Getting the Records Straight: Creating, Retaining, and Disclosing Archives
| Pages | 17-20 |
| Date | 01 January 1991 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb027058 |
| Published date | 01 January 1991 |
| Author | James Michael |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management |
Getting the Records Straight: Creating,
Retaining,
and Disclosing Archives
James Michael
A Historian's Viewpoint
The problems associated with archives clarify many of the practical, political,
and legal issues associated with any sort of public records system. The views of
historians are naturally relevant, although there is no unanimity among them
about what the law and practice in Britain should be. Many have what amount
to conflicting interests in both the fullest possible record-keeping and in the
earliest possible disclosure (to themselves at least). Their views about
legislation depend to some extent on how recent their period of specialisation is
and how successful they are at obtaining discretionary disclosure of the records
they want.
We must begin with the act of creating
a
'record', and with its legal definition.
'Oral history', for example, is outside the subject (although it can be affected by
restrictive laws such as the Official Secrets Act). The 'records' in such projects
are mostly mental impressions. Their retention depends on the fallibility of
human memory. Their disclosure, to the oral historian's tape recorder at least,
is a legal question of the authorised or unauthorised disclosure of information.
But it is worth noting that such historical research has largely been made
possible by developments in technology.
The first problem is the 'candour' argument. It is difficult to disagree with the
proposition that a government official, or anyone, will be affected in the
recording of anything by the prospect that someone, sometime will read it.
Without wandering into the by ways of epistemology, it can be taken as given
that consciousness of observation affects what
is
observed. The social analogy to
the Heisenberg uncertainty effect in physics applies not only to the effect of
being observed (and knowing it), but also to the contemplation of who will read
what is written, and when.
The historian's dream is to be the cliche fly on the wall when history is made,
or at least to have the services of an objective fly with an extremely good
memory. Failing that (and much oral history is the product of very partial flies
with human memories) a more practical dream is for full access to records of
what went on. Even that dream has its dark side, however, in the prospect of
being swamped by records. The weeding process begins with the decision to
record or omit.
Such a decision is taken for many reasons other than vindication by history.
The necessity for candour in dealing with the business at hand may displace
thoughts of what history will make of it, although they may return when there is
a later decision to retain or destroy records. The decision to record or not, and
what, is also sharply affected by technology, and is likely to be even more so
affected in future. The requirement of communicating in writing over distances
17
To continue reading
Request your trial