Excellent points on the Baker, his argument is strongest if you only discuss newspaper preservation. The points he makes are weakened when you broaden the discussion to include committing resources to other material instead of or in addition to newspapers as Geri has done below. To follow up on the institutional angle Geri raises - has anyone seen Baker criticize the newspapers themselves for not preserving their runs, what about photo morgues? Baker criticizes the only institutions in society which attempt to do anything to preserve newspapers, by saying libraries are not doing it right
The passages in which he describes the joy of flipping through the paper copies of the newspapers suggests that his technical criticisms of microfilming are not genuine. IMHO he would not be satisfied with better microfilm. At the heart of his criticism is an A Priori argument: saving the "originals" is good, libraries discard them = therefore libraries are bad.
Baker gives Librarians, Archivists,and Records Managers much to think about... but right now I am thinking about how much higher Baker's profile as a writer is after attacking national institutions like the LOC and the NYPL hmmmm....
Anybody hear much about Baker BEFORE his crusade began?
-----Original Message-----
From: Geri E. Solomon [SMTP:Geri.E.Solomon@HOFSTRA.EDU]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 9:59 AM
To: ARCHIVES@LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU
Subject: Baker
I think that there are a lot of passionate people out there who love old newspapers. That is nice. However, newspapers are only one facet of the circulated information that has been created. It is made in multiple copies to be read by the multitudes. Technically, unless it is created by the institution itself, it probably isn't even archival. (Or, perhaps if you are a regional repository.) Most archivists have a directive to save the "unique" documents that tell the tale of their institutions. The items that are single copies, that give us the info, that connects the institution, that determines the policy.
I understand that there are genealogists, there are passionate newspaper people, there are others that think that everything should be saved. Truly that is impossible. So, we microfilm or we copy onto formats that are not the real thing, but are substitutes. It may not be the only answer, but it is the best that we have so far.
As far as Baker is concerned, you see that already he is thinking like an administrator when he looks for shelving, and making appointments for researchers. Soon he will be getting boxes of stuff dumped on his doorstep. Maybe this is the best thing that could have happened, he'll be in a better position to judge the profession in a few years. After people start giving him the newspapers that he might not want as much, or multiple copies, or stuff that is not newspapers at all, but the papers of someone who gave him a lot of $$$$ and that are not particularly interesting or important, but how can he offend them?
And as they say about the teaching profession, if you want summers off, and lots of holidays, go get your degree and become a teacher....Or, if you think you can do a better job as an archivist, go get your degree and get a job and let me know where you are in about 10 years.
Geri (who is tired of being maligned) Solomon
Libarges@Hofstra.edu
A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List!
To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to listserv@listserv.muohio.edu
In body of message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
*or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to archives@listserv.muohio.edu
Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html
Problems? Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <rschmidt@lib.muohio.edu>