Legacies and lifecycles: digitizing oral histories at Rutgers University libraries
| Pages | 203-220 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-09-2016-0038 |
| Date | 14 August 2017 |
| Published date | 14 August 2017 |
| Author | Krista White,Caryn Radick |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Librarianship/library management,Library technology,Records management & preservation,Information repositories |
Legacies and lifecycles: digitizing
oral histories at Rutgers
University libraries
Krista White
Dana Library, Rutgers University Libraries, Newark, New Jersey, USA, and
Caryn Radick
Special Collection and University Archives, Rutgers University Libraries,
New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
Abstract
Purpose –This paper aims to explore two separate legacy oral history digitization projects at one
institutionand how the project teams approached the different issues and challengesthese projects presented.
Design/methodology/approach –The approach compares two case studies of how digitization of legacy
oral history collections was carried out. The paper discusses these projects utilizing a lifecycle model approach and
reveals how archival and digital humanities perspectives drove some of the projects’differences.
Findings –The authors find that when working with digitizing legacy oral history collections, each
collection will require different approaches and methods of problem solving. In large institutions with
multiplerepositories, it can be useful for project teams to consulteach other to develop best practices.
Practical implications –The two case studies presented in this paper can serve as models for other
institutions digitizing many oral history collections and serve as a model for communication and
collaborationin larger institutions with multiplerepositories.
Originality/value –This paper comparesand contrasts two case studies of digitization projects involving
legacy oral history collections in different units of one large institution. Project teams were influenced by
different approaches. One project was conducted by archivists and the other led by a digital humanities
librarian. Differing professional foci provided different perspectives about collection characteristics and,
subsequently,led to different approaches that impactedimplementation of the projects.
Keywords Oral history, Digital humanities, Academic libraries, Archives, Digitization,
Audiovisual materials
Paper type Case study
Introduction
In 2012, two units of Rutgers University Libraries (RUL) each began work on digitizing
different oral history collections in their holdings. Although the units did not consult each
other prior to embarking on their projects, the project teams found it helpful to open a
dialogue as they moved forward. This article presents two case studies of digitizing legacy
oral history collections, outlining the approaches taken and the similarities and differences
between the projects. Topics discussed will include each project’s scope, condition, rights,
digitization process, metadata, delivery and ongoing preservation. Although other case
studies have detailed efforts to digitize oral history, this article illuminates how projects to
digitize materialswith similar original formats at the same academicinstitution can result in
different challenges.
The steps taken in these digitization projects follow an information lifecycle approach
starting with an assessment of the original materials, moving into the digitization of these
Digitizing oral
histories at
Rutgers
203
Received 22 September 2016
Revised 20 October 2016
Accepted 20 October 2016
DigitalLibrary Perspectives
Vol.33 No. 3, 2017
pp. 203-220
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2059-5816
DOI 10.1108/DLP-09-2016-0038
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2059-5816.htm
materials, and to their preservation and accessibility as digital objects. Hodge laid out a
similar frameworkbut focused more on working with “born-digital”objects (Hodge, 2000).
Background and collection histories
The first project was based at RUL’s Special Collections and University Archives (SC/UA)
on its New Brunswick campus and entailed the digitization of oral history interviews
conducted between 1990 and 1992. These interviews provide unique firsthand accounts of
important events in the history of Rutgers, Newark, New Jersey and the USA. The
interviewees were former students, faculty, staff and administrators who had been at
Rutgers–Newarkin the 1960s and 1970s, a tumultuous time both on and off the campus. The
interviews focus on the socialand political climate during the late 1960s and early 1970s and
offer perspectives of events such as the Newark riots and the 1969 takeover of a Rutgers
building by the Black Organization of Students in an effortto draw attention to the lack of
diversity at Rutgers. The project initiator and interviewer, Rutgers–Newark librarian
Gilbert Cohen, had conducted the interviews as a sabbatical project. The materials were
transferred to theRutgers University Archives in 1995.
The second project, The Jazz Oral History Project (JOHP), was held by the Institute of
Jazz Studies (IJS) at the Dana Library at Rutgers–Newark. Unlike the SC/UA project, this
was not a home-grown undertaking. The projectbegan in 1972 as an attempt to capture the
life experiences of musicians from the pre-swing and swing eras of jazz, with a particular
focus on musicians aged 60 or older. Renowned jazz bassist Milt Hinton proposed the
program to the Jazz Panel of the Music Program of the National Endowment for the Arts.
Musicians were paid $2,000 and agreed to give an interview that would last no fewer than
5 hours. In its first years, the program was administered by Jazz Interactions –a nonprofit
organization in New York City whose mission is to bring greater awareness of jazz. The
Smithsonian Institution assumed stewardship of the program in 1974 and ran it until late
1979 when the IJS took overits final phases. The program ran under the direction of IJS until
1983, during which time interviews werecollected from jazz glitterati such as Hinton, Mary
Lou Williams, Count Basie and Charles Mingus. The program included many lesser-known
artists to provide a well-rounded overview of the early years of jazz as an art form. The
digitization project for the JOHP was implemented in two separatephases. The first phase,
digitization of open-reel and audio cassettes, took place from 2003 to 2006 to preserve the
audio recordings for the project. The secondphase, undertaken by Krista White at the Dana
Library, is still underway andconsists of the digitization of the JOHP transcripts to enhance
accessibilityto the collection.
At RUL, potential digitizationprojects go through a proposal process by whichthe value,
rights issues and resources necessary to complete a project are assessed. Both the SC/UA
project team and the DanaLibrary project head went through this process beforeproceeding
and received approval to move forwardand add the digitized files to the Rutgers University
Community Repository,known as RUcore.
Literature review
Both oral history projects were undertaken to gain insight and perspective on under
documented groups. Swain notes that such projects are consistent with the changes in the
nature of oral history –initially, they had been seen as a way to document “the great”, but
with societal changes, perspectives from “everyday”people were sought (Swain, 2003).
Thomson identifies the “history from below”perspective as a paradigm shift in how oral
history interviews were conducted (Thomson, 2015). Bulger characterizes oral histories as,
“[breaking] down the caste system and class barriers one encounters when reading the
DLP
33,3
204
To continue reading
Request your trial