Going into this year I did not have a good grasp on how important archives were to not only scholars but also the general public or anyone looking for information on a wide spectrum. I learned that archives can be under a wide variety of genres and if it has been digitized or is still a tangible form of artifact. The significance of archives from a scholars standpoint comes in a lot of options or ways; scholars use archives to further investigate primary sources to possibly write their own article about it. Through tangible archives, they have the ability to see first hand and in person what that artifact was like exactly like it was from the year it was made. The significance of tangible artifacts over digital archives is the appearance of the artifact, significant markings, exact size and texture. 2 Once something has become digitized it loses some of its cultural value I believe. The decision to digitize can come from many background ideas; a major reason used to justify the digitization of an artifact is preservation. My idea of the Federal Theatre Project changed in the sense of understanding the adversity that came with it. Looking through our class discussions about the FTP I notice all of the hardships they faced and I was under the assumption that once they initiated this project that people loved it and it took off and grew fast; but this was not the case.
- Thomas Padilla, “Interview”, Bias, Perception, and Archival Praxis. [/efn_note} You lose all of that when it becomes digitized and with digital-born information. However, digital archives create a space where anyone in the public can access the information because it is already public before being put on the LOC archive. Those are the significances of archives for scholars and the general public; but digital archives pose as a protective element to information. 1 Jefferson Bailey, “The Artifactual Elements of Born-Digital Records, Part 2”, The Artifactual Elements of Born-Digital Records. 1
