Acquisition and appraisal is a challenging aspect of the archival field. In my current job as a processor at Trinity college, appraisal scares me a bit (even though I do it on a very small scale basis). I never know if I ought to keep something or throw it away and thus, I tend to err on the side of caution and retain everything. However, this fear is most likely due to a lack of practice. Recently, I spoke with my boss, Rick, to ask about his experience with acquisition and appraisal. During the course of our conversation, Rick told me a great story about a Rhode Island man named Don D’Ammassa who has collected over 50,000 science fiction/horror titles (check out Don's web site here). Though Don has not expressed a specific interest in donating his collection, Rick has been “courting” him for years because such an enormous and comprehensive collection would be a huge boon to Trinity College. In Rick’s words, it would put Trinity "on the map." This collection would make Trinity the largest science fiction/horror book repository on the eastern seaboard. In turn, this would draw researchers, potential donors and generally get Trinity College some excellent PR. The University of Rhode Island has also been “courting” Don. However, they have asked Don for a monetary donation for preservation/conservation needs (which, as we learned from P:ACM, is not an unusual practice). To get an edge over URI, Rick has told Don that he need not contribute money. Instead, Rick will hold fundraisers and other events to garner necessary resources. In conclusion, I learned that as a curator, you always have to have feelers out to find collections that fit your mission policy and increase your user group. Additionally, you have to be creative in how you court potential donors.
In terms of the Chapter 4 of P:ACM, I appreciated the focus on proactive archivism. On page 79, the authors state, “Passive accumulation of all photographs offered to the repository places great burdens on future resources.” This makes a lot of sense to me, even though I do not think it is a popular stance in the field. In my own (limited) experience, I have seen that most acquisitions are via donor gifts. These donations are taken with little thought as to their value, whether it be informational, artifactual, associational or evidential. In most scenarios, donations are accepted to remain in good graces with the donor, who may eventually give money to the institution. However, in P:ACM, it is very clear that we archivists should give deeper consideration and care when acquiring photographs.
An additional thought that kept popping up in my mind as I was reading is the interesting relationship between a photograph as a piece of information versus its value as an object. It is fascinating that a photograph may have no informational value to an institution and yet, the institution will acquire it due to its artifactual value. This, of course, all depends on the mission of the institution. For example, an all-women’s college may want to acquire photographs of suffragettes for reasons of promoting feminist scholarship, while a technical college may want those same photographs due to the process that created the image.
Finally, as I read the Charbonneau article, I was confused by a statement in the first paragraph. He states, “Photographs are distinct from textual documents in that their most important value is informational.” In P:ACM, informational value is defined as "data on activities, events, places and processes not otherwise captured in other forms of documentation" (p. 102). I believe that such a definition also applies to textual documents. Perhaps Charbonneau meant to imply that the technical elements of a photograph often take precedence over other appraisal values. If I interpreted this incorrectly, feel free to clarify this for me! As a side note, I really appreciated Charbonneau’s appraisal chart on p. 130--very helpful to a novice.
-Meg Campbell
No comments:
Post a Comment