"Archives Power" and Archives 2.0

[Amanda Hill]

I just read Randall Jimerson's book, Archives Power, which gives a good overview of some of the last quarter-century's developments in archival theory, particularly in the area of accountability, societal memory and social justice.

He touches on Archives 2.0 in Chapter 6, with references to Kate Theimer's Archives 2.0 manifesto and (inevitably, it seems!) the Bentley Library's Polar Bear Expedition Collections. He suggests that ...

The new technologies employing Web 2.0 applications and related methods require archivists to modify some of their long-held assumptions about archival sources, reference services, and research strategies.

Do you agree with that? I feel differently. To me, it seems that the Web 2.0 tools allow archivists and users of archives to do things that they couldn't do before, but I don't think that I've had to let go of any assumptions about the way that services should be run.

Jimerson also says that...

While archivists may want to accept and promote such technological tools, it is important to note that they may bear a steep price tag, that they may promise more than they can deliver, and that there remain many people unable to use these tools because they cannot afford access or cannot learn the necessary techniques.

I feel that the number of people we can reach through these tools (which certainly do not have to be expensive - far from it, in fact!), who would otherwise have no knowledge of our materials and would probably never be personal visitors to the archives, more than compensates for the fact that some will not be able to use them.

So, what do you think? Are we all running blindly into the Web 2.0 sunshine from our strongrooms and shedding our archival traditions as we do so?

[Thomas Wolf]

"To me, it seems that the Web 2.0 tools allow archivists and users of archives to do things that they couldn't do before, but I don't think that I've had to let go of any assumptions about the way that services should be run." For Germany I would say, that they haven´t done before. The cooperation in describing archival sources is not known.
I personally will run with open eyes into the Web 2.0 sunshine

[Gary Brannan]

I don't see much problem with archivists running from their strongrooms into the Web 2.0 sunshine (we're all a bit pasty from being indoors all day anyway!). I agree that really, the use of Web 2.0 strategies doesn't have to be financially expensive, but it may be more that they're come with a steep time-tag than a steep price-tag. Certainly I see the Web 2.0 being a compliment than a replacement for traditional archival activties and letting us do more in more innovative and exciting ways than we've hitherto been able. I do think though that any approach needs to be careful and co-ordinated as a whole, as there'd be nothing worse than hundreds of small and short lived Web 2.0 projects that flare briefly and then die when the next thing comes along or due to lack of takeup; having said that stuff like Twitter and Flikr are a godsend!
Maybe we're running into the Web 2.0 sunlight, but we might still need sunglasses and sunscreen so we don't get burned!

[Martin Locock]

Of course, if we are to start worrying about whether people have access to or can use Web 2.0 finding aids, we might also ask the same question of traditional finding aids. Web 2.0 at least offers a solution to what was previously an immovable fact of life, that most archives went unused because people who would benefit from using them were unaware of their existence or relevance.

[Jane Stevenson]

I'm not sure that is is about modifying assumptions about sources, services and strategies, but I do think that Web 2.0 and other changes in the environment do require archivists to think differently. I still find that many archivists focus quite narrowly on their own collections and their own little universe, rather than thinking about really being a part of the Web. I think the silo approach is a big barrier to dissemination, although it is gradually changing.