Tag: 1. Juni 2009

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2429/4378

Title: The German archival system 1945-1995
Author: Landwehr, Regina
Degree: Master of Archival Studies – MAS
Program: Library, Archival and Information Studies
Copyright Date: 1996
Abstract: After World War Two, Germany became divided into two countries commonly called East and West Germany. This thesis describes how the two countries, one communist and one pluralistic, developed distinctly different archival systems with respect to the organization, legislation and appraisal methods of government archival institutions. East Germany’s archival system was organized and legislated into a rigorous hierarchical structure under central government control with the mandate of fulfilling in a systematic way primarily ideological objectives. Although professional collaboration between the archivists of the two countries had been officially severed since the early years of separation by East Germany, because of irreconcilable political differences, they influenced each others’ thoughts. Specifically, East German archivists borrowed and implemented extensively appraisal concepts formulated in West Germany, such as the documentation profile idea. The examination of the archival system in West Germany reveals organizational characteristics typical of federalist countries. The development of archival legislation in West Germany was clearly the outcome of initiatives from the archival profession itself, and West Germany’s appraisal methods reflected a diversity of theoretical considerations which, because of the pluralistic nature of the discussions, were marked by a lack of professional consensus. The description of the discussions that took place over time illustrates an ongoing struggle to identify and respect the perceived demand for sources, and to formulate appraisal methods focusing on the contextual and functional analysis of records creators’ activities and competencies. The discussion of the. developments that followed Germany’s political reunification in 1990 shows that East Germany’s archival system was absorbed by the West German system. The thesis concludes that the main effect of reunification was a search for a balance between East and West appraisal concepts and methods, and a renewed constructive debate characterized by a reexamination of previous archival contributions supporting contextual and functional appraisal approaches.

http://blog.librarylaw.com/librarylaw/2009/05/alert-action-needed-in-new-york-state.html

Peter Hirtle writes

There is a proposed new law making its way through the New York State legislature that would regulate how museums deaccession items in their collections. While ostensibly about museums, the law could have a major impact on how libraries function. All libraries and historical societies in NY should write to the legislation’s sponsors and ask that passage be delayed until definitions are clarified.

The bills are A06959 (introduced by Richard L. Brodsky) and its identical counterpart S04584 (introduced by José M. Serrano). They would govern how museums acquire and dispose of objects. You can learn more from a hearing on the topic found here.
The proposal has generated some discussion and concern within the museum community (see, for example, the letter from the Art Law Committee of the New York City Bar or the posts on the bill in the Art Law blog). My concern is with its potential impact on libraries and archives. The problem is that while the bill discusses the issue surrounding collecting in museums, it defines museums so broadly that most libraries and archives would fall under its sway. Here is the definition:

“MUSEUM” means any institution having collecting as a stated purpose in its charter, certificate of incorporation, or other organizing documents, or owning or holding collections, or intending to own or hold collections that is a governmental entity, education corporation, not-for-profit corporation, or charitable trust.
Since almost every library in the state owns or holds collections, for the purposes of the law they would be museums. The law would sharply limit their ability to dispose of any material (other than returning it to the donor). Everything the library or archives gets would have to be accessioned before it could be discarded. And instead of throwing unwanted items into the trash or putting them in the local library book sale, a library would first have to offer the material to other “museums” in New York state and then the rest of the country. Proceeds from any sale could only be used to support further acquisitions.

I appreciate the NY efforts to prevent damagages to cultural heritage by deaccessioning historical collections. If real damages for the cultural heritage could prevented by the law I woould accept some minor disadvantages i.e. that deaccessioning which makes sense is’nt possible.

Museums, libraries and archives are memory institutions. They should preserve the items they own for the posterity.

For damages by deaccessioning historical collections see

?s=deaccess

Hirtle-Update:

http://blog.librarylaw.com/librarylaw/2009/06/update-deaccessioning-in-new-york-state.html

http://blog.librarylaw.com/librarylaw/2009/08/ny-deaccessioning-update-some-good-news-for-libraries-but-less-so-for-historical-societies.html

http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/updates/update.shtml

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/31/AR2009053102262.html

On Sunday, staff from the National Archives called me from all over the country: Philadelphia, New York, Suitland, Maryland. No, they didn’t want to archive some of my recent poetry or conduct an archival survey. These staffers were trying to access their voice mailbox, and they got me — over and over and over again. […] Makes me wonder what’s really happening to all that valuable historical material they handle.