I completely agree. Although we have cultural diferencies (In Spain there aren’t lobbies) we have same problems and solutions.

The economic problems are the same. There isn’t enough money and we will try show our utility for the society. What we really need is to be useful to our community. I mean firstly we must admit that a doctor or an farmer are workers more essential than us. Secondly we must invest all our intelectual
effort to meet our users’ needs and keep the internal discussions about what our profession is for are free time.

Regards Yoperal

I completely agree. Although we have cultural diferencies (In Spain there aren’t lobbies) we have same problems and solutions.

The economic problems are the same. There isn’t enough money and we will try show our utility for the society. What we really need is to be useful to our community. I mean firstly we must admit that a doctor or an farmer are workers more essential than us. Secondly we must invest all our intelectual effort to meet our users’ needs and keep the internal discussions about what our profession is for our free time.

Regards Y.Perdiguero

Archives may not be “essential” to sustaining physical human existence—unless one eats paper, archives will not feed, clothe, or protect the bodily health of a person. But existence quickly goes beyond physical survival…tattered phrase though it may be, there is some “quality of life” issues that soon emerge as a human need, and I do believe archives kick in at that point. You all can think up the rights of citizens uses, so I won’t go there. But there are others. Just a couple (but I could go on well beyond this….)

For students, archives provide the past as a human laboratory for trying to understand how and why people act—no textbook allows the examination of the raw material of human action. I recall working with students in my teaching life in Indiana where we used archival documents about the Great Depression in their community to talk about why and how welfare came to be developed. Too many of my students were in families living on welfare—and too many others parroted their parents derisory comments about people on welfare. To make this short, in the process of discussing this issue in the laboratory of the past, we were able to accomplish some understanding that they were able to translate into the present, and achieved just a little breaking down of prejudice.

Archives, as we’ve learned as a result of acts of terrorism or disaster, can be part of the grief, healing and memorialization process. Look at the long-term work the folks at Syracuse University have done with the archives of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, which is an example of where things can and are going with 9/11, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and others. Not just collecting, but the exhibits, public programs, etc, resulting have been significant to individual, communities, and beyond.

Mental health diagnosis and treatment strides forward rely on longitudinal studies that require medical records (both public and private treatment sources). There are mental health researchers doing this right now to assess a range of treatment modalities. Ditto a range of incarceration approaches.

Archives are important in community-building, in helping people to place themselves in time and space, and in developing a sense of belonging–which is very much a quality of life issue particularly as we move around more and more, and need to find ways to connect to place, but also as ethnic, racial, and other social communities. Places like the Centro de Estudios Puertorriquenos at Hunter College is an important resource for the Puerto Rican community in sharing its past with those who have been born in the US, for providing a sense of identity and community understanding. Hey, as the mother of a teen-ager, anything that can help the emerging identify of a young person gets big kudos from me.

On the issue of a lobbyist in DC for archives, I do agree with Frank Boles (and I can tell you why), but in the interest of space, if anyone wants to discuss that further, I’d be happy to via email or additional discussion on this site. Enough space taken up for now.

This is the quote that should fit after the lonely arrow above . . .

>

This is the identity question in a nutshell. First, I sort of buy your argument on government archives, but in a lot of ways only the most essential records qualify here – vital records, property ownership, voter registration. If government archivists are honest, they also feel uneasy when they are forced to justify their existence agasint cuts to basic social services. Which leads to the second.

We might be best served by allying with related “make peoples lives better and more interesting” professions – museums, parks, libraries, historic preservationists, etc. and continue to make the case that the real choice isn’t between archives and healthcare. The choice could also be between uselss wars, foreign and domestic and economic theft by the ruling oligarchy and a fuller life for all of us.

And finally. I’m not completely onboard with the centrality of archives instead of archivists. The records are meaningless except in the context of their usefulness to human beings. Records values have changed through time. As D alluded to, Rapport’s records-destroying bombs will not erase our lives or culture. So the real value to users is in identifying what has importance *now* to *them* and that is a key responsibility of the archivist. It ties into the whole “social justice” and “activist archivist” model that is currently trendy. If we want to look at identity, we need to be much more willing to get in the mix and actively build ties among users, among colleagues, and with the records they can use.

That’s my 3 cents.

I’m feeling a little lazy, so I’ll highlight the part of your blog post (and comments) that struck a cord with me:

“We would be better served to spend less energy trying to make people understand why they should value archivists and more energy making people understand why they should value archives—and not why they should value archives for abstract principles, but for values that everyone can understand and share.”

And from Russell D. James, CA:

“I’m still not sure, however, that we don’t need to form and better understand our identity. An archivist must know who they are and what they do (professional identity) before they can market their archives, at least I think so.”

I agree that archives are a luxury, usually for the history departments on campuses and the history buffs outside academia and government. I have always thought it might be a good idea to find some way to prove your importance to engineering and mathematics and fashion design departments and business schools. But when I have mentioned this to other archivists, they have either laughed at me or laughed off the idea.

I’m still not sure, however, that we don’t need to form and better understand our identity. An archivist must know who they are and what they do (professional identity) before they can market their archives, at least I think so.

So, yes, archives are a luxury. But they’re a welcome luxury, at least personally speaking.