STHC-L: The Science, Technology and Health Care Archives Forum

[Previous Posting] [Next Posting]

fwd: REPLY: science/technology archives (4) 

Forwarded to STHC-L from H-SCI-MED-TECH.

Russell



--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 14:37:26 -0400
From: "N. Lerman, H-SCI-MED-TECH" 
Subject: REPLY: science/technology archives (4)
Sender: "H-NET List on the History of Science, Medicine, and 
Technology" 
To: H-SCI-MED-TECH@H-NET.MSU.EDU

Reply-To: "H-NET List on the History of Science, Medicine, and 
Technology" 
Message-ID: <199807081933.MAA25373@ebi.library.ucla.edu>


[1]
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 09:50:53 -0400
From: Arnold_Roos@pch.gc.ca

Years ago I wrote an article, "A Case Study in Frustration: Archives, the
History of Technology, and Restoration of Yukon Riverboats," for the
Canadian journal Archivaria, Vol. 25 (Winter 1987-88), pp. 51-72.  One of
the reasons I wrote the article was to try to foster some discussion and
awareness amongst archivists concerning the needs of historians of
technology.  It did not surprise me that subsequent to the article there
was a deafening silence concerning this subject.  The reason for this is
not very hard to find.   There are simply too many demands for the limited
resources available to archivists for them to focus in on what in their
world is a minor field.  The pressure from genealogists, all levels of
government and so forth is much greater than what the few historians of
technology can bring.  This does not mean that we, as historians of
technology with our own special requirements, should stop demanding that
our needs should be met.   I have found that this has been more effective
on a personal level talking with individual archivists who have some
interest in this field than trying to convince the profession as a whole.
My purpose has always been to find some home for a record group that I
thought was worth preserving and then having some input as to what parts of
that record group should be preserved.  Perhaps the time has come again to
address this issue to a larger audience.  It certainly cannot hurt.

Arnold E. Roos
Parks Canada

------------------

[2]
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 09:02:51 -0600
From: Huey Gardner 
To: HTECH-L@SIVM.SI.EDU

I'll make two quick comments about science/technology archives.

First, the University of New Orleans Library "rescued" boxes of old
blue prints found in an old warehouse which was once used by
Higgins Industries.  The structure was due to be torn down.
The blue prints are plans and modifications for WWII landing craft
built by Higgins.  When last I tried to use them, I was told that
they (the library) was waiting for someone to go through them
and decide what to keep.  I was afraid that whomever did that
may not recognize what they had.

Second, I've spent a lot of time sifting through the archives of
the Louisiana State Supreme Court.  In many of the cases involving
machines, structures, etc., the drawings and plans that should be
a part of the case file is missing.  I found only one - a map.
I know they were submitted because they're refered to in the record,
but someone along the way decided to discard them so all that is
left is the written record.

Just my two-cents.

Huey Gardner

-----------------

[3]
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 10:05:18 +0000
From: brush@ipstmail.umd.edu

A couple of issues:

1.  There is an urgent need for the establishment of a center for
history of biomedical sciences that could perform the functions
currently handled by the AIP Center for History Physics and other
centers.  I've had some discussions with people at NIH about this; it
appears that, for example, there is no place at NIH to preserve the
papers of world-famous scientists who retire from NIH, and no system
for informing them about other options or even encouraging them to
save their papers.  At present these papers just get thrown out, or
left in a hallway or someone's garage.  The National Library of
Medicine has an excellent historical section but its archival
holdings focus on 19th-center physicians and the results of a few
interview projects; it appears that the NIH administration is not
interested in funding an archive that would preserve papers of
contemporary scientists.   Apparently none of the professional
societies has taken any real responsibility for this function (an
exception is the Microbiology Society which has an archive at U of
Maryland Baltimore County).

2.  A different kind of issue is the difficulty a researcher
encounters in finding out all the places where letters of a
particular scientist are held.  You have to travel to all the
archives that you think might have such letters.  Published finding
aids and indexes generally don't give enough information, especially
if the collection has only one or two letters from a particular
scientist.    Most professional archivists tell me that their POLICY
is NOT to do the "item-level cataloging" that would produce even a
simple name index of all the correspondents in a collection.  The
reason is (a) in order to do that you have to establish "name
authority" -- you must be sure of the identity of the correspondents.
 For example if a letter is signed "E. B. Wilson" that could be the
physical chemist Edgar Bright Wilson, the statistician Edwin Bidwell
Wilson or the biologist Edmund Beecher Wilson.  It takes time and
expertise to do this.  (b) Because archives, like all institutions of
this kind, are chronically underfunded, they don't have the resources
to compile such an index, so in a typical "finding aid" they just
tell you the "major" correspondents.

As a user of archives, I disagree with the policy; I would rather
have a name index even though it may be inaccurate or ambiguous
because of the E.B.Wilson problem;  as a researcher, it's up to me to
establish the identity of the author of a letter, not to rely on an
archivist to do so.  I would like to see more indexes of the kind
compiled (with great effort and aggravation) by Bruce Wheaton and
Robin Rider, for the letters of 20th century physicists; see my
review in Isis 83 (1994) 671-72.  I would also support applications
to foundations to fund the preparation of such indexes.

Stephen Brush
University of Maryland

--------------------

[4]
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 11:59:50 -0400
From: Andrew Butrica 

>     I would also welcome any anecdotes about significant
>     documents or records that have been lost (damaged, stolen,
>     deaccessioned, etc.) in the past few years.  Also, does anyone know if
>     SHOT has dealt with these questions before and if so, what were the
>     results?

We did a SHOT session last year in Pasadena on the problems of doing
history of the present/recent past and each presenter touched on this and
related issues.  It was a very successful session.

As for documents researchers would like to get their hands on... How about
corporate records?  These are about the most elusive out there.

Ab


Andrew J. Butrica
Historian
X-33 History Project

Code R
NASA Headquarters
Washington, DC 20546

Voice:  (202) 358-4593     Fax:  (202) 358-2866

X-33 History Project Website:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/x-33/home.htm
--- End Forwarded Message ---


___________________________________________________

Russell A. Johnson        rjohnson@library.ucla.edu

Archivist              (310) 825-3191  or  206-2753
Neuroscience History Archives
Brain Research Institute, UCLA
Box 951761     Los Angeles CA  90095-1761

Special Collections Cataloger        (310) 825-6940
Louise M. Darling Biomedical Library, UCLA
Box 951798     Los Angeles CA  90095-1798
<STHC-L@library.ucla.edu>   [STHC-L Archives -- Main Index]  [STHC-L Archives -- 1998 Message Index]