Comments on: Canada's national archives being dismantled and scattered

By: fnt23

fnt23 — Thu, 31 May 2012 15:01:00 +0000

I won’t touch on digitization – it’s a huge topic, and I think davidasposted has pointed out a great example of why it won’t always work. I do want to talk about volunteering:
A great sentiment, and I applaud the motivation, I really do. Any desire to preserve our history is something I am passionate about.
Except that, as someone so passionate about this that I completed a masters in Archival studies well over a year ago, I now cannot get work. I have been trying all over the country, and so often I am told that the archive is not hiring – it is run by volunteers.
And I’m torn up about it. I know many of these places do not have the budget to hire us, and I desperately WANT this history preserved above all else. But volunteers do not have the proper training, and what work I have had (two small contracts, less than a month each), I have been hired to, essentially, clean up after decades of volunteers as much as I could with the little time they wanted to hire me for. It wasn’t pretty for the records. A lot of them were nigh useless due to improper methodology – either through all loss of context, or through deterioration because of improper preservation strategies, if any.
And then there are the job issues. Wages on archival job postings, which supposedly used to be $25 dollars an hour, are dropping to $10 – 15 dollars an hour for postings looking for people with masters degrees and five years experience. Sometimes they don’t bother to pay – you need a degree and experience for the opportunity to try to “expand your resume.” These are not lucrative places – small businesses hold competitions to hire us for nothing. The competition for any sort of archival work is so fierce – so many of my peers have given up what for many of us is a dream – and then I hear that an archive is not looking to hire because so many volunteers come in and it makes me pretty sad.
So I’m torn. If everyone stopped volunteering, maybe qualified archivists would get jobs – and there are so many of us desperate for them, with more graduating every year. Or maybe corporations will just say “well, if we can’t archive it for free, we won’t bother.” So who am I to tell anyone who wants to help to stop helping? Hell, even I’m volunteering once in a while because otherwise I would have no experience. I don’t really know what else to do.

By: Jeremy Mesiano-Crookston

Jeremy Mesiano-Crookston — Tue, 29 May 2012 05:58:00 +0000

I submit that if a program requires explicit explanation and justification of its existence for it to be even noticed by the public, the public probably doesn’t care.

Great, well let’s just lump every form of theoretical science, every form of linguistics, every field of study that doesn’t get an interview with Katie Couric and call it a day. Large Hadron Collider? Fuck em. Let em get on Letterman, then I’ll give a shit about it.

You don’t care about archives because you’re a person who doesn’t care about archives. Don’t project that onto the world. lots of people study them. Lots of historians do, lots of sociologists do. Sure, it’s not ever going to cure cancer, but it’s a useful part of society, and one which basically is the starting point for civilization. We save things and remember them.

By: Kimmo

Kimmo — Tue, 29 May 2012 04:07:00 +0000

Heartbreaking, pointless, idiotic fucking bastardry.

By: Trevor Kollmann

Trevor Kollmann — Tue, 29 May 2012 01:34:00 +0000

The choice of words may have been strong and I should not have singled anyone out, but thank you for clarifying your position. Thinking more on this issue, I wouldn’t be as concerned on his background, but on whether he is accomplishing what many believe is critical for the position and on that end, that is a definite “no.” Since he has failed in his responsibility as a bureaucrat to bring in money to a critical institution, it seems obvious that people should call for his replacement.

Though that will bring up my earlier point, education is just one facet of a person. However, I agree that beginning an education outside of library science would likely put you at a disadvantage for being a good administrator at an archives, so a replacement should have exceptional experience. If there are plenty of qualified archivists who are willing to work in an administrative position (and I have no knowledge on this topic) and are not getting the position, I would look to a higher level of government to question their priorities.As a bit off topic from the original post, economics is a very broad field and certainly has meandered from the original focus of economics. However, business and economics degrees are popular majors for students and this fact may partly account for your experience with short-sighted economists(and business)/administrators.

By: Biff

Biff — Mon, 28 May 2012 20:41:00 +0000

Gutting the library of Congress would be analogous and a tragedy – down here in the lower 48 we have the Texas Board of Education that purges our current children’s text books of references to our past be they civil rights, Mexican/US history, native American history , a full picture of separation of church and state, Darwin and evolution – so in the end, our museums and archives will only be of valuable to those who are actually educated enough to use it.
the fact that “only 4% of the LAC collection has been digitized to date — a poor record that will be made worse by the cuts announced…which reduced digitization staff by 50%.” , reminds me that the last time I checked the land reclamation progress made by the tar sands conglomerate was one acre reclaimed – Politicians always like to have a little something to show the gullible if they ask .

By: Russell McOrmond

Russell McOrmond — Mon, 28 May 2012 20:39:00 +0000

The Berne Convention (Which became WIPO treaty #1 by the way) having a lack of formalities for copyright is separate from the deposit requirement. Whether or not you deposited at LAC you still had Copyright, just weren’t conforming to separate (and unfortunately largely unenforced) laws.

I don’t see this lack of archiving to be a good thing, as so much of our heritage will be lost without there being some incentive for people to be proactive in preservation.

I also disagree with the antiquated interpretation of Berne which suggests there should never be any formalities at any point in the future. This concept pre-dates modern technology which makes it far easier to register (and renew) that tiny fraction of works that are intended to under copyright by their copyright holders than the majority of works which are in the public domain. Online registration of works, with possibly a 2-year grace period, would be trivial for copyright holders and would reduce the massive costs on the rest of society dealing with issues like orphaned works, determining the expiry of copyright, etc.

Having a database would be great for copyright holders. Ensuring that such a database is kept up-to-date (through renewal requirements) would mean people who want to license works would be able to find the relevant copyright holder to negotiate a license. The “not available for sale” problem is far greater than the copyright infringement problem, and we should be harnessing modern technology in order to facilitate more licensing : not sticking our heads in the 1886 Berne Convention sand and giving up on all those royalties.

BTW: For those in the USA who only became part of Berne in 1989, Canada was under Berne since the convention first came in force in 1887. We have nearly a century more experience with these issues and problems with Berne (and thus WIPO treaties built on Berne) than you have :-) http://c11.ca/chronology

By: AVR

AVR — Mon, 28 May 2012 20:35:00 +0000

I note the apocalyptic tone by way of explaining why this isn’t going to get political traction: because every micro-scandal is now treated as the irreparable turning point of descent into barbarism, and the apolitical middle tunes it all out.

To everyone: as a general principle, I support libraries, museums and archival efforts of all kinds – and especially digitization projects. It’d be nice if every worthwhile social initiative had unlimited resources. But, given real-world limitations, and that most federal departments are getting massive cuts at the moment, treating this as a harbinger of the darkest dystopia and calling me (and others) ever-so-witty names isn’t really that constructive, y’know?

By: stephenl123

stephenl123 — Mon, 28 May 2012 20:18:00 +0000

One aspect of this got conflated with the sell-off in the original article: ”LAC officials are considering cutting back on a central aspect of their mandate to receive from publishers two copies of all material published in Canada.” If they do eliminate the deposit requirement, it will bring them into compliance with the Universal Copy Right Convention (pre-DMCA, pre-WIPO). The deposit requirement says artists righters and musicians are not protected by copyright law unless they file the proper paperwork. Eliminating this is actually a good thing.

By: davidasposted

davidasposted — Mon, 28 May 2012 19:34:00 +0000

Digitization is great for consuming words on pages, but less so for most other bibliographic concerns. Right now I am working at the Library and Archives examining old chapbooks, whose physical construction tell me much about the development of publishing in Canada and, frankly, is more important in that regard than the text itself.

By: blindidiotgod

blindidiotgod — Mon, 28 May 2012 19:27:00 +0000

You’ve hit the nail on the head. It’s all about access to information and the Harper agenda to do away with it.

By: chenille

chenille — Mon, 28 May 2012 19:26:00 +0000

Characterizing maintenance of current spending levels as an increase does matter. Because it is a lie, and of the type which can sabotage political will, which is not so immutable as you pretend.

By: blindidiotgod

blindidiotgod — Mon, 28 May 2012 19:26:00 +0000

It’s obviously useless to argue with someone who would see the Smithsonian, or the Library of Congress as a useless cause. It’s also useless to argue with someone who, out of his/her own ignorance, isn’t aware that the aging building is not the only place the public can access the collection, that if you had to go to Ottawa every time you needed something from LAC it wouldn’t have survived this long, that every library in Canada has access to the collection, the real main building and preservation area are in Gatineau, and the only reason that the building in question is in the state it’s in is because ignorant people like you are the ones in power, and there has been no funding for an institution that was at one time in the running to be as big as the Library of Congress.

By: chenille

chenille — Mon, 28 May 2012 19:17:00 +0000

I’m not trying to dehumanize anyone, and I apologize for slighting economists on the whole. However, it’s a field that admits a lot of garbage – presumably not in its actual study, but in what gets sold as “economics” to the general public, like psychology and nutrition.

And economics and business seem to be popular cover for a lot of the short-sighted administrators who care about very little but the immediate budget. It’s no surprise to see one more thing pulled apart by someone under their banner, whose experience in that field comes after he was added at the top. It’s hard to believe they couldn’t find an qualified archivist, isn’t it?

But you’re right, the problem is surely people picking administrators for dismantling things, rather than anything wrong with all economists.

By: Funk Daddy

Funk Daddy — Mon, 28 May 2012 19:13:00 +0000

You are confused, and answer someone else.

However, where the public-private partnership results in the destruction of ministerial archives that are used regularly then I suggest another option, one that is not totally insufficient.

By: Funk Daddy

Funk Daddy — Mon, 28 May 2012 19:09:00 +0000

The public doesn’t “care” about many things until they feel the effect, by that measure you could say that the public didn’t care about water treatment, until Walkerton. The public doesn’t care about rail maintenance, until a derailment. The public won’t care about this, until the loss is felt in less effectual policy and lowered competitive ability for Canadian academics.

As for how people are responding to the government’s and your short-sighted outlook, the tone reaches a fever pitch as a result of the compilation of similar actions by this government, not just this one act.

No AVR, in fact some collections are being 86ed, you are simply incorrect in that regard. The cuts affect way more than one facility, but you clearly didn’t know anything about that apart from being told.

By: AVR

AVR — Mon, 28 May 2012 18:55:00 +0000

It doesn’t matter if you characterize an increase from current budget intentions as an increase or restoration of previous highs. If the decision has been made to decrease, the decreased amount becomes the new normal. Increasing from that amount is an increase.

It’s just not evident there’s the political will for that spending. Accordingly, what do you suggest other than the public-private partnership option?

By: AVR

AVR — Mon, 28 May 2012 18:44:00 +0000

I submit that if a program requires explicit explanation and justification of its existence for it to be even noticed by the public, the public probably doesn’t care. That’s not to say it’s not doing something important, just that a campaign like this is unlikely to work.
If that’s true, it probably doesn’t matter how fervently *you* believe it’s invaluable to have all those materials available to the public in an aging, flood-prone building on Wellington.

In any event, the apocalyptic tone in this thread is way out of proportion to what’s actually happening. Collections aren’t being Fahrenheit 451′ed, they’ll just be slightly less convenient for researchers in Ottawa/potentially slightly more convenient for researchers elsewhere.

By: Funk Daddy

Funk Daddy — Mon, 28 May 2012 18:19:00 +0000

Dem books is gubmint gun too fur! We is throw dem in da harb- in da harb- in da waters!

LOOK! Dem floats! Is a book! dem floats! Burn it, is a book! is floats!

By: Funk Daddy

Funk Daddy — Mon, 28 May 2012 18:13:00 +0000

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/013/013-395-e.html

Some, but clearly not enough. Though I warrant he is not at this time authorized to respond to critics with any but the budgetary boilerplate provided by his appointers.

By: Funk Daddy

Funk Daddy — Mon, 28 May 2012 18:01:00 +0000

Digitizing can be used to save big money, when materials are digitized from the basis of frequency of access you can accrue the constant benefits of placing that material in safe cold storage which inevitably results in facility and staff savings, or being able to redirect those resources elsewhere. Also you must account for the benefit of being able to offer increased access of frequently accessed materials.

By: blindidiotgod

blindidiotgod — Mon, 28 May 2012 17:57:00 +0000

I should add that the public doesn’t hear about this service because LAC has always been low on cash in the first place. AVR doesn’t seem to understand that there has never been a call to expand, nor increase spending, just to stop the endless cuts that come year after year. There was already a good infrastructure in place before it had been slowly, and quietly dismantled by the government in power. It’s cost the taxpayers more to have, what they’ve already paid for, so thoroughly decimated.

By: Funk Daddy

Funk Daddy — Mon, 28 May 2012 17:53:00 +0000

Who asked to expand the LAC budget? The NADP budget was stable and was the path to reducing the LAC budget while expanding access instead of restricting it or, as in the case of Transport Canada archives, which I have used, doing away with access altogether? Those archives are being ditched altogether.

Right, government is meant to be short-sighted and solely populist. That explains the StatsCan debacle too, doesn’t it? More focus on staying in power, not in delivering service or accountability. Do you know who else accessed Ministerial specific archives and libraries? Policy-makers. But if you don’t mind making policy from a purely ideological standpoint, I suppose your otherwise ridiculous statement stands.

Under which circumstances? F-35 circumstances? Tell me what percentage the NADP’s 9.6 million dollar budget represents of the 25 billion dollar boondoggle Conservative circumstances necessitate?

By: zarray

zarray — Mon, 28 May 2012 17:51:00 +0000

I’d probably think “Oh god the tea partiers have gone too far”

By: Ryan Lenethen

Ryan Lenethen — Mon, 28 May 2012 17:47:00 +0000

Next, new mandatory textbook:
The Official History of Canada: Harper Edition.

Also: If they are looking to save money, they should know that Digitizing is VERY expensive, both to create and to maintain. It is also only really applicable to certain archives. The archives include an awful lot of other stuff than just books that are either hard to digitize, or impossible. The point of digitizing is to allow for increased access. Not everything falls into that requirement.

By: Trevor Kollmann

Trevor Kollmann — Mon, 28 May 2012 17:30:00 +0000

As an economist who has also spent months in archives researching material, I’m absolutely appalled by the apathy of the Canadian government towards preserving history as I’m fairly certain that know one should wait for a repeat of the 1890 US Census debacle for people to realize the importance of proper archives. However, I’m also appalled at the ad hominem attacks that try to dehumanize groups of people. Before you blindly attack someone based on their educational background, it may be more useful to understand whether Caron had other experience which may have suggested that he would be an excellent steward of the archives.

By: chenille

chenille — Mon, 28 May 2012 15:51:00 +0000

It’s just not fiscally or politically realistic to expand LAC’s budget.

Where “expand” apparently means “not make large cuts”. Whereas I’d think you’d at least accept that their budget should increase with inflation; you argued that should be a given for things like tuition.

By: Marcia Kennedy

Marcia Kennedy — Mon, 28 May 2012 15:22:00 +0000

And pour a barrel or two of oil for them while you’re at it.

By: Jeremy Mesiano-Crookston

Jeremy Mesiano-Crookston — Mon, 28 May 2012 14:40:00 +0000

It’s fairly ignorant to say that “the public doesn’t care”. The public simply doesn’t hear or understand about this service.

Have you ever read a work of popular history written by a Canadian author? Or about Canada? Have you read a piece of period fiction? Ever? Chances are very good that the author spent at least a few days in the Library and Archives, researching for free. Not to mention the amount of University students and other types of researcher that flow through that place.

It’s an amazing country that lets people use their minds for no additional charge. I guess we’ve decided we’re not that country anymore.

By: Russell McOrmond

Russell McOrmond — Mon, 28 May 2012 13:51:00 +0000

Cory,

I’m not at LAC, but the NGO I work for is very closely associated: http://www.canadiana.ca

What we do is try to take some of that public domain material available via the LAC and other libraries in Canada, digitize it, and make available to subscribers. It is unfortunate that it isn’t all Open Access, but OA requires that someone pay and there isn’t a funder for that type of thing. The bulk of our subscribers are Canadian libraries, primarily at educational institutions. We have a growing number of individual subscribers, and from what we hear this is often from the genealogy community.

It is unfortunate that Government is getting further and further out of this area, as it is not something that is going to be done well by the private sector. Our reliance primarily on the educational and public library community has always concerned me (I’ve only been here for 17 months) as these publicly funded sectors are also being targeted for reduced funding just as the public sector is.

Note: I’m a sysadmin/software developer here, not a policy or business development person, but if anyone reading wants to know more they should contact us.

By: AVR

AVR — Mon, 28 May 2012 13:51:00 +0000

It’s just not fiscally or politically realistic to expand LAC’s budget. No party is calling for it, the public doesn’t care, and librarians are not a constituency the government cares about.

Under the circumstances, is it better to cling to the fantasy of giant infrastructural investments and operating budget increases, or have other institutions take over curating some collections?