The Digital Past Course Blog – Page 12

Blog Post #8 The Archives

When we went a visited the Special Collections to examine different objects from the Federal Theater Project, I don’t think I’d ever really thought about how archives and collections acquire their things. Finding out that the archives are a bit beholden to what donors decide to send them made me slightly uncomfortable. It feels like they’re at the mercy of the donors, which really means that the public and scholars are at the mercy of the donors.

This is a problem because I feel it could lead to collections being biased in some way. Archives are extremely important, not only to scholars, but to the rest of the general public because they store large amounts of information, and sometimes even artifacts. In an ideal situation, archives wouldn’t have any problem acquiring pieces, but unfortunately they have to resort to donations most of the time.

The digitization of the archive is also very interesting. It was explained to us that there’s a hierarchy of digitization, so objects that are fragile, or that may be difficult to preserve are first. But what about documents that are already hard to read? I wanted to ask about this at the talk but the questions period was over so quickly. I was wondering this because our files had a memo in the front that the type was already fuzzy and a bit distorted. I wasn’t sure how well that would translate on a computer screen.

Speaking of which, I think that seeing the objects and papers from the Federal Theater Project made it easier to connect with. It was less of a hypothetical thing and a true reality. There’s also a lot of information that we don’t have access to online, and being able to see it and put your hands on it definitely makes it a much more interesting experience. I really admire the archivists for taking care of such important documents, and doing it so well. And learning about “portable theaters” was really cool too.

Sources:

https://acrl.ala.org/dh/2017/09/13/archivalpraxis/

https://www.loc.gov/collections/federal-theatre-project-1935-to-1939/articles-and-essays/federal-theatre-melodrama-social-protest-and-genius/

Archive Reflection

In class this past week we explored interesting artifacts that George Mason has kept secure since the 1930s. In groups we were asked to examine notes written or typed in scripts from shows produced by the Federal Theatre Project. I found them extremely interesting because looking closely at handwritten notes by a director or member of the crew spoke volumes about the intentions of the production. For example, a group shared that their director took notes that the electricity stopped working during a production called Power. Another one shared the director made a notes that the actors needed to act more southern and another shared notes on how they were trying to get their production advertised but found some difficulties. All of these notes can make a reader understand the productions and society at the time better. Without saving these notes people would think all the plays went rather smoothly and the difficulties they faced wouldn’t be known. The information on the productions left by notes and kept safe is so important because it makes people understand the struggles the Federal Theatre Project faced.

The archive collection at Mason is huge and although I was unable to attend the seminar I have a friend who works there and I was able to hear a little bit about what they store there, and how they store the information.

I thought the reading and learning about digital archives was interesting because I always wondered how, why and to what purpose saving something digital could be as important as preserving something like a photograph. In The Artifactual Elements of Born-Digital Records, Part 1 author Susan Manus touched on the changing technology. Looking back technology has changed immensely and being about to keep “antiquated carriers can also serve distinct roles in digital preservation activities” which is something I never thought about.Being able to look back onto something from one of the first computers would open up a whole new idea to you then just reading about it.

In the interview between Thomas and Elvia, Elvia touches on her interest in archives and the topic of how people decide what is important enough to preserve. In the interview it touches on how Elvia grew up bilingual in America and so she can relate to artifacts about cultures and is able to distinguish the useful ones. Also Elevia states that there are “ Issues of representation and power are fundamentally rooted in archival work “ and because of this people challenge archival neutrality. People in the archive work need to remain neutral in order to preserve important information. Elevia says she tries to “have conversations across similar fields with a diversity of practitioners is key to understanding how our practices and end goals are alike and dissimilar”.

Manus,Susan. The Artifactual Elements of Born- Digital Records, Part 1. (November, 2011). Library of Congress.

Padilla, Thomas. Elvia, P. Bias, Perception and Archival Praxis. (September 2013). Data Praxis

The Federal Theater Project

The archive contains numerous different artifacts that can be used to better understand the way people behaved and interacted with certain mediums. It can be from hundred-year-old posters about a play, to a doll that has had its strings tangled up from decades ago. It also allows the general public to be able to donate certain items that they deem important or interesting enough to give away to scholars to research or study. Some of which can be very important to the person donating, as shown with Kurt Schwitters in the article we read. ¹ Through these artifacts, scholars from all over have access to information that would otherwise be impossible to find.

Certain materials digitize better than others. For instance, the posters my group had which covered certain theatrical plays would be easier to digitize due to their two-dimensional nature, than the doll or jacket that require more than one angle to understand fully. They could attempt to emulate the physical object, as Bill LeFurgy mentioned in his article. ² It would be much harder to digitize something that has many fine details, both visually and physically due to the feel of the item not being able to be digitized. This affects our interaction of the materials by not being able to feel what the object is made out of or how heavy it is. Overall, digitizing can be useful, but not when feeling an object helps gain more information.

I didn’t truly understand how diverse the Federal Theater Project was until I witnessed all the diverse groups and plays that they were putting on. Not only white and black performances, but performances from Java, Japan, Eastern Europe, and India. It was a surprising amount of diversity in an age that I would suspect to be not very tolerant or at the very least ignorant of the cultures portrayed in those plays. This helps to show me how diverse things were even in the early 1900’s, or at the very least, shows how radical the Federal Theater Project was when compared to the other projects we’ve studied. However, it does change the way I look at this time period, as I expected it to be a bit more, homogeneous with the culture of the United states. In the end, I guess there was a lot more color, both racially and creatively, than I expected.

Blog Post #8-Special Collections

Visiting the Special Collections was an experience that helped to gain a stronger feel of what theatre was like in the 1930s. We have discussed in class the importance of digitizing information for preservation purposes, and the possible negative effects of digital data. Having the ability to feel actual documents from the Federal Theatre Project proves both points. Seeing the fragility of documentation, learning about the proper way to hold a piece of paper, and the need to be so careful when handling the items shows the importance of digitizing information because without proper care, these documents would become damaged and lost forever. However, as the Coordinator talked about in class, the digitization of tactile items can change the way in which people interact with history. We lost the ability to engage with the senses, which can ultimately impact the way we absorb information.

Another difficulty with digitization is the risk of bias in choosing sources. As Thomas Padilla noted in his interview, art can be political, and it is up to the archivists, politicians, etc. who get to be remembered, forgotten, or silenced through historical records. ³ At George Mason, the archivists digitize one of every document, based on what the Coordinator told us. She mentioned that this can become difficult with documents that have multiple pages or annotations, and that as a team they decide whether the additional information will be included in the archive.

Archives, at least George Mason’s, is a sort of hub of knowledge and history. The public is gifted an opportunity to interact with our history in a way that is not always available in a classroom setting. Researchers are able to use the data and artifacts for their own projects, at a price, whereas without an archive this information may be lost. The Library of Congress argues a similar concept with born-digital records. Susan Manus believes that future archivists, or even current, will look to historical records on original forms of technology in order to preserve digital works that may become historically significant as time goes on, just how the hard copy works of the Federal Theatre Project are important to our understanding of history today. ⁴

Down with the Beavers – Special Collections

On November 6^th, 2019 the class met in the Fenwick Library to talk about the things Mason has archived. It was actually a pretty fascinating topic. My group looked at the “Revolt of the beavers” play, it was later discarded because beavers sharing somehow leads to children believing in communism. Besides that, it was interesting to see something that was supposed to be erased time, because of it leading to communism, was still somehow saved.

Archivists are the people who preserve these types of things so that other people can later find them. One huge part of their jobs is to take things and preserve them to the best of their ability so that later when someone needs that artifact for a paper, presentation, etc they can use it towards their work. No matter if they actually want the artifact or not (the donor situation), if the artifact will be valuable or not, or the stance it supports on politics, gender, race, etc. these people preserve them. Each artifact they preserve is like a time capsule in our history – for instance, The Ballad of America. Once that song was connected to communism the writer was blacklisted (for other songs aswell), and the song was ripped out of every schoolbook. The government wanted it to be completely hidden. Now in later times since it was well preserved, and we can look back on it as a big part of our history. ⁵

These Archivists have to: Identify the artifact, determine if it is worth preserving (if a donor offers lots of money, the item is really valuable, if it’s on a topic well known throughout the school, etc). Next they have to decide how they are going to preserve it. That might be keeping it in their storage/library, making the item available online, putting it in a display, etc. Then preserve that item and make it available to the general public. These types of things, in a way, serve as a memory of the United states. Although over time somethings may seem little or pointless its sort of a way of saying “Hey I was a thing that existed, you can’t just forget about me”. ⁶

Another tough job Archivists have is determining if to make something digitally available online or not. Majority of the time the papers they have are stored in a library, which they want people to come to. The whole point of a library is for people to come, check out a book, do some research, and check out these documents/artifacts. One of the plus sides of putting the documents online is its more accessible to more people, but as I said before that might make less people come to the library. Another plus side to putting it online is if the document is in really bad shape it might be better for people not to come and touch it. This digitally preserves it. ⁷

I’ve never been interested in theater, but to be able to see a play that was supposed to be destroyed years ago and be able to hold the original in my hands was fascinating. To look back on the past it makes no sense to us that these things would want to be destroyed and hidden from us. Back during those times everything was rocky, everyone was always looking behind their back with things like the depression happening, WW2 on the brinks, just anything bad you can think of. People needed ways to unite but those things uniting them were being taken over the people “looking behind their backs” and being scared. I’m glad that back then even though everyone might be scared of it, someone still realized these things needed to be saved as a “time stamp” in our history.

Blog Post #8

The Federal Theatre program was put in place in 1935, and ended in 1939. Some problems that the program faced were railroads costing too much. Individuals could not pay the fee of the trains and then the cost of the tickets to see the plays. Another problem is movies, they started to take over the theatres. There was no need for actors, directors, stage crew, etc. Due to budget cuts, lack of employees, and lack of an audience the Federal Theatre Program ended.

The goal of the Special Collections Research Center (SCRC) is to document and preserve documents and collections. They also make them available to the general public. Archivists digitize certain items/ collections to save the information, for example a piece of paper from over a hundred years ago may start to disintegrate. Or a tape or record may get scratched or destroyed over the years. Though not every piece of material is digitize due to many factors. These collections are extremely old and important, they need to be handled with care. The process of scanning has to be done with extreme caution. Then the Archivists have to ensure the quality and maintain it over time. George Mason University’s SCRC has over 70 digitize collections from the Federal Theatre Project. Being able to look at physical artifacts from the era the Federal Theatre program was active helped me see how impactful it was. Being able to look at the actual documents/ collections from that time was more impactful to me than reading articles about them.

Sites:

“Federal Theatre: Melodrama, Social Protest, and Genius : Articles and Essays : Federal Theatre Project, 1935 to 1939 : Digital Collections : Library of Congress.” The Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/collections/federal-theatre-project-1935-to-1939/articles-and-essays/federal-theatre-melodrama-social-protest-and-genius/.

“The Play That Electrified Harlem : Articles and Essays : Federal Theatre Project, 1935 to 1939 : Digital Collections : Library of Congress.” The Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/collections/federal-theatre-project-1935-to-1939/articles-and-essays/play-that-electrified-harlem/.

Archives and Communist beavers

Archives are central to the work of Historians. They provide access to records, memory, knowledge, and more. “Who gets to be remembered and historicized by way of record creation?”⁸ Arroyo-Ramirez argues that record keeping and creation is an act of power in itself. Just as there is no raw data, there is no neutrality in archives. In Silencing the Past, Michael Rolph Trouillot argues that the making of archives is how the silencing of a particular people or event in history occurs. The silencing of a people can be seen most distinctly in ex-colonies and modern-day settler states. We need to be more critical of how power plays a role in the creation of historical narratives and this needs to ensue at the archives.

The digitization of archives is great because it can potentially increase the scope of people who have access to historical data, and in doing so, it can also allow for an increased awareness of the politics behind archives. As we talked about in our visit to the Special Collections center, archivists decide to digitize materials based on their popularity, quality, and feasibility. Although the digitization of archival materials can be advantageous, I can’t say that is the case for all the materials in an archive. The Thomas Jefferson Library exhibit in the Library of Congress is a great example that shows how physical artifacts, whether real or constructed, can play a role in influencing our interpretations of people and events.⁹

I’m grateful for our visit to the Special Collections Center because it helped me contextualize the controversy of the Federal Theater Project. It was only after looking at the program for the “Revolt of the Beavers” that I really understood how anti-intellectualism and fear had perpetuated the controversy of the FTP. The children’s program had a cartoon drawing of a beaver on the cover, yet it was used by the House un-American Activities Committee as evidence that Hallie Flanagan was promoting communist ideals. Holding the physical copy of the program and imagining the HUAC using the same children’s program (with the cartoon beaver cover) in court was a humbling experience.

Blog Post 8

Archives can play a very large role in the lives of scholars. Archives can provide deep and hands-on insight into research. Physical archives allow you to immerse yourself into the history. You can feel the history throughout the items you touch. Those items were preserved so we could experience them in the same way they did so many years ago. This is so significant to scholars because they care about that topic and want to experience it. For the general public it is just really interesting and a cool experience to be able to see these archives in person. With Digital archives you lose that experience. You lose the close-up and personal feel of the history. However, digital archives are more accessible to not only scholars but the general public as well. Digitizing materials greatly affects our interaction with them. For example, when looking at a photo of a printing press stamp online, you have a different reaction than if you were holding the stamp in your hands. When we visited the Special Collections, I had the experience of actually holding several printing press stamps. I was able to feel the weight, see the details, and understand how it would have been used. If I had only looked at a photo it would not have been as interesting an experience.

When digitizing archival materials, there needs to be a good amount of though into which items archivists digitize. One of the main things to think about is consent. In the article “Bias, Perception, and Archival Praxis,” Elvia Arroyo-Ramirez states that, “the library profession’s blanket tendency to digitize pre-Internet print resources can be harmful especially if it clashes with the original consent of participants involved.”¹⁰ I found this interesting because it is true. Historians were given consent by the owners of certain materials to keep them in an archive. They were not always given consent to publish it to the internet for the entire world to see. These materials could include sensitive information that the owners may not want the public to know. This has been an issue in several cases over the years. Another thing that must be considered is the hardware in which the material is created. This mainly applies to already digital data, but digital for old hardware. ¹¹ This old digital data would have to be converted to something that could be understood on our technology today. If the archives were physical, one could look at the data on a computer that the data was created on. They could see it how the people saw it in its time.

Manus, and Susan. “The Artifactual Elements of Born-Digital Records, Part 1.” The Artifactual Elements of Born-Digital Records, Part 1 | The Signal, November 28, 2011. https://blogs.loc.gov/thesignal/2011/11/the-artifactual-elements-of-born-digital-records-part-1/.

Padilla, Thomas. “Bias, Perception, and Archival Praxis.” dh lib. dh lib, October 24, 2017. https://acrl.ala.org/dh/2017/09/13/archivalpraxis/.

Blog Post #8

For scholars, the archive gives much more information than just the material inside of it. When looking at an archive, the scholars must look at the framework that lies outside of the archive in order to understand the purpose of creating the archive itself. With this, there are different factors that go into creating an archive.

As I’ve come to realize, anything that lies within the digital humanities is biassed. And this means that whatever information that is put into an archive is biassed as well. Archivists must determine what goes into an archive based on its functionality and its usefulness to the archive, but how does one decide what is actually worthy of putting into an archive and what is merely discarded? For each archivist it might be different based on their own environmental factors.

Another important thing to notice about digital archives is their operating systems. “The Artifactual Elements of Born-Digital Records, Part 2¹²” gave a wonderful example of the importance of the framework of the archive. Bill Lefurgy explains that the Library of Congress recreated Thomas Jefferson’s book collection and they included the actual shelving and organization that Jefferson used. This is because the framework illustrates that Jefferson had reasoning behind his organization and unique, curved shelving units. Likewise, archivists must look at the original modeling of the item, especially if it is obsolete ¹³. Due to the archives being biassed, it is difficult to discern if the general public is getting all of the correct information that they need.

As for the Federal Theater Project, I believe that by looking through the materials for class, that I have a better understanding of why the FTP was so important for Americans. I knew that the FTP gave Americans jobs and offered some economic relief for those who were out of jobs, but it also helped stimulate American culture by using real people who had a passion for the arts. For example, many plays usually omitted large groups of minorities from being in the large scale productions, so when the all African American cast of “Macbeth” came to stage¹⁴, it was a huge deal. Minorities were being represented and passionate actors and actresses were able to showcase their talent.

The Federal Theater Project brought back authenticity. Instead of showcasing the same songs on the radio or showing the same large scale (yet probably half-hearted) productions of plays, people from the FTP were able to bring back authentic music and theater. The Federal Theater project revived the culture in America.

Special Collections Research Day (Blog Post 8)

I really liked this opportunity to see the special collections in class. It is definitely not something I would have sought out myself even though I am a theater major. I learned that George Mason has one of the biggest, if not the biggest sourcing of theatrical artifacts from the Federal Theater Project. The archive is important for scholars because it allows them to see the physical documents that people actually saw during the 1930s. It allows scholars to study these objects closer and better draw conclusions from them. Being one-on-one with documents or objects like these offers a new outlook on studying one’s craft. The intimate environment that the Special Collections rules have in place to study these things definitely lends towards a more focused experience. ¹⁵ For the general public, especially since George Mason is a public university, it allows them to have access to old historical documents that they cannot access anywhere else in the world. A lot of them are one of a kind so this allows a higher demand for these objects to be seen when people find out about Special Collections. I think, in a lot of ways, archivists are trying to digitize most artifacts because it allows them to be accessible by people all across the nation. If our goal is to educate others, or give them the tools to educate themselves, archives like Special Collections can be a really great resource if people know about it. But, digitized versions can lose some value that a tactile object can bring. So, our speaker talked a lot about how they try to digitize most artifacts but ultimately they do not all bring the same feeling as digitizing a document like a letter or a photograph does. My understanding of the Federal Theater Project changed because it pointed me towards how much documentation was being put out at the time. I forget that these programs had public responses, effects on the people involved, and operations that were happening that the public did not see that often kept them afloat. So, it was very cool to see them all in front of me. I was looking specifically at photographs of Voodoo MacBeth.

¹⁶

It was interesting to see what the photographers thought was important to catch and what wasn’t. For example, there were a lot more pictures of the audience than the backstage crew or actors preparing for the show to begin. I think that says a lot about how people viewed its impact on Black representation in theater. Overall, the Special Collections visit was a great way to see a resource I didn’t know existed. I hope it will remain in a physical and digital form so people can see it for many years to come.