|
I learn with great satisfaction that you are about committing to the press the valuable historical and State papers you have been so long collecting. Time and accident are committing daily havoc on the originals deposited in our public offices. The late war has done the work of centuries in this business. The last cannot be recovered, but let us save what remains; not by vaults and locks which fence them from the public eye and use in consigning them to the waste of time, but by such a multiplication of copies, as shall place them beyond the reach of accident (Jefferson [1791] 1984). Thomas Jefferson, often credited with having foreseen the problems his compatriots would face and devising solutions to them, seems in this letter to be typically prophetic in his vision. Is he not describing "preservation through proliferation"the key preservation strategy that libraries adopted in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and that has resulted in the great abundance of resources in libraries? Is not "multiplication of copies," as Jefferson puts it, the way that films and music and photographs have spread through our culture, with demand for preservation following? Is not copying them, be it by photocopying or scanning, and placing them beyond the reach of accident a recipe for avoiding the "daily havoc on the originals"? And, as we look ahead, will these remain the primary strategies for ensuring future access to present-day originals, or should we anticipate major changes in the nature of research, teaching, and preservation-and-access technologies that will render these strategies obsolete? Core principles of artifactual value do not change with genremap versus manuscript versus musical performance. The value of an artifact, however, is profoundly affected by the medium on which the information is fixed. The definition of artifact as a unique item of historical importance worked as long as there was a fair degree of consensus regarding the nature of the artifact. New recording techniques for sound and image, as well as magnetic and electronic reproduction, have put enormous pressure on these heretofore-useful assumptions. This is true even in the case of traditional print/paper artifacts, as has been seen. Artifacts are complex objectsmaterially, structurally, temporally, and perceptually. Cultural forces shape this complexity in an ongoing dialectic that is subject to continual revision and thus is never definitive. The status of any given artifact, like that of any cultural construction, is vulnerable for several reasons. In a museum or a library that has limited economic resources for core mission work, it must compete to maintain a claim on institutional resources. It must also compete for intellectual resourcesfor the attention of the public, of scholars, and of others who, by their attention or lack thereof, valorize its status. This intellectual competition is every bit as parlous as is the economic one. Each generation must engage the issue on its own terms and do so actively if preservation is to be effective. Today, thanks to the very technologies that highlight, if not create, the problems we are facing, we can coordinate efforts to document and preserve in ways hitherto impossible. We should be able to track more clearly what others are doing in identifying what must be saved and what need not. We should be able to coordinate retention of best surviving copies and thereby avoid duplicating preservation efforts. We should be able to know with certainty what "last, best" copies of an artifact exist and where they exist, and therefore to assign responsibility for stewardship of such items. This work is traditionally seen as the purview of librarians and
archivists; however, preservation strategies at the local and national
levels have been and will continue to be dependent for their success
on the engagement of all members of the research community, including
scholars and academic officers. Scholars may not see preservation
of research collections as their responsibility, but until they do,
there is a risk that many valuable research sources will not be preserved.
Faculty can work with local librarians to ensure that scholars' research
needs are clearly articulated and are taken into consideration when
budgets are planned. Faculty can be influential in persuading presidents
and provosts to devote appropriate levels of resources to locally
held research collections. Above all, they can see that part of their
role as scholars is to be stewards of collections as shared resources
across the country. This means engaging at the national as well as
local level to ensure that scarce but valuable resources are being
preserved at some locations. They can engage their national roles
as stewards through their scholarly societies, which act as publishers
and guardians of the scholarly record. They can, through national
organizations, articulate the value of the intellectual heritage
that is at risk and lobby for increased funding to support preservation.
Good stewardship begins with scholars and librarians taking responsibility for the preservation of artifacts in the following ways:
5.2 Best Practices for Preservation of the ArtifactAt the technical level, good stewardship rests on the following principles and practices:
5.3 Strategies for Specific FormatsAs part of the network of libraries responsible for preserving and making accessible artifactual collections, individual libraries can play a critical role in a national preservation strategy by doing the following: Print (pp. 19-30)
Audiovisual (pp. 30-41)
Digital (pp. 41-54)
5.4 RecommendationsAt the local and national levels, there are several actions that members of the research community can take to ensure greater access to original research materials in the future and to use available resources most effectively. Such actions include the following:
5.5 Areas for Further ResearchThe research agenda that has emerged from this investigation into the role of the artifact in library collections is considerable for each of the three types of recording media discussed: print, analog audiovisual, and digital. The most pressing areas, largely nontechnical, include determining what materials are held in libraries and archives, identifying how researchers use source materials, and encouraging the use of primary sources and artifactual collections in research and teaching. In particular, there is a need to
The task force also recommends that a similar investigation be undertaken into the state of preservation among rare and special collections. While excluded from consideration in this study, these collections are as vulnerable to unintended loss and destruction as are the artifactual and digital collections that have been the subject of this report.
|