|
Back to the Future - Archives 2002, Thirty Years Later
Michael Gourlie, Executive Director, Archives Society of Alberta
Before Archivaria, and even before the Association of Canadian Archivists, the publication of record for Canadian Archivists was, appropriately, Canadian Archivist, the journal of the Archives Section of the Canadian Historical Association. Published from 1963-1974, Canadian Archivist started out as a newsletter with a couple of articles and a list of the accomplishments and activities at archival institutions around the country. As the years passed and the archival community began to form a distinct identity, the journal became thicker and the articles became more in-depth. When Archivaria took over from Canadian Archivist in 1975, it inherited a tradition of increasingly sophisticated archival literature that has grown even more influential in the past thirty years.
While most Canadian Archivist articles are interesting from only a historical perspective, there is one that speaks to the new millennium and generation of archivists. In the 1972 issue (Volume 2, number 3), Canadian Archivist editor Hugh Taylor gathered together a panel of employees of the Public Archives of Canada to "project future archival developments from the present state of the art" as practiced in Canada. In addition to Hugh Taylor, Jay Atherton, Richard Huyda, Leo LaClare, Claude LeMoine, Betty May, Dave Newton, and Lynn Ogden met to discuss what Canada's archival community would look like in 2002. According to Taylor, the resulting article, "Archives 2002", was a "freely adapted and revised précis of that discussion which unfolded in a lively fashion over two and a half hours and several beers."
While some of the discussion seems alternatively quaint or over the top, there are some surprising elements of the article that speak to today's archival concerns. When forecasting the future, no one is correct one hundred percent of the time. It is unfair but somewhat amusing to point out, after the fact, when someone has predicted an absolutely unrealized future. One member of the panel stated blithely that, "in thirty years time, it will be economically feasible to preserve all material of the past through miniaturization and automation. Space will not be a factor." This statement will come as a surprise to the builders of the Gatineau Preservation Centre of the Library and Archives of Canada as well as the new Provincial Archives of Alberta building.
As well, because space no longer would be a problem, the function of appraisal would be eliminated in favour of preserving all records electronically in virtually no space at all. These and other statements, such as the increasing preservation of taped telephone conversations or the availability of books via holograms, are entirely out of step in today's archival practice.
But there are portions of the discussion that seem to predict the future of the Canadian archival community. In spite of the general overconfidence in what technology would accomplish, one archivist noted, "there should be a complete capability of interchange of information between the provincial repositories, for example, and the Public Archives of Canada," while another panel member mentioning that clients would be fed information via a home terminal, anticipating our current networks of online databases.
There is also a discussion of acquisition practices, with the archivists wondering if the appropriate material had been acquired for future researchers. They noted that most archivists were trained as historians and that the staff of most archival institutions "were conservative with a small and large 'c'", with little interest in the records of the left or underground movements. This was viewed as a very real danger, and a panellist expressed the fear that archivists would continue to be too conservative, which translated into a dangerous power to retard growth.
These discussions seem reminiscent of the recent post-modernist debate about the role of the archivist in shaping the archival record of society. In addition, discussions about the convergence of the information professions and the need for archivists to become more knowledgeable about technology show that some issues continue to resonate over time and are not necessarily new to the community.
In the article, Taylor states, "the tape will be preserved and will rate at least as a curiosity thirty years from now," and one wonders if the audiotape has survived the vagaries of time. While some elements appear humorous, the article presents a picture of archivists who were thinking about wide-ranging issues that archival theorists are still wrangling over today. A modern update to the article - "Archives 2034" - that features a comparable panel of archivists would be equally amusing and prophetic to future Canadian Archivists.
|
