Dear All
well, it isn't Friday, but Robert Chell does raise some interesting issues
and I'm going to comment on them a little:
> What concerns me is this coming together of the disciplines in what is now
> called the "sector" is identifiying ever more closely archives with
> culture or
> cultural property, to the exclusion of what should always be the
> archivist's
> first task: that of records management, in the true sense of the continuum
> management of the records. What constitutes a "record" as opposed to any
> other form of information is what sets us as archivists or records
> managers
> apart from the librarian and the curator: We are essentially dealing with
> primary material that is or was, or is going to be, an integral part of a
> transaction of business or administration, and is kept because it forms
> evidence of that transaction. There is a danger that we take the common
> ground of information (to be selected, preserved and accessed) too far.
> For
> the archivist or records manager, what is recorded is far less important
> than
> the record of what is transacted, as Sir Hilary Jenkinson, David Bearman
> or
> Greg O'Shea will tell you.
>
> Records management is receiving little attention from Resource, although
> one
> assumes that it will be included in Resource's declared intention of
> drawing
> up its own agenda for archives, due early in 2001.
>
This is an important point and is what differentiates records and archives
from museum objects on the one hand and library resources on the other,
broadly speaking. I raised exactly this issue (records: archives, culture:
accountability) at the last SoA London Region meeting after a very useful
presentation on the work of the London Archives Regional Council (LARC). It
is also being discussed in the usual vigorous professional way on
aus-archivists at the moment. In response to my question at the SoALR
meeting Justin Frost our friend at Resource did say that one of the issues
is that Resource is for culture while accountability matters are more the
purview of the Lord Chancellor's Dept (I am sure he will correct me if I
have got this wrong).
> What appears to be missing is evidence that such integration is good for
> the
> archives, for archivists and for records managers. At a time when FOI and
> the
> management of electronic records are setting the agenda for the next ten
> years, it is surprising that such issues will be being addressed from
> within
> departments more accustomed to dealing with sports centres, swimming pools
> and
> the cultural heritage.
>
Whatever we may think about the desirability of this situation, like so many
other features in our professional life It Is A Fact. I second Robert's
call for evidence about the effect it is having. Why not on the list?
Best wishes
Sarah
* * * * * *
Sarah J A Flynn
Regional Liaison Co-Ordinator, A2A
Public Record Office
Kew
Richmond
Surrey TW9 4DU
Tel (direct line): 020 8392 5328
Fax: 020 8878 8905
Email: [log in to unmask]
www: http://www.pro.gov.uk/archives/A2A/default.htm
* * * * * *
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|