Philosophy of LIS Practice
In contemplating my library and information science (LIS) philosophy, I see that my graduate work has been enhanced by my professional employment in an academic library for over ten years, along with my experiences in exhibit curation and involvement in community archival work. In tandem, the two lived experiences of active employment in Librarianship and the pursuit of an MLIS have impacted my engagement with the coursework and strengthened my professional identity. In retrospect, I no longer feel discomfort for not pursuing an MLIS until this juncture in my career and feel that this moment was worth the wait. This circumstance has armed me with a greater awareness of my positionality and privilege, informing my LIS philosophy, archival values, and ethics in ways they might not have been.
My understanding of archives in society is informed by the role in which archives have historically structured collective memory. There is a reason why it is said that history is written by the victors. The archive is a traditionally privileged space that reinforces the hierarchical structures of society through its power to determine what is worthy of preservation and what is not. This power influences societal conceptions of identity and belonging. This privileging creates a cacophony of silenced voices that directly contributes to the marginalization of communities. I denounce the cliché role of the archivist as an impassive custodian of records. F. Gerald Ham declared archives should “hold up a mirror for mankind,” and if archives fail this task, people will not understand the world they inhabit.1 Ham’s call for archivists to metamorphose from passivity into a “more active and perhaps more creative role” in building the archival record resonates with me.2 As Jimerson observed, archivists can either co-create power structures or promote their dismantling.3 Due to the fragile fluidity of collective and personal memory, archival memory has become a means to link memory to stable and preservable forms. Artifacts and documents within archival holdings become “surrogates for memory,” in which memory is fixed within time and place.4 This has great importance, considering that historical memory is structured upon the evidentiary holdings of the archive. Given that archives are not neutral institutions, archival memory is privileged, thus privileging historical memory. The significance and authority that archives confer upon documents directly influence historical memory, and over time impact collective memory. We must recognize the archivist’s role in identity and memory construction politics. It is imperative, given the historical exclusion of narratives, to address archival gaps and give voice to archival silences, ensuring archival holdings reflect the diversity of our shared communities.
Many factors affect desired archival outcomes. Institutional barriers must be navigated, such as organizational missions and collecting scopes, funding, physical and virtual storage, expertise, staffing capacity, lack of equipment, organizational support, and internal and external politics. Interpersonal relations between communities and institutions call for consideration and potential redressing to implement archival interventions and collaborations. With time and patience, the multitude of layers impacting archival work can be addressed. It will be necessary to serve the organizational mission within which your archive is situated, however, I will always interpret this mission through the lens of humanizing the archival record. I believe in building meaningful relationships with colleagues, fostering open dialogue and a cohesive understanding of organizational mission, and building a shared strategy to address the dilemma of breadth versus depth in archival holdings and representation. Given that I believe most archival work happens in the negative space, driven by what is not there, collection gaps and silences must be identified and redressed. Representation impacts archival use. Marginalized communities, if and when they exist within an archive, rarely are allowed to speak with their own voice or through their records.5 It is imperative that communities see themselves honestly reflected within archives and that their existence is documented and validated in meaningful ways. This is not achieved in a vacuum; one must conduct an environmental scan of our shared communities, identify allies, build relationships with individuals to serve as archival advocates within different communities, and be informed by individual communities as to what is lacking in archival holdings. With what narratives do they self-identify, and how do they want those narratives preserved and presented? What documents and ephemera do they consider integral in illustrating their personal lives, which in turn gives communities life?
I believe my archival role to be a curator of narratives rather than a keeper of records. Through the lens of telling a story, giving voice to a silence, or redressing an archival gap, I cannot separate, as Reed posited, the people imbued within the records from the records themselves.6 My primary archival responsibility is to contribute to the democratization of archives. This professional ethic is influenced by Derrida’s statement that “effective democratization can always be measured by this essential criterion: the participation in and the access to the archive, its constitution, and its interpretation.”7 To meet these criteria, I will strive to implement participatory practices into my archival approaches to ensure that communities are empowered to document their narratives. I will implement post-custodial approaches in the documentation of communities to resituate power into the hands of the community, rather than the academy. Through digitization rather than collecting, communities retain control of their cultural heritage. Greater access can be provided with virtual archival amplification, along with facilitating participatory interpretation through annotated description or participatory tagging. Above all, no matter the level of archival intervention, it should be to facilitate, not dictate. Positionality is important to state, to, and with, the archival record. These actions will foster democratization and align with Harris’ concept of “fundamental hospitality,” the belief that it is “imperative to open the archive in a fundamental way to those alienated in it and by it.”8 I recognize that democratization is an ongoing process that has no completion and must evolve with societal changes; however, the task is necessary to make a “contribution to the development of shared understanding of overlapping histories.”9
My ethics and values, outlined above, are in conversation with the Society of American Archivists’ value statement and code of ethics.10 I will strive to expand access and usage opportunities for users and potential users of archival records. I will cultivate collaborative opportunities not only with creators, users, and colleagues, but with those who wish to engage with the archival record. I will promote transparency and mitigate harm. I will respect the diversity of humanity and advocate for its inclusive archival representation. I will help communities achieve sustainable preservation of their cultural heritage and share knowledge and expertise with creators and users alike. Access is of paramount importance and should be promoted and provided to the greatest extent. However, it is necessary for archivists to foreground ethical considerations and ensure injustices and marginalization do not continue. One must be sensitive to the distribution of cultural materials and attuned to the nuances of divergent public interests and understandings of public and private, which may dictate the need for imaginative responses to different modes of circulation and access. In the end, I will be an ally in preserving the archive: the archive, as defined by Verne Harris, “that is all around us; it is on us and inside us. It is the stuff of daily life.”11
My understanding of archives in society is informed by the role in which archives have historically structured collective memory. There is a reason why it is said that history is written by the victors. The archive is a traditionally privileged space that reinforces the hierarchical structures of society through its power to determine what is worthy of preservation and what is not. This power influences societal conceptions of identity and belonging. This privileging creates a cacophony of silenced voices that directly contributes to the marginalization of communities. I denounce the cliché role of the archivist as an impassive custodian of records. F. Gerald Ham declared archives should “hold up a mirror for mankind,” and if archives fail this task, people will not understand the world they inhabit.1 Ham’s call for archivists to metamorphose from passivity into a “more active and perhaps more creative role” in building the archival record resonates with me.2 As Jimerson observed, archivists can either co-create power structures or promote their dismantling.3 Due to the fragile fluidity of collective and personal memory, archival memory has become a means to link memory to stable and preservable forms. Artifacts and documents within archival holdings become “surrogates for memory,” in which memory is fixed within time and place.4 This has great importance, considering that historical memory is structured upon the evidentiary holdings of the archive. Given that archives are not neutral institutions, archival memory is privileged, thus privileging historical memory. The significance and authority that archives confer upon documents directly influence historical memory, and over time impact collective memory. We must recognize the archivist’s role in identity and memory construction politics. It is imperative, given the historical exclusion of narratives, to address archival gaps and give voice to archival silences, ensuring archival holdings reflect the diversity of our shared communities.
Many factors affect desired archival outcomes. Institutional barriers must be navigated, such as organizational missions and collecting scopes, funding, physical and virtual storage, expertise, staffing capacity, lack of equipment, organizational support, and internal and external politics. Interpersonal relations between communities and institutions call for consideration and potential redressing to implement archival interventions and collaborations. With time and patience, the multitude of layers impacting archival work can be addressed. It will be necessary to serve the organizational mission within which your archive is situated, however, I will always interpret this mission through the lens of humanizing the archival record. I believe in building meaningful relationships with colleagues, fostering open dialogue and a cohesive understanding of organizational mission, and building a shared strategy to address the dilemma of breadth versus depth in archival holdings and representation. Given that I believe most archival work happens in the negative space, driven by what is not there, collection gaps and silences must be identified and redressed. Representation impacts archival use. Marginalized communities, if and when they exist within an archive, rarely are allowed to speak with their own voice or through their records.5 It is imperative that communities see themselves honestly reflected within archives and that their existence is documented and validated in meaningful ways. This is not achieved in a vacuum; one must conduct an environmental scan of our shared communities, identify allies, build relationships with individuals to serve as archival advocates within different communities, and be informed by individual communities as to what is lacking in archival holdings. With what narratives do they self-identify, and how do they want those narratives preserved and presented? What documents and ephemera do they consider integral in illustrating their personal lives, which in turn gives communities life?
I believe my archival role to be a curator of narratives rather than a keeper of records. Through the lens of telling a story, giving voice to a silence, or redressing an archival gap, I cannot separate, as Reed posited, the people imbued within the records from the records themselves.6 My primary archival responsibility is to contribute to the democratization of archives. This professional ethic is influenced by Derrida’s statement that “effective democratization can always be measured by this essential criterion: the participation in and the access to the archive, its constitution, and its interpretation.”7 To meet these criteria, I will strive to implement participatory practices into my archival approaches to ensure that communities are empowered to document their narratives. I will implement post-custodial approaches in the documentation of communities to resituate power into the hands of the community, rather than the academy. Through digitization rather than collecting, communities retain control of their cultural heritage. Greater access can be provided with virtual archival amplification, along with facilitating participatory interpretation through annotated description or participatory tagging. Above all, no matter the level of archival intervention, it should be to facilitate, not dictate. Positionality is important to state, to, and with, the archival record. These actions will foster democratization and align with Harris’ concept of “fundamental hospitality,” the belief that it is “imperative to open the archive in a fundamental way to those alienated in it and by it.”8 I recognize that democratization is an ongoing process that has no completion and must evolve with societal changes; however, the task is necessary to make a “contribution to the development of shared understanding of overlapping histories.”9
My ethics and values, outlined above, are in conversation with the Society of American Archivists’ value statement and code of ethics.10 I will strive to expand access and usage opportunities for users and potential users of archival records. I will cultivate collaborative opportunities not only with creators, users, and colleagues, but with those who wish to engage with the archival record. I will promote transparency and mitigate harm. I will respect the diversity of humanity and advocate for its inclusive archival representation. I will help communities achieve sustainable preservation of their cultural heritage and share knowledge and expertise with creators and users alike. Access is of paramount importance and should be promoted and provided to the greatest extent. However, it is necessary for archivists to foreground ethical considerations and ensure injustices and marginalization do not continue. One must be sensitive to the distribution of cultural materials and attuned to the nuances of divergent public interests and understandings of public and private, which may dictate the need for imaginative responses to different modes of circulation and access. In the end, I will be an ally in preserving the archive: the archive, as defined by Verne Harris, “that is all around us; it is on us and inside us. It is the stuff of daily life.”11
1 Ham, F. Gerald. “The Archival Edge,” The American Archivist 38, no. 1 (1975): 5–13.
2 Ibid., 8.
3 Jimerson, Randall C. "Archives and Manuscripts: Archives and Memory,” OCLC Systems & Services: Vol. 19,
no.3 (2003): 85-95.
4 Ibid., 89.
5 Flinn, Andrew. “Community Histories, Community Archives: Some Opportunities and Challenges,” Journal of the Society of Archivists, 28, no. 2 (2007): 151-176.
6 Reed, Barbara, “Reinventing Access,” Archives and Manuscripts 42, no. 2 (2014): 123-132.
7 Jacques Derrida, Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 4.
8 Harris, Verne. “Archons, Aliens and Angels: Power and Politics in the Archive,” in The Future of Archives and Recordkeeping: A Reader, by Jennie Hill, 103-122. London: Facet, 2011.
9 Flinn, Andrew. “Community Histories, Community Archives: Some Opportunities and Challenges,” 161.
10 “SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics.” SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics | Society of American Archivists. Accessed March 27, 2022. https://www2.archivists.org/statements/saa-core-values-statementand-code-of-ethics.
11 Harris, Verne. “Archons, Aliens and Angels: Power and Politics in the Archive,” 105.
2 Ibid., 8.
3 Jimerson, Randall C. "Archives and Manuscripts: Archives and Memory,” OCLC Systems & Services: Vol. 19,
no.3 (2003): 85-95.
4 Ibid., 89.
5 Flinn, Andrew. “Community Histories, Community Archives: Some Opportunities and Challenges,” Journal of the Society of Archivists, 28, no. 2 (2007): 151-176.
6 Reed, Barbara, “Reinventing Access,” Archives and Manuscripts 42, no. 2 (2014): 123-132.
7 Jacques Derrida, Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 4.
8 Harris, Verne. “Archons, Aliens and Angels: Power and Politics in the Archive,” in The Future of Archives and Recordkeeping: A Reader, by Jennie Hill, 103-122. London: Facet, 2011.
9 Flinn, Andrew. “Community Histories, Community Archives: Some Opportunities and Challenges,” 161.
10 “SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics.” SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics | Society of American Archivists. Accessed March 27, 2022. https://www2.archivists.org/statements/saa-core-values-statementand-code-of-ethics.
11 Harris, Verne. “Archons, Aliens and Angels: Power and Politics in the Archive,” 105.