[Personal_archives] A turning point?

[Alison Nordstrom]

I agree strongly with Martha that the overall subject of photographs in
personal archives is so very rich that we would need years rather than days
to wrap our heads around it. Any number of points of focus could be
profitable, but the private vs. public idea relates nicely to our earlier
discussions of context and is IMO particularly germane to archivists who
often find themselves gatekeepers of material never intended for research,
exhibition or other public access and where the death, absence or unknown
identity of its origanal owners makes it impossible to establish guidelines
that we are sure reflect that owner¹s interests.

I¹m curious. Are there pictures in your archives that you do not share or
choose to share selectively, even if they came into your collection with no
such restrictions? At Eastman House, we have from time to time been cautious
with our ( many ) post-mortems and we have a large collection from a
photojournalist that he had labeled ³bad taste² that we would rarely share (
though we have on occaision. )The issue of context remains key. It is fairly
easy to tell a researcher¹s intent and we do feel a need to honor original
meanings and use while staying as open to others¹ interpretations as
possible. We don¹t deal in print material but I imagine the same notions
would apply to correspondence, manuscripts and the like.

And Rick is right. These are questions to be shared with historians,
curators and others. These are ethical questions that are best resolved
through discussion and contemplation with others who share the dilemma.

Related case: In 1971, LIFE photographer W. Eugene Smith made the iconic
image ³Tomoko in her Bath² showing the naked and severely crippled body of a
victim poisoned by industrially generated mercury; it became a powerful
indictment of industrial pollution and remains one of Smith¹s most important
images. In 1997, Tomoko¹s family asked that publication and exhibition of
the image be halted out of respect for their privacy. ( my group of
curatorial colleagues has discussed this often with many points of view)
What wuld you do? Would you exhibit it? Sgare it with a researceher who
requested it? Share it with a researcher working on the general subject of
industrial pollution?

Alison





On 10/30/08 12:28 PM, "Martha Langford" <mlangford at qc.aibn.com> wrote:

> The introduction of postmortem photographs and all the immensely useful
> recommendation from the literature have nevertheless made us all a bit
> thoughtful. The week will end before we sort out the ethics of these
> matters - our conversation will be over.
> 
> So I want to pick up on the disciplinary point about sociologists having
> a more developed theory on the public uses of taboo or potentially
> hurtful material. The social scientists have led the way, it seems to
> me, toward more self-reflexive practices. Everything I've read here so
> far suggests that archivists and art historians are doing their best to
> be both sensitive and reflexive in their work. How do we communicate
> these ideas to emergent researchers, whether in the archives or in the
> classroom? I have my strategies, but I was hoping to hear from you,
> because these ideas need constant refreshment, or they turn in on
> themselves and cease to be productive.
> 
> So: reflexivity...how's it going?
> 
> Martha
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_archives mailing list
> Personal_archives at mailman.yale.edu
> http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/personal_archives
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/personal_archives/attachments/20081030/a9980082/attachment.html