Assignment #7: Preservation Funding Trends

For better or worse, it seems as though much of the cultural preservation work undertaken in the USA is funded by various granting-agencies. There are some obvious pitfalls with this arrangement: organizations and institutions may be forced to tailor their projects to the (often quixotic) desires of the funding agencies rather than its own needs, the difficulty of assuring continuity or perpetuity for projects meant to survive beyond the grant-funded period, copious amounts of paperwork, and intra- and inter-institutional competition which can preclude cooperation.

Greater triangulation between funding agencies, institutions, and the public (users) could likely minimize the first problem, but the latter three constitute systemic flaws in the system, pointing to the deeper issue of cultural heritage institutions being chronically underfunded. The situation is analogous to malnourished children who are occasionally awarded dessert: the treat is pleasant while it lasts, but it heightens awareness the profound lack of food once consumed. The needy children instinctively presume causal relationships between their behavior and the receipt of the dessert, and do their best to earn one again, only to discover the capricious nature of the dessert-dispensing entity. At the risk of overburdening this cliche metaphor, just as this pattern fails to nurture the childrens' growth, institutions dependent on the succor of granting agencies cannot thrive as well as if sustenance was constant and predictable.

Recognizing the reality of the situation entails that institutions hoping to secure funding for their preservation efforts keep abreast of trends--what types of grants being offered, and what types of projects are winning them--in order to increase the odds of getting money. Prominent funders of cultural heritage preservation include: IMLS, Heritage Preservation, National Park Service, NHPRC (National Archives), Getty Conservation Institute, and the Andrew Mellon Foundation. Most of these have extensive information available through their websites. Reading through them all is as overwhelming as it is informative. Broadly speaking, agencies are concerned with certain key imperatives: increased responsiveness and interactivity between users and institutions; researching and implementing new technologies for providing access or for preservation methodology; promoting environmentally sound practices, and for preserving the significant cultural heritage material produced underrepresented but vitally important groups, especially Native American Tribes.

In addition to proposing projects that fall under these broad goals, grant-seekers must be keenly attuned to methods for asserting the merits of their collections, and the ability to integrate the project into their overall mission. Finally, we cannot help but observe several paradoxes at play: striking a balance between emphasizing a collections uniqueness (and therefore important to preserve) while simultaneously positing the project as extensible to other collections (reproducible); trying to embrace the cutting-edge while assuring the timelessness and sustainability of the project, just to name a couple.

Assignment #6 part 1: Digitization and Digital Preservation

Photo Credit: Illustration by The New York Times; photograph by Doug Mills/The New York Times

Katie Hafner, "History, Digitized (and Abridged)," New York Times, Your Money, March 10, 2007 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/business/yourmoney/11archive.html?pagewanted=all

In this article, Technology Writer Katie Hafner cautions that "important pieces of history that are at risk of disappearing or being ignored in the digital age," due to not being digitized. On the face of it, this argument appears facile and alarmist. If anything, the general public has a level of access to information and historical resources heretofore unimaginable. Archives and local libraries have always contained buried treasures. Only major institutions ever published finding aids or catalogs as bound volumes. Researchers would have to exercise considerable assiduity in order to determine resources' locations, before having to travel to the site.

Nowadays even small archives are able to summarize or offer selected finding aids over the Internet, making pinpointing locations far simpler. Many major libraries and archives afford researchers the opportunity to order duplications online or over the phone. Granted, it might be more complicated than ordering a book from Amazon.com, but it should be recalled that until recently, only a very select few had the inclination or ability to track down primary historical resources and now that cadre has expanded to include almost everyone.

Gafner highlights a central problem: she quotes Edward L. Ayers, who says,"There's an illusion being created that all the world's knowledge is on the Web..." when in reality, as much as there is available online compared to what used to be the case, it still only constitutes the smallest fraction of the cultural heritage materials in existence. So, effectively the issue is false perception on the part of society.

I am a huge advocate for expanded access, particularly for visual materials such as photographs, but I operate under no misconceptions: there is no way that every last scrap of historical documentation can or should be put on the Internet. From many the many issues at stake, I'll choose two: the false belief that having a digital surrogate of a book or manuscript permanently preserves the object, and the difficulty of providing context [provenance for the archives geeks] to archival materials online.

While these objections are philosophical, I believe that they have important practical ramifications. The fact that historical documents' artifactual value is deeply rooted in their physical existence is lost on some people. The fallacy that digitization = preservation is pernicious. Take this passage from the article for example: "I can't tell you how many people have suggested to us, 'Oh, you just need to digitize all that stuff down in the basement and you'll be all right,' " Ms. Wainwright said." If these materials are lost in the flood, they are lost even if digitized versions preserve the textual information. The visceral connection materials offer to the past simply cannot be substituted by pixels, no matter how high the digitization specs are. Moreover, unless serious advances in digital preservation take place, it is not necessarily the case that the digital copies will outlast the original paper-based records or that access will exist in perpetuity.

The concept of provenance has been central to archival theory since the 18th Century. It relates to the context and origination of materials, as well as the relationship of individual documents to the overall fonds, or group of records, as well as to the archival institution maintaining the records. For photographic materials, especially those without attribution, their place amongst a collection is especially relevant. But with Internet meta-searches or googleimages searching being the primary way in which in which casual researchers look for photographs online, the images are often floating signifiers, entirely divorced from their original groups. They maintain their visual information, but without the benefit of context.

Without a doubt, cultural collective memory benefits from increased online access to materials, but it is important to realize that preservation and access have always been limited by resources, attitudes, taste, and access. To combat haphazard and myopic representations of the past, Archivists and librarians should think collectively and cooperatively about what they digitize. Theories such as Documentation Strategy could be helpful, allowing institutions to band together to best reflect society through which documents are selected for digitization. Keep in mind that when we regard historical materials, we draw conclusions about the past based both on what exists and what does not.

In-class Exercise: Hypothetical Preservation Policies

Group: Lauren Algee, Elspeth Healey, Elizabeth Seramur

Institution: Blanton Museum of Art, The University of Texas at Austin

Because of the Blanton Museum's mission as a teaching institution focused on exhibition and creative curatorship, the primary focus of a hypothetical preservation policy should hinge on maintaining the artworks through a variety of strategies. The safety of the artworks both in storage and exhibition is paramount. While on display, controlled climate, lighting, and exhibit design strategies can lessen the impact on materials. Efforts should be undertaken to educate staff, guards, docents, and patrons on observing diligent practices when interacting with artworks. In order to maintain its permanent collection and to safeguard loan items, policies should stipulate preservation storage conditions: climate control, careful handling, effective housing, fire suppression, and secure access points, including loading docks. The Blanton could take advantage of the two Preservation programs on campus, and avail itself of students to conduct preservation/conservation needs assessments for the objects and facilities, perform minor treatments, and implement re-housing projects.

Blog 5: MPLP

Greene, Mark A. and Dennis Meissner. 2005. "More Product, Less Process: Pragmatically Revamping Traditional Processing Approaches to Deal with Late 20th-Century Collection." American Archivist, 63.2 (Fall/Winter). Pre-print available online at: http://ahc.uwyo.edu/documents/faculty/greene/papers/Greene-Meissner.pdf

Archival work is defined by the paradoxical challenges inherent to archival materials. One of the most pernicious of these paradoxes is the perceived binary conflict between preservation and access. Greene and Meissner's article responds to the problem of backlogs in archives. In these authors' view backlogs are due in large part to overly-fastidious processing habits that derive from object-level orientation. The article characterizes processing archivists and conservators as OCD housekeepers, needlessly terrorized by paper clips and staples. They are also depicted as hoarders whose concern for the materials' condition impedes access by researchers. It is no wonder, then, that processing archivists and conservators often object to the mantra of "More Product Less Process." The authors would have been well-advised to consult with some of the folks they chastise, if only to soften the blows and prevent (rhetorical) reprisals.

Lost in the instinctive ruffling-of-feathers, are some manifestly useful ideas, based on systematic observations, including feedback from archivists and patrons of archives. Bracing pronouncements can provoke fruitful debates about what kinds of practices can be modified and streamlined. The most important theme that can be derived from pragmatic archival theory, such as that espoused by Greene, is the responsibility of the archivist to act as a steward not just for collection materials but also of the financial and other resources allotted. As these resources dwindle, it is imperative that archives justify their existence and work at every level. It should be on the conscience of every archivist that he/she use time and materials wisely. In order to do this, stepping back and examining current processing practices may be in order both to eliminate waste and emphasize effective practices. Some habits may be kept and others relinquished as the overall workflow is streamlined.

Anecdotally, it seems to me that refoldering is perhaps too much maligned by Greene and Meissner. It is an important exercise in establishing both physical and intellectual control over the materials. In my personal experience, during the refoldering process previously unknown significant documents are discovered, sensitive information identified for restriction/redaction, and severely damaged objects in need of treatment are observed. With personal papers, often the vaunted "original order" means no order at all, so even if an alternative arrangement is not imposed, at least the processor could make useful observations in the course of rehousing that could inform the finding aid, much like the "preliminary" processing mentioned in the article (19). Lacking or otherwise uninformative finding aids, coupled with archival staff who also have no idea what's in all those boxes can be a greater impediment to access than the dreaded "backlog."

Returning briefly to the paradoxical nature of archives, we must remember that the purpose of archives is to preserve AND provide access to cultural heritage documentation. This is not an either/or proposition. It is important to recognize that preservation serves access, and use (via access) justifies preservation. And we cannot provide access to objects that no longer exist. So, the two are inextricably bound to one another, rather than competing.

Assignment 3: Notes from Initial Visit to Suida-Manning Papers at Blanton Museum

Date: 2/2/2009
Location: Museum Archives, The Blanton Museum
Purpose: Meet to discuss preservation needs assessment for Suida-Manning Collection

Participants:
Sue Ellen Jeffers, Museum Registrar, Blanton Museum
Elizabeth Seramur, Student, School of Information
Elspeth Healey, Student, School of Information

PICTURES:



QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

Q: What does custodian hope to achieve in terms of the collection?

A: Ideally, SEJ would like to establish some degree of intellectual and physical control over the collection, making the materials available to researchers. With respect to the preservation needs assessment, this process could lay the groundwork for future archival processing by determining whether any hazardous conditions exist, the amount of materials needed for rehousing, and the types of materials present. SEJ does not anticipate allocating funds for conservation treatment beyond rehousing activities. Some rehousing may be done by undergraduate work study, or graduate archives students.

Q: What is the size and scope of the collection?

A: The collection materials currently occupy the following :

13 Metal Filing Cabinets:

• 12 four-drawer metal filing cabinets measuring 15 in x 25 in x 52 in
• 1 four-drawer cabinet measuring 18 in x 29½ in x 52 in
  

38 Flat Metal Edge boxes:

• 25 x 17 x 21 x 3 in
  
• 6 21 x 25 x 3 in
  
• 4 15¼ x 11¾ x 3 in
  
• 2 19 x 25 x 3 in
  
• 1 15 x 19 x 3 in
  

Original Letter Boxes and additional material on shelving:

• 42 in x 88 in x 16 in shelving
• 42 inc x 35 in x 16 in (minus half a shelf)

According to SEJ, collection is made up of approximately 50% photographic materials (prints, glass lantern slides, etc.; most appear to be black-and-white, possible non-photographic photomechanical reproduction techniques observed, pending identification) and 50% manuscript materials (correspondence, notes, etc.). Collection appears to comprise a mixture personal and professional records for William Suida (1877-1959) , his daughter Bertina Suida Manning (d.1992), and her husband Robert Manning (d. 1996) including historical materials dating back to the 19th Century. Languages in evidence so far include English, French, and German.

Q: What are the evident current conditions/possible areas of concern?

A: Most of the materials were transferred from cardboard boxes to metal filing cabinets and flat, metal edge manuscript boxes. Some materials remain in original housings such as cardboard boxes and leather folders. SEJ destroyed obviously moldy materials upon accessioning, but some moldy materials may exist. Conditions range from crammed in and overstuffed to falling over due to excess space. Dust is also a problem, particularly with respect to the glass lantern slides. Overall climate appears to be controlled.

Q: What supplies will we need?

A: Gloves for handling photos and potentially moldy items, respirator/mask for dealing with possible mold spores, compressed air for dusting, microspatula for separating pages, measuring tape, and a loupe. Additionally, sticky notes will be necessary to identify materials numerically.

Q: Where will we be working regularly?

A: SEJ has a rolling cart which we can use to transport materials into the Museum Registrar's workspace, located in another room.

Assignment 1: Preservation Philosophy

Readings:
Michèle Valerie Cloonan, W(H)ITHER Preservation? The Library Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 2 (Apr., 2001), pp. 231-242.

Salvador Muñoz-Viñas, Contemporary Theory of Conservation, (2005) Burlington: Elsevier.

The Notion of Authenticity

Establishing a "philosophy" for the preservation of cultural heritage is a complex undertaking. It requires contemplating why cultures manifest an impulse to preserve, and how. Motivation for preserving documents and monuments range from sentimental nostalgia to nationalist fervor. Where does the preservation professional find his/her place along such a continuum? Although there are rich treatments of the preservation of cultural memory in literature from such disciplines as anthropology, archaeology, history, museology, and sociology, discussions specific to library and archival literature have been relatively quiet. Cloonan and Muñoz-Viñas have done much to shape this discourse by exploring themes relevant to preservation professionals.

Recent developments in the field of digital preservation have prompted new examinations of the notion of authenticity for physical objects. When restoration was the prevailing method for intervening with historical objects, concern for the integrity of the object's physical appearance largely dictated its treatment. In other words, attempts were undertaken to restore the object to the condition of its creation. The original condition was considered to be its most "authentic" state, and therefore returning the artifact to that state was desirable.

Crafting a philosophy of preservation begs unraveling the intertwined meanings of originality and authenticity. As Cloonan suggests, "the paradox of preservation is that it is impossible to keep things the same forever. To conserve, preserve, restore is to alter" (235). Muñoz-Viñas prods the question further. Taking issue with the notion authenticity commonly espoused by what he calls "Classical" conservation/preservation philosophies, that objects can have a "true" nature, he points out that the underlying logic of this reasoning is deeply flawed: "Objects cannot exist in a state of falsehood, nor can they have a false nature. If they really exist, they are inherently real. The expected, imagined or preferred is not real unless it coincides with the existing object" (93, emphasis in original). What, on the surface appears to be merely a semantic problem extends much deeper to the core assumptions motivating preservation activities.

Historian David Lowenthal reminds us that "nothing ever made has been left untouched, nothing ever known remains immutable; yet these facts should not distress but emancipate us. It is far better to realize that the past has always been altered than to pretend it has always been the same. Advocates of preservation who adjure us to save things unchanged fight a losing battle, since even to appreciate the past is to transform it. Every relic is a testament not only to its initiator but its inheritors, not only to the spirit of the past but to the perspectives of the present" (Lowenthal 1985, emphasis mine). Just as with Heisenberg's microscope, we cannot examine historical objects without somehow altering their essence, intangibly or otherwise.

I raise this issue not to excuse inaction or shoddy treatments, but instead to suggest an understanding of historical objects that acknowledges their engagement with the present. And although preservation is perhaps inherently anachronistic, it is helpful to recognize this fact, rather than operating on a series of faulty premises.