tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10166090.post2254964310932421823..comments2024-02-17T07:59:18.705-08:00Comments on Grad Student Madness: Why Historians Should Visit the ArchivesRufushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17762279210783841414noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10166090.post-53537283869950438092007-08-17T06:23:00.000-07:002007-08-17T06:23:00.000-07:00I know the feeling- I watched David Lynch's INLAND...I know the feeling- I watched David Lynch's INLAND EMPIRE last night!<BR/><BR/>My wording was probably misleading there. I didn't mean they would create archives for that express purpose. I'm sure that the people who make these digital archives have the noblest of intentions.<BR/><BR/>However, that's not a guarantee of future success. Henry Ford didn't intend to make a machine that would heat the atmosphere through carbon monoxide, or to make future generations fatter, or even to replace the hansom cab. The men who created television didn't do so with the intention to drive down literacy rates. With the Internet, there's a reluctance by those of us who are "soaking in it" to question its effects.<BR/><BR/>But, if putting music online has killed off a number of record stores (including Tower amazingly enough), and Amazon has killed off small bookstores, and putting journals online has meant that universities throw out their journals...<BR/><BR/>What I see happening is this- the archives go online and so they stop getting visitors. Eventually, they're going to have to lay off the large staff that these places have, and move the stuff into storage. In fact, the libraries that I study at have begun doing just that with their regular books.<BR/><BR/>I think that the benefit of archiving is that anybody can read this stuff. On one hand, it could lead to a renaissance in reading- the non-reading generation could start reading books and documents again. I think that's the idea behind the Google books project. "People will start reading books again if we make it more like surfing the net!"<BR/><BR/>Conversely, they might just continute not reading and people like me who enjoy traveling to the archives and feeling the paper and wasting our time might just leave the profession. <BR/><BR/>The other thing with the Google books project is that it's perverse to expect people to keep publishing books in order to give them out for free. <BR/><BR/>At any rate, I'm getting off topic too. But I should clarify that I believe the people who are making these archives have the best of intentions and are simply more optimistic than I am about widening the range of readers. This should be commended.Rufushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17762279210783841414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10166090.post-38670151916985924442007-08-16T22:56:00.000-07:002007-08-16T22:56:00.000-07:00Scribes used to copy out manuscripts by hand, eith...Scribes used to copy out manuscripts by hand, either for duplication, or because they were old and crappy and falling apart. In either case, that could only ever be an acknowledgment of use and worth. <BR/><BR/>I have always regarded the urge to create archives--of any kind, including digitally--as a similar endeavor. Perhaps I am not cynical enough, but it seems to be incredibly devious to create entire institutions around the idea of meticulously conserving documents at great expense for the express purpose of moving them out of the realm of utility. It's just so hard for me to buy into that notion.<BR/><BR/>There's probably more, but my train of thought has totally abandoned me here.Hollyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10593117152792976823noreply@blogger.com