For archives losing precious space to ever increasing collections, digitization may seem like a great solution. However, some may be concerned about what digitization means for preservationists and conservationists. Many professionals in the field argue that intrinsic value make preservation and conservation of documents and artifacts necessary. Hunter (2003) describes records as having “intrinsic value” whey they “have physical qualities that make the original form of the records the only acceptable one in archival terms” (p.67).
Menne-Haritz and Brübach (2000) argue that in some instances, the research value of an object or document can be lost with digitization. Often the physical context of a text offers important information relating to a message. “The loss of the physical contexts, and therefore the aid they give in interpreting and understanding a text, as can happen when texts are digitalized, makes their importance particularly clear” (p. 80).
With digitalizing texts, there is also the threat of changes to a text, unintentional or otherwise. “Authenticity is not attainable in electronic, digital representations” (Menne-Harwitz & Brübach, 2003, p. 81). The original is necessary to verify what is within a digital representation.
Therefore, we must recognize the importance of original documents and their preservation despite digitalization. Original documents serve to put texts within its historical context and authenticate that text. These two things cannot be done with electronic medium. While digital forms may serve as a supplemental reference when the original document is not readily available, they cannot replace the value within the original forms.
Works Cited
Hunter, G. (2003). Developing and maintaining practical archives. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Menne-Haritz, A., & Brübach, N. (2000). The intrinsic value of archive and library material.
Microform & Imaging Review, 29(3), 79-95.
Lauren Zemaitis
The idea that the intrinsic value of an item is the item itself is fascinating. I do agree because there really is something to be said for seeing things in context. When I was in high school I was able to take a trip to Greece and see the Parthenon. That’s not exactly the same as documents but in terms of historical perspective it was a very valuable experience. In an ideal world I guess people would be able to consult the digital images and then actually go to see the physical documents themselves. As for errors in digitizing I would imagine that in some ways it is like translating in that there is potential for human error that can become a permanent part of something.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how the popularity of mp3 files vs. physical compact discs, cassette tapes, records, etc. will affect archives in the long run. What happens when the "original document" is nothing more than a digital file?
ReplyDeleteAs a kid, I remember carefully examining the booklets that came with compact discs. Now I hardly pay attention to album art because I buy most of my music in an online store. The music still sounds the same but I think something is lost in not handling the physical objects: the booklets, the case, the disc itself. It’s one thing for a private citizen to not keep artifacts intact; it’s quite another for a public archive to even consider casting aside original sources. I can understand using digitization to create back-ups but what is an archive if not a place where one can expect to find the physical documents and realia that reflect a culture?
Olivia, it's interesting that you bring up digital formats as back up for music. Currently, music archives are unable to create back ups of important pieces of music due to copyright law. Even when the only known recording is on fragile vinyl, nothing can be done to try to save it under American law. Currently, recorded sound archivists are lobbying Congress to make a change in copyright law to make it possible to save a major part of our historical heritage!
ReplyDelete