Archival science
Archives
Archives administration
Archivists
Exact sciences and technology
Historians
History instruction
Information and communication sciences
Information science. Documentation
Library and information science. General aspects
Literary history
Perspective
Profession
Professional aspects
Professional aspects : training, employment
Public records
Role
Sciences and techniques of general use
United States history
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Historians and archivists approach the documentary past differently, as they consider, respectively, the "archive" (singular) and "archives" (plural). The former focuses on issues of power, memory, and identity centered upon the initial inscription of a document (or series of documents). The latter concentrates on the subsequent history of documents over time, including the many interventions by archivists (and others) that transform (and change) that original archive into archives. Despite making good common cause in lobbying over public policy and initially sharing values based on objective, scientific history, the two professions have drifted apart in recent decades. This essay explores the reasons for this divergence by analyzing the history of the two professions and highlighting resulting misconceptions that blind both to deeper nuances of the multiple contexts surrounding records that may enhance their understanding and use. It concludes that archives are not unproblematic storehouses of records awaiting the historian, but active sites of agency and power. Until recently, it has been in the interests of both professions to deny (or at least not interrogate) the subjectivity of archives. Both professions could benefit significantly, therefore, from a renewed partnership centered upon the history of the record to produce better history.
ISSN:0360-9081
2327-9702
DOI:10.17723/aarc.74.2.xm04573740262424