<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16757" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>Thanks Martha for your clarifications. You didn't tie me up at all. I just
happen to love words and enjoy opportunities to play with them. Doing so often
illuminates the discussion, I've found. Perhaps as in this case: I think it was
very useful for you to provide the profession use of the term, especially in a
group of largely non-sociologists. It is the kind of thing that archivists would
learn more about if there was greater involvement of other disciplines in our
discourse, as today. For myself, my graduate work was in management science,
which makes me think that the sociologist's "reflexivity" is similar in
meaning to the management term "Hawthorne effect" -- another
term contributed by sociologists. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I do believe with some others in the archives profession (e.g., Terry Cook)
that, at least in institutional archives, description and disposition
management are quite subjective activities. Some have
suggested that archivists should personally sign such documentation
for accountability reasons and future reference. Your question also
gives rise in my mind to another: do institutional archivists dealing with
personal collections not have the right (or is it against generally accepted
professional practice) to advise donors that certain items will not be accepted
if they wish -- e.g., for nude pictures of juveniles? And if they do have the
right, do they choose to use it and how are such decisions made -- solely
according to the instincts of the archivist; using specified institutional
guidelines; by review with an established panel charged to provide
assistance to the archivist; otherwise? The same questions apply to Nancy's
issues where all such photos may be accepted, but then treated very differently
for purposes of access.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rick</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 10/30/2008 6:34:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
mlangford@qc.aibn.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Alison,
the emphasis in your note didn't come through, but I see how we
<BR>misunderstood each other. My point was about the feeling of memory - the
<BR>translation into photographic expression of the state of remembering. A
<BR>photographic work that appears "inclusive and informative" may prompt
<BR>memory, but its chief characteristics bespeak knowledge which summons
<BR>more criticality than exploratory feeling. But the obvious retort is
<BR>that something that appears "inclusive and informative" to you may not
<BR>be so clear to me, and not just because I lack the background or
<BR>contextual data to do the analysis. This is where the punctum trumps the
<BR>studium, and taps into more personal memories. Archivists are
<BR>susceptible to the same subjective, sometimes blinding emotions. And the
<BR>rehearsal of these feelings generally occurs in the public/private realm
<BR>of the reading room.<BR><BR>Nancy, you've formulated an excellent
list of questions in response to <BR>the reflexivity question Sorry, Rick, to
tie you in knots over my choice <BR>of words, but we were borrowing from
sociology where the word is used to <BR>convey the theory that the presence of
the observer influences the <BR>behaviour that is observed. Translating that
into the archives, I would <BR>suggest that there is no way for an archivist
to bring me material <BR>'neutrally'. Everything, from a professional judgment
of my competence <BR>to process certain kinds of data to a subjective
judgment of my <BR>entitlement to certain kinds of data - I think that's what
Nancy is <BR>getting at with her list, but I won't put words in her
mouth.<BR><BR>I hope this isn't too telegraphic - I feel the end of
conversation <BR>coming nearer and I'm still trying to sketch that in-between
space I <BR>asked about at the beginning. Let me bring Erving Goffman in.
Visiting <BR>researchers know that there is a backstage behind the onstage
behaviour <BR>of the archivist who is advising them. Indeed Alison just
confirmed it, <BR>in her report that selective sharing takes place. So back to
my earlier <BR>question - how's your reflexivity? Do archivists take stock,
from time <BR>to time, of the archival effect? I actually think that's what
Nancy is <BR>doing for us. Other voices may wish to chime
in.<BR><BR>Martha<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Personal_archives
mailing
list<BR>Personal_archives@mailman.yale.edu<BR>http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/personal_archives<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></FONT><BR><BR><BR><DIV CLASS="aol_ad_footer" ID="439e6305b229ed1d83b24f57b7cf48af"><FONT style="color: black; font: normal 10pt ARIAL, SAN-SERIF;"><HR style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px">Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. <a href="http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212416248x1200771803/aol?redir=http://travel.aol.com/discount-travel?ncid=emlcntustrav00000001">Check out Today's Hot 5 Travel Deals!</a></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>