Archives as the Site of Social Action and Retribution

                In last week’s readings and class discussion, we came across a case in which the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) was contacted in heavy waves by Japanese-Americans in the 1980s who were forcibly held in internment camps during World War II. In order to be compensated by Congress and seek retribution, they were asked to prove their internment. (David Bearman, “Access and Use,” Chapter IV). For a student like me who uses archives almost exclusively for academic work, it’s a reminder that archives are sites not only established for the pursuit of academic knowledge, but in search of a personal and social one as well. Archives can serve as power tools for social and political action in the pursuit of retribution.

                I encountered a situation directly this past March while I was researching at NARA in College Park, Maryland, just outside of Washington, D.C. While waiting for my new researcher card, I was seated next to an older gentleman. We began talking about our reasons for visiting, to which he told me that he had traveled halfway across the country to obtain records to prove that he had served in a specific battle and troop during the Vietnam War to prove he was eligible for certain veterans’ benefits.

                While I don’t know the outcome of this man’s story, I think it speaks volumes about the place of archives within the public sphere. Mark Greene, in his “The Power of Archives” piece articulated democracy as one of the enduring values of the archival profession. Said Greene, “archivists are more concerned with governmental accountability in a republic.” (Greene 31). In many ways, as others have argued, this is how an archives can determine its enduring value to justify its existence. 

NARA Releases 9/11 Emails: The Politicization of Processing and Access

What priorities decide how quickly things get processed and made available? Last night’s class discussion, centered, in part, on this prioritization of this goal. One of those priorities, of course, was political. This was particularly relevant when I stumbled upon this week’s New York Times article “9/11 White House Emails Capture History Through Modern Lens,” which you can read here: http://nyti.ms/1gbFvw4

The George W. Bush Presidential Library, managed by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), released several emails sent out the morning of 9/11 fourteen years ago. While many were not made public due to strict privacy and national security concerns, several were released that highlight some of the day’s initial shock.   

NARA released the emails to The New York Times as the country commemorates the fourteenth anniversary of 9/11. The anniversary of 9/11 as well as its presence in very recent memory makes these emails a particularly relevant set of records in public discourse and collective remembering. I certainly have held the trope that scholars and historians are bulk of an archives’ visitors. But Frederic Miller’s “Use, Appraisal, and Research: A Case Study of Social History” on social historians’ use of archives has debunked that notion. Everyone accesses archives; scholars are just a minute percentage of users. (Miller 374).

The NYT article demonstrates that as well. Archivists are more visible than we think they are, so their audiences are far-reaching and ever-present. NARA’s decision to release these previously classified items indicates the politicization of processing and release. But it further indicates archivists’ participation in modern-day discourse and shaping of memory and national conversations.

While I wish I could say that I was in the board room meetings when NARA decided to release these records, I imagine that it was challenging and maybe even polarizing. However, I’m sure that these archivists were unanimous on their appraisal value, but how do we determine the value of other records that may at first look less immediately significant? I hope to explore this more as the class goes on!