Special Collections – Page 4 – The Digital Past Course Blog

Special Perspectives

Viewing the physical material history and remains of the Federal Theater Project when visiting Special collections was enlightening. For some objects like the costumes and puppets, seeing photos from the plays, most of which we’ve seen only in black and white negatives, do not truly show the detail that went into the making of the play. A deeper understanding of the Federal Theater Project comes with the realization that these objects were made by the seamstresses and stagehands hired by the FTP; this is the skill that the FTP sought to preserve and provide employment for.

Other objects and materials we viewed in Special Collections, like copies of Hallie Flanagan’s notes for the first meeting with the directors of the Federal Theater Project, were also interesting but not as profound. My group viewed an onion paper copy of the notes, which included Flanagan’s renowned moving speech, “Is This the Time and Place?” as well as a manuscript of the discussion among the directors. The information expressed by the source was certainly valuable; we learned the personal beliefs of those who objected the Federal Theater Project, we learned of Flanagan’s motivations in pursuing the FTP. However, this source in particular did not give much more information than a digital copy would.

We learned however, that this source is not one that is likely to be digitized any time soon. When deciding which materials to digitize, it is important for archivists to prioritize items which are fragile or have high research value, while also considering rights or privacy¹. While this material could contribute to interesting research, paper stored properly should not be fragile and should last quite a while.

For these reasons, scholars and the general public can both benefit from the process by which archivists store collections, whether it be digitally or physically. For the general public who may wish to interact with these resources purely out of curiosity and interest, they can request to view and handle items of great novelty, such as the puppets, costumes, and printer stamps that we got to interact with. Items such as manuscripts and posters that aren’t quite as interesting to someone without a scholastic interest in the topic, can be stored digitally in a way that is easier for scholars to access and study. This allows for text analysis and distance reading, which can contribute to their research better than closely examining numerous physical copies. Digitizing physical copies of texts such as these allow for modern research to equitably apply to pre-internet resources just as it does to sources “born” digitally². This process of digitizing records therefore serves the purposes of digital humanities in allowing for democratization of history.

Both Sides Now: Reflecting on the Special Collections

The Special Collections Research Center has archives full of data. Specifically, they put on display for us artifacts concerning the Federal Theatre Project (FTP). Across the tables lay various documents and objects. These objects and documents are very important as they help paint a picture, help develop the story of the FTP from what we, as scholars, already know. Scholars can take this information and rearrange to make varying arguments. Where the general public is concerned, I feel they are the consumers of the stories archivists make with their collection. Say, the archivists sits out a puppet, some pictures of dancers and notes on their designs. The public would interpret it however the archivist would set it up, and then begin to question or look into it further if the collection intrigues them. In this way, the archivists educate both scholars and the general public. The scholars being able to take the research a step further, while the public, I feel, would consider it more of a “national memory” or a facet of the past that greatly exemplifies the nation of the time.

The job of the archivist is to organize the data in any way they deem fit or suitable. When it comes to digitizing, there are two categories of how the item is interpreted: one is informational, the other is artifactual. Informational concerns the fixity and validation of the data or artifact. Does the information conveyed by the data remain the same as the artifact becomes digitized? Artifactual concerns interpretation. The archivist takes into consideration the materiality of the object. For example, in Artifactual Elements Pt. 1 ³, the focus is on born-digital data being recovered from old-fashioned hardware. The archivist takes into consideration how data is stored, created and processed using this hardware. Then they consider the “environment” of the information and how that impacts how the source was created, altered or access. Desktops impact how we create and store records on our computer by a fixed screen. Another and final thing to consider is how word processing software, image editing programs, or how even operating systems can impact how contemporary records creators produce creative works.

Archivists struggle with trying to keep the meaning of their collections when digitizing them. Oft times, what is lost are the sensory perceptions. When you digitize an object, you can no longer smell it or feel it. All you can do is look at it interpretively and use various digital tools to analyze it that way. An Archivist, in this case, may prefer to digitize documents or pictures because a lot of the information can still be conveyed–digitally altered even. A three-dimensional object relies heavily on being “3-D.” When you digitize it, that already takes away its depth and makes it flat. You even lose the sense of touch which could key into how the object was made. Even though they are great to marvel at, these images and objects are subject to their own biases of the time. When we digitize them, that bias is carried forward through time. The scholar takes the time to parse through this bias and figure out who or what was omitted in order to get a good idea of the history being conveyed. ⁴ Simply, once these sources enter the digital world, many more challenges arise.

The SCRC FTP collection we saw involved a puppet, diorama and various forms of documentation. A lot of what they had put what we learned about the FTP into context. My group specifically got to see the Vaudeville and Negro Unit’s plays, stages, and costumes. In class, we discussed how the FTP did not use a lot of money for spending, but on salaries.⁵ The images painted a different story for me. Everything looked so lavish and exciting, made me wish I could have seen the pictures in their original context; rather, I wish I could see all the colors and see all the dramas in actions.

Special Collections Archives

First, the Special Collections archive is a major resource that allows us to explore many different histories including the Federal Theater Project, our school, and the New Deal Era. The archive is very significant and important for scholars because it groups many important artifacts and information into the same place. This allows scholars to be able to easily find what they are looking for. Also, it allows for scholars and even the general public to easily find tons of information about their topic. For example, if a digital historian was looking for artifacts relating to Theater and arts during the New Deal Era, then they would just have to search Federal Theater Project and all of the information would be at their fingertips. Also, the Special Collections allows people to decide whether they want to digitally find artifacts and information or do they want to physically go and feel artifacts and learn that way. For the general public, the archive serves as an extra reminder of our history and our country’s history. Also, they can use the archive as a secondary source when they can’t find any other information or place to go.

The main thing that archivists must use to decide whether to digitize an artifact is how would the artifact appear to the user, if digitized. They must discuss multiple different things to decide if an artifact should be digitized including texture, weight, appearance, and quality etc.¹It’s important to realize that archivists make sure the user will be able to understand what the artifact is based off the photo. For example, I dealt with the print press stamp during our Special Collections class and the texture on these is very unique. You can’t feel the ridges or understand how the paint/toner had to be packed into these stamps because of how deep the ridges and spaces are. Also, some of the stamps can only be seen and understood under certain angles of light, which would be extremely hard to show in a photo and would therefore not benefit to digitize. From our speaker, I learned that archivists mainly digitize photos because these are easy to see digitally and they try to keep away from digitizing objects because of all the extra factors that you use when digitizing a 3D artifact.

My understanding of the Federal Theater Project has changed drastically after looking at the materials in class. I realize the true effect this federal project had on so many lives. The government was able to put people back to work doing something they love, such as acting, and also gave normal citizens a cheap play they could see. ⁶ This project was able to bring people together for a short period of time over a comedy or tragedy of some sorts. Also, I understood how this project gave more than just actors jobs. For example, now writers are able to write articles in the newspaper about the show and critics are able to give their opinions as well. Also, marketing people are able to make flyers and promo for the plays. The project seemed to be beneficial for many people.

Special Collections Research Center- A great Resource

The experience today with the Special Collections Research Center at GMU was awesome. As a budding archivist it was great to how other archives handle their collections. Most of the rules outlined on the policy page ⁷ were what I have experienced in other archival centers. I was impressed with the wide range of materials that they had for the Federal Theatre Project. Being able to interact with the puppet and the “Dark Coat” was interesting and enjoyable.

It was interesting when Brittany described the decision process for digitization, seeing that they had a “top ten list” was genius! Her description of reasons for digitizing certain items was informative. I had only considered accessibility as a reason to digitize documents. But her statement about a documents stability as a deciding factor was interesting. If the document is physically compromised, but it’s contents are invaluable then digitizing it is a way to maintain that information for future.

Archives are a fantastic resource for university students and the general public alike. They are the repositories of information that could otherwise be lost. It was interesting that she mentioned the political reasons that some collections are part of the GMU Library collection. My personal experience with archives has been in the public sphere, dealing with publicly owned government records, but in considering private collections I have new questions. Her mentioning of being obligated to accept a collection because of a monetary donation fascinated me. I am of the thought that most collections are inherently valuable. She seemed to imply that some of these collections are unwanted or burdensome for the SCRC. I found that interesting, but reading the conversation between Thomas Padilla and Elvia Arroyo-Ramirez “Bias, Perception, and Archival Praxis” I understand that there is another side of archives. In this conversation Arroyo- Ramirez discusses that there is a sense of bias in collections. She states that scholars are discussing “issues of power, representation, and accountability by challenging the existing canon of archival neutrality and objectivity; speaking on colonialism, apartheid, and transitional democracies and their relationships to record keeping; and connecting these challenges to current archival practices.” ⁸ I have always considered archives to be neutral, but I understand how accepting collections only from certain people or groups they could be bias. If the documents collected only pertain or describe one side of history then they are not in fact neutral.

That is something that I think is really special about the Library of Congress Slave ⁹ narratives. These are stories from the other side of history, the often underrepresented stories. It is important for that history to be preserved alongside of the nations history.

Through our discussions about the Federal Theater Project this week I realized how much social politics affected the New Deal projects. I had the impression that they were all welcomed and celebrated for having put artists back to work in the economic crisis. It was fascinating to see that that was not the case. Our group examined the programs for the Children’s Theater’s production of “The Revolt of the Beavers” which we had previously learned was associated with communism and helped to fuel tensions for the FTP. It was really interesting to see these documents in person.