[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A rose by any other name? I don't think so!



When I speak to classes on campus, I begin by pointing out the similarities between archives & libraries:  they are both sources of information, are both service-oriented, and both maintain collections so that they can be used for research.  However, because archives hold unique materials that are irreplaceable, they have developed special rules to prevent loss from theft or damage, and providing access to the intellectual content is often complicated and non-standard.

 

Everyone knows about libraries; in general, they are well supported and funded.  Archives are usually isolated, unknown, underfunded.  Because they deal with items that are usually widely published and distributed, libraries have developed standards for providing access, reducing costs, and improving efficiency through cooperative ventures like copy cataloging, forming consortia, and interlibrary loan.  Because archival and manuscript materials are unique, original cataloging must be done for every collection.  Therefore, the benefits of cost savings and increased efficiencies are not available to them.  Archivists are only recently attempting to develop standardized practices for providing access.  I think a lot of this has to do with the fact that the earliest archivists were historians who used the collections themselves and, convinced of the uniqueness of their own materials, were not interested in providing access for other researchers.  The history profession also could not have been more unlike the highly structured world of librarianship, and this is the tradition out of which archival science arose.

 

Accustomed to the open practices of American librarians, patrons expect archives to be open extended hours on nights and weekends, to be able to browse the stacks freely, to photocopy items themselves, and to check out materials.  They also do not expect to have to check their bags and use pencils.  However, once it is explained to them that these rules have been developed to protect unique and irreplaceable items, most are readily cooperative.  And they all certainly understand about the underfunding and staff shortages that prevent archives from being open 24/7.

 

All this being said, I constantly find that my MLS has been an invaluable experience.  After the four basic classes, nearly all of my courses were concentrated in archives-related subjects.  I can’t imagine dealing with the multitudinous multifaceted formats and issues and concerns without the solid grounding I received both through the coursework and internships.  I still get my notebooks out when I have to tackle a new problem or issue!

 

Rebecca Fitzgerald, CA

Mt. St. Mary’s Archives & Dept. of Special Collections

Mt. St. Mary’s College & Seminary

Emmitsburg, MD

301/447-5397

301/447-6868 (fax)

rfitzger@msmary.edu

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Hamson, Susan [mailto:susanh@CHEMHERITAGE.ORG]
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 10:58 AM
To: ARCHIVES@LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU
Subject: A rose by any other name? I don't think so!

 

Hi all.

 

I thought I'd toss this one out to you since we've been without a discussion thread for a bit and since I'm completely peeved at the moment.

 

I had an experience yesterday when someone--uninformed about libraries and archives--asked me if archivists were a subset of librarians.  As I answered, "No, they are different."  I was countered by two librarians who chimed in and offered, "No, they're essentially the same thing."  As we were in a meeting, I was unable to call these individuals on the comment, but . . .

 

My question for my fellow archivists out there is this:  Do you see yourself distinct from librarians?  And (I'm certainly assuming so) how would you counter that comment?

 

Susan

---
Susan Hamson
Archivist 

Othmer Library of Chemical History
Chemical Heritage Foundation
315 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA  19106-2702
Voice: 215-925-2222
Fax: 215-925-6195

The views expressed in this message are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Chemical Heritage Foundation.