In this week’s readings in Archive Stories: Facts, Fictions, and the Writing of History, a collection of essays are presented in order to show how the past works in the present, how archives interact with state matters, and how sometimes archives can become a contact zone. Through research and studies of archives around the world from a wide selection of authors, Antoinette Burton brings together these issues. It quickly becomes clear the amount of issues that archives face; whether it be from outside sources such as government regimes or from simply how to incorporate a sensitive issue such as the Soweto uprising. One of the most interesting themes of this book is that it shows how history can change and how often times objectivity is lost in history due to outside pressures.
One clear example of outside pressure comes from the essay by Jeff Sahadeo called, “Without the Past There is no Future”: Archives, History, and Authority in Uzbekistan.” In the creation of a central archive after the fall of Soviet rule in the area, it shows the need to reconcile two different histories and how access can be denied and utilized. Therefore these archives clearly become a contact zone within the country. In a country that has been forced to constantly change not only its culture but its understanding of the past, it becomes obvious why a sign that reads, “without the past, there is no future” would be necessary in such a central archive.
Throughout this collection it is shown the importance of archives in national identity, in continuing and exploring history, and how controlled they can be down to even who has the right to look at their materials. This book is an important tool in understanding the significance of archives in today’s societies. The use of essays allows the reader to understand that this is a global topic and breaks up what could become a monotonous essay. Also the division of the book into three distinct sections allows Burton to arrange the essays she has included into her three arguments. This book was informative and well researched, as well it helped to broaden my own understanding of just how many trials archives face around the world.
One of the things that truly struck me, and I am not even sure the author intended this to be a point, but how divided a collection can become in the archive system. This became apparent in the essay on the Peal archives in New Zealand. Mr. Peal collated documents and resources pertaining to the Polynesian society in the late 1800s. Today his works are scattered throughout larger collections: the main Polynesian Society Collection, the library section, and the “further records” section. I guess I just never realized how a collection, largely donated, would become split between different areas. It seems to make the work of an archivist a little bit more difficult when one considers that even taking care of one collection can span several different areas and centers.
The Final Frontier?
15 years ago
2 comments:
Like you, I was amazed at how different interpretations of history overtime influence archives and how archivists practice documentation and archival research. This was apparent in Pohlandt-McCormick's essay about her experiences in the archives in South Africa. In the beginning, she was limited to what material she could research as a result of the apartheid government protecting themselves from exposed injustices and crimes of its officials. Government officials, even citizens not wanting to get caught with restricted information, even went so far as to shredding documents. Through these practices it is obvious that the underlying goal of presenting historical evidence objectively and as a whole was unimportant at that time. Once the TRC began and the regime in South Africa changed, there was more awareness and acceptance on her research of the Soweto uprisings. She even got to go into the stacks and find posters that she had been asking for for months.
While the transition did not happen overnight, it still amazed me how quickly the archives in South Africa were able to change with the times. I liked how Pohlandt-McCormick described the archivists as once being "guardians" to the archival records were now "facilitators" and essentially becoming every researcher's dream.
Although not completely surprised, the main theme of governmental or archivist intrusion in the access to archives was a bit much to deal with. Its as if historians receive a double jeopardy, with the verification of research documentation and political control, for ultimately adding sources to the archival record.
Post a Comment