Archival science and postmodernism: new formulations for old concepts

Process rather than product, becoming rather than being, dynamicrather than static, context rather than text, reflecting time andplace rather than universal absolutes – these have become thepostmodern watchwords for analyzing and understanding science,society, organizations, and business activity, among others. Theyshould likewise become the watchwords for archival science in thenew century, and thus the foundation for a new conceptual paradigmfor the profession. Postmodernism is not the only reason for reformulatingthe main precepts of archival science. Significant changes in thepurpose of archives as institutions and the nature of records areother factors which, combined with postmodern insights, form thebasis of the new perception of archives as documents, institutions,and profession in society.This essay explores the nature of postmodernism and archival science,and suggest links between the two. It outlines two broad changes inarchival thinking that underpin the archival paradigm shift, beforesuggesting new formulations for most traditional archival concepts.     

Tacit narratives: The meanings of archives

Archivists and historians usually consider archives as repositories of historical sources and the archivist as a neutral custodian. Sociologists and anthropologists see “the archive” also as a system of collecting, categorizing, and exploiting memories. Archivists are hesitantly acknowledging their role in shaping memories. I advocate that archival fonds, archival documents, archival institutions, and archival systems contain tacit narratives which must be deconstructed in order to understand the meanings of archives. Revision of a paper presented, on the invitation of the Master's Programme in Archival Studies, Department of History, University of Manitoba, in the History Department Colloquium series of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, 20 February, 2001. Some of the arguments were used earlier in two papers I presented in the seminar “Archives, Documentation and the Institutions of Social Memory”, organized by the Bentley Historical Library and the International Institute of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 14 February, 2001.     

Tacit narratives: The meanings of archives

Archivists and historians usually consider archives as repositories of historical sources and the archivist as a neutral custodian. Sociologists and anthropologists see “the archive” also as a system of collecting, categorizing, and exploiting memories. Archivists are hesitantly acknowledging their role in shaping memories. I advocate that archival fonds, archival documents, archival institutions, and archival systems contain tacit narratives which must be deconstructed in order to understand the meanings of archives. Revision of a paper presented, on the invitation of the Master's Programme in Archival Studies, Department of History, University of Manitoba, in the History Department Colloquium series of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, 20 February, 2001. Some of the arguments were used earlier in two papers I presented in the seminar “Archives, Documentation and the Institutions of Social Memory”, organized by the Bentley Historical Library and the International Institute of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 14 February, 2001.     

Archival science and changes in the paradigm

The dominant paradigm in Archival Science, thehistorical-technicist paradigm, has its origins with the French Revolution and raised from the social, economic, political, ideological and cultural changes that occur during the 19th and 20th centuries. During this last one and due specially to the technological revolution Archival Science reinforced its technical component and became autonomous in face of History, but the consolidation of the model, based on a custodial, technicist and documentalist perspective, is associated to a knowledge essentially empirical. By effect of the new conditions generated by Information Society, the dominant paradigm entered into a crisis and developed inside itself the factors which, unavoidably, will produce the paradigm shift. The new paradigm — thescientific-informational paradigm — conceives Archival Science as an applied discipline into the scope of Information Science and defines unequivocally its object of study — the archive, understood as aninformation system — and its scientific method of research. The method tends to find consolidation through quadripolar research dynamics, which is operated and continuously repeated within the field of knowledge itself, which implies a permanent interaction on four poles — epistemological, theoretical, technical and morphological.     

Archival science and changes in the paradigm

The dominant paradigm in Archival Science, thehistorical-technicist paradigm, has its origins with the French Revolution and raised from the social, economic, political, ideological and cultural changes that occur during the 19th and 20th centuries. During this last one and due specially to the technological revolution Archival Science reinforced its technical component and became autonomous in face of History, but the consolidation of the model, based on a custodial, technicist and documentalist perspective, is associated to a knowledge essentially empirical. By effect of the new conditions generated by Information Society, the dominant paradigm entered into a crisis and developed inside itself the factors which, unavoidably, will produce the paradigm shift. The new paradigm — thescientific-informational paradigm — conceives Archival Science as an applied discipline into the scope of Information Science and defines unequivocally its object of study — the archive, understood as aninformation system — and its scientific method of research. The method tends to find consolidation through quadripolar research dynamics, which is operated and continuously repeated within the field of knowledge itself, which implies a permanent interaction on four poles — epistemological, theoretical, technical and morphological.     

Archival science facing the information society

It is only a few decades ago that archivists befan to redefine theirdiscipline in terms of a science. This redefinition of archives and records management was the consequence of a growing need for an adequate expression referring to a comprehensive new body of knowledge on records and archives. Consensus on how to adequately define archival sciencehas not been achieved yet, however. As information society evolves,records and archives are changing in nature and status. It is anemerging discipline that has to be defined, which is still bearsthe impress of the mindset and practices of the industrial society.Bruno Delmas shows the archivist some clues to find a way out of thisambiguity and keep communicating human heritage to unknown generations.     

Archival science facing the information society

It is only a few decades ago that archivists befan to redefine their discipline in terms of a science. This redefinition of archives and records management was the consequence of a growing need for an adequate expression referring to a comprehensive new body of knowledge on records and archives. Consensus on how to adequately define archival science has not been achieved yet, however. As information society evolves, records and archives are changing in nature and status. It is an emerging discipline that has to be defined, which is still bears the impress of the mindset and practices of the industrial society. Bruno Delmas shows the archivist some clues to find a way out of this ambiguity and keep communicating human heritage to unknown generations.     

档案记忆再生产研究的学术价值与问题思考

档案记忆再生产研究是运用马克思社会再生产和当代社会记忆理论,对档案记忆的生产（生成）与再生产行为及其过程进行多方位、整体性探讨,旨在探索发现档案记忆再生产行为的内在机制与本质规律。作为档案记忆研究的自然延伸和再度阐释,档案记忆再生产研究具有整合档案记忆研究既有成果、开拓档案记忆研究新空间、助推社会记忆研究新发展、打开学科知识交汇的新门径等学术价值;需要我们探索解决其中涉及的科学性问题、本体论问题、合法性问题、体系化问题、关系性问题、方法论问题,以构建一体化的档案记忆理论体系。     

论档案记忆研究的学术坐标

本文根据社会记忆的基本要素结构,重点对社会记忆研究的三种切入式传统(主体-中介-客体)进行了剖解和阐释,揭示出档案记忆研究是以中介切入的方式来思考和探视社会记忆.这是档案记忆研究在社会记忆理论研究框架中的立足点,是将档案记忆放入社会记忆系统加以考察,既与社会记忆理论研究接轨,又能独立展开的学术坐标.     

档案学与社会学的互动及对建设档案社会学的展望

档案学与社会学存在一种互动关系,社会学研究离不开档案,档案学也可以借鉴社会学的研究范式,然而档案社会学虽有萌芽却基本处于停滞不前的状态。本文从概述社会学研究中对档案的利用情况入手,针对档案社会学的发展现状,结合两个学科的共同特征,对档案社会学的学科建设提出建议。     

档案学与信息技术

信息技术（Information Technologies)影响了档案管理的观念和；方法。并要求它们要适应IT的发展，许多信息技术专家认为，档案学的方法，原则甚至概念都过时了，作者在本文中，则论证档案学能帮助我们回答IT给档案管理带来的问题，强调了档案工作者与信息技术或电子归档专家的合作。     

Education and Research in Archival Science: General Tendencies

This text is essentially based on works carriedout for a research which was subsidized from1997 to 2000 by the Social Sciences andHumanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).The goal of this study was to examine thegeneral tendencies of education and research inarchival science. First, a review of theliterature published from 1985 to 1998 allowedus to establish a state of the art. Then, asurvey was completed with a questionnaire whichhas been sent to educational institutions,national archives institutions and researchers.Answers were received from more than 70different countries. With regards to theeducation program, the analysis of data showsthat there have seen notable progresses. Morethan the growth of the number of programs, wemust especially recognize the constantimprovement of its contents, which is achievedin conformity with the propositions made in theliterature. As for the research, it exists acommunity of ideas about fields and themes tobe privileged even if there is an apparentdivision of the researchers into two groups.The first group distinguishes itself by itscohesion by unanimously recognizing a smallnumber (nine) of priorities in research inarchival science. The second group showsmultiple interests which cover 30 researchthemes. The author conclude in saying that thedevelopment of education and research inarchival science are on their way, but nothinghas yet been won. It is important to accentuatethe efforts to insure a durable life toeducation and research as pillars of thediscipline.     

档案学中若干概念与现象之辨析

在档案学的学习和研究过程当中,笔者常会碰到一些意思相近或联系甚密的概念和现象。纵观学界中的诸多著作和论文,对某些基本概念的解释尚有争议,有的是同一种事物出现多种提法,有的是不同的事物使用同一种称呼,很容易让人混淆。在此,笔者尝试对某些概念和现象进行分析,以理清思     

中外档案学研究差异之原因分析

中国档案学研究内容广博,外国档案学研究内容精深;中国档案学研究主体以高校档案专业教师为主,外国档案学研究主体以档案实际工作者为主;中国档案学研究方法以定性描述为主,外国档案学研究方法以实证研究为主。中外档案学研究的明显差异性不是偶然出现的,它与中外档案事业管理体制、教育体系和各国研究历史传统、档案职业专业化水平等诸多因素都有关系,在本文中,作者对产生这三个方面差异的原因进行了分析。     

高校档案教育新形式的出现与发展——以福建师范大学首届档案职业技能大赛为例

档案学作为一门实践类学科,实践教学本就必不可少,但受到资源限制,学生实践机会较少。福建师范大学举办档案职业技能大赛,将档案竞赛活动同档案专业教育相结合,取得了较好成效,同时探索了适合档案专业实践特性的新型教育方式,也为高校档案教育的发展提供了新的思路。     

中美档案学形成阶段与发展因素的相通性分析

档案教育、档案专著与期刊论文是档案学产生与发展的重要标志,中、美两国档案学的发展历程均属于起步晚、发展快的代表性国家。历经萌芽期、形成期后逐步走向成熟,促进档案学生成与发展的因素不仅来自外界的刺激,最主要的因素源于学科内部。虽然不同国家、不同阶段有着不同的特点,从中挖掘其本质上的通性因素,更能够反映一门学科的国际发展趋势及面临的挑战。     

档案学网络教学资源建设现状与对策研究

网络教学资源建设是档案教育信息化建设的关键因素.笔者在分析我国档案学网络教学资源建设现状的基础上,对教学资源建设的策略进行了思考,提出了一些有益的建议.     

Education and research in archival science: General tendencies

This text is essentially based on works carried out for a research which was subsidized from 1997 to 2000 by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). The goal of this study was to examine the general tendencies of education and research in archival science. First, a review of the literature published from 1985 to 1998 allowed us to establish a state of the art. Then, a survey was completed with a questionnaire which has been sent to educational institutions, national archives institutions and researchers. Answers were received from more than 70 different countries. With regards to the education program, the analysis of data shows that there have seen notable progresses. More than the growth of the number of programs, we must especially recognize the constant improvement of its contents, which is achieved in conformity with the propositions made in the literature. As for the research, it exists a community of ideas about fields and themes to be privileged even if there is an apparent division of the researchers into two groups. The first group distinguishes itself by its cohesion by unanimously recognizing a small number (nine) of priorities in research in archival science. The second group shows multiple interests which cover 30 research themes. The author conclude in saying that the development of education and research in archival science are on their way, but nothing has yet been won. It is important to accentuate the efforts to insure a durable life to education and research as pillars of the discipline. This text is an overview of a project which has been subsidized by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) from 1997 to 2000. It has been presented in September 2000 in Seville (Spain) at the 10th Symposium of the Section for Archival Education and Training of the International Council on Archives (CIA/SAE).     

档案宏观职能鉴定中国家性与社会性的思辨

[目的/意义]宏观职能鉴定通常被认为是档案鉴定由“国家模式”走向“社会模式”的转变,从哲学基础、鉴定客体和价值追求来看,档案宏观职能鉴定的真正内核无疑是反映和尊重“社会”,但其是否为完全的“社会模式”、是否实现“知行合一”却有必要作进一步探析。[方法/过程]分别以“国家性”和“社会性”作为基本考察对象,分析阐述宏观职能鉴定对于两者的体现情况与程度。[结果/结论]宏观职能鉴定存在“国家性”有余而“社会性”不足的问题,若欲真正实现档案鉴定向社会模式转变的目标,应当将宏观鉴定与微观鉴定相搭配,将“自上而下”和“自下而上”的鉴定路径相结合,同时在鉴定时划分正式场域与非正式场域。     

Intro to Archival Science: Developing an Undergraduate Archival Elective Outside of a LIS Program

Abstract

This case study describes the development and implementation of a three-credit undergraduate archival science course at Mount St. Mary’s University. Offered through the university’s Department of History, this course was designed to prepare students for positions in archives-related careers, unlike most research-based undergraduate archival electives. Benefits of the course to both students and the archivist profession will be discussed.