(no subject)

[lizzybennet]

I can't find my keys (uncommon for me) so Josh isn't going to preschool today.

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the concept that archivists have to choose which records to keep and which to destroy. Yes, I can see that it would be easy to know to keep the records relating to those prominent members of society. But what about the glimpses into every day life, the diaries and photographs that let us see how the everyday person lived in 2009, 1985, 1973? How does one decide? I'm doing my literature review on this which means I'm reading a few articles on the issue. Hopefully I can gain some insight. I've always been under the impression that historians write history as we learn it in school. However, now I'm realizing that historians can only write what archivist preserve. If there isn't a document specifying that a certain event occurred, eventually it will be forgotten. There must be proof and this is the function of archives, to preserve that proof.

Comments

[jediwonderboy.livejournal.com]

With the progression of everything digital, why is this even an issue for archivists? I mean, I guess some of the physical remains would be left behind, so the tactile reminders of history would be gone; but the ability to keep that info should be infinite.

[mysteena.livejournal.com]

If only it were that simple (I was under the same impression when I started this venture as well.) The amount of information generated on a daily basis, simply via the Internet is phenomenal. There is physically no way it can all be preserved. However, even if we had the capacity/money to preserve it all, how can we be assured that the technology we use now will be compatible with the technology of the future? For example some of the info that was electronically archived in the 1980's has degraded and is no longer usable. What about security? Digital images can be manipulated, digital information can be hacked.

It's a whole can of worms when you really get into it.

[jediwonderboy.livejournal.com]

Well, I know there are several internet archive databases foating around out there, and it's entirely true that so much is online now, that it's mind numbing to try and think of someway to preserve it. Old digital info is prisoner to the physical devices that are still around to read it, and if needed, transcribe or upload to a new medium.

thinking about just how much info of people's lives here here, living on LJ, is interesting in itself. What happens to it, once it reaches a saturation point?

I think I was reading your post more from a view that old (pre-digital) docs were being looked at, and I didn't know if it was a consideration to scan or visually preserve them.

[mysteena.livejournal.com]

Definitely efforts are being made to digitally scan old documents. Even with those older documents though, decisions must be made over which to save and which to destroy. It's a complicated process and one that can't be learned from textbooks, which I think increases my anxiety about it. Also, as a history buff I feel like I can see the potential value in any document, if that makes sense.