Collection Processors

...now browsing by category

 

Picturing religion

Friday, July 22nd, 2011

What can a photograph tell us about an individual’s religious beliefs and practices? A lot, according to Colleen McDannell, author of Material Christianity: Religion and Popular Culture in America. In that book’s opening chapter, McDannell unpacks a single image—a snapshot of the living room of a home built by the Farm Security Administration—to reveal how wall hangings, knick-knacks, and furniture communicate valuable (and otherwise unobtainable) information about a family’s connection to the divine, the church, and other believers.

McDannell’s analysis came to mind as my partner, Dan, and I began processing the photographic collection of the Religious News Service at Presbyterian Historical Society. The photographs in the collection are nothing like the one McDannell uses in her analysis—most of the images are photojournalistic shots of denominational gatherings, public appearances, or other religion-related activities. Nevertheless, McDannell’s larger point—that a photographic image can tell us just as much or more than the written word—still applies to this fascinating collection.

Since its founding in 1934 by the National Conference of Christians and Jews, Religious News Service (RNS) has operated as a sort of religious Associated Press, sharing religious happenings and religious takes on current events with the broader reading public.

To say that RNS’s photographic records capture every U.S. religion-related event in the twentieth-century would be an overstatement—but not a major one. The photos depict typical national and international “current events”: political ceremonies, summits, and speeches; social events like rallies, protests, demonstrations; scenes from wars and other conflicts; and the like. But they also depict specifically religious events, trends, and observances, and introduce viewers to important contemporary figures in Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish communities.

Some researchers might value this collection for its visual chronicle of major events in twentieth-century American religious history. Indeed, the collection does substantially document the history of American Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish groups during the twentieth century. But for researchers who want to move beyond this narrative usage, the collection might prove useful in raising questions. Why do the photos often document meetings between politicians and religious figures? And why do they so frequently depict those whose religious beliefs and practices make them “different”—Amish, Orthodox Jews, Catholic nuns?

Questions like these point to the real utility of a collection like the RNS photos: scholars of American religious history can take the collection itself as a historical document and consider how its composition—its foci and its lacunae—reveals Americans’ thinking about religious matters during this era. Perhaps RNS focused on political-religious interactions because so many mid-century Americans were concerned about the “dividing wall” between church and state. And perhaps photographers pursued images of the Amish, Orthodox Jews, and Catholic nuns because Americans have had (and continue to have) an ongoing fascinating with the unknowable religious “other.”

Regardless of their value to researchers, the RNS photos—from the breathtaking to the bucolic, from the horrifying to the hilarious—have provided for interesting conversations between my processing partner and me over the last month-or-so. Check out the thumbnails below for some images from our processing work.  Photographs may not be used without permission from the Presbyterian Historical Society.

Jesus Loves You… Let Me Draw You a Picture To Prove It

Monday, July 11th, 2011

When most of us think of the word “evangelist,” we picture people like Billy Graham—seemingly angry, fist-shaking preachers who whisper, cry, shake, and shout in an effort to drive their audience to a spiritual frenzy. McKendree Robbins Long—the early twentieth century Presbyterian evangelist whose papers Dan and I just finished processing at Presbyterian Historical Society—was probably a lot like Graham in some ways. But Long didn’t just rely on his oratorical prowess to draw would-be believers to Jesus Christ. Long, a classically trained visual artist, also used pictures to proclaim the Old Time Religion.

Long’s papers at PHS reveal this evangelist’s penchant for fusing his soul-saving impulse with his artistic muse. Two classical examples of this activity—hand-drawn sketches titled “I Will, Be Thou Clean” and “There is Never a Drought in the Spirit”—depict the two New Testament tales in which Jesus heals the lepers and meets the woman at the well, respectively. Each contains an implicit message to viewers—Jesus saves, both physically (from disease) and emotionally (from the “drought” of loneliness experienced by the woman at the well).

Most interesting to me was Long’s apparent obsession with the Christian doctrine about the end of the world. A number of his paintings and illustrations depict death, destruction, and damnation—all end-of-the-world themes Long culled from New Testament scriptures. Many of the works feature familiar faces, too—one, appropriately titled “Apocalyptic Scene with Philosophers and Historical Figures,” shows historical actors like Charles Darwin and Karl Marx awaiting their final Judgment on the banks of a boiling lava-filled river. (Researchers, please note that only a copy from a scan of this piece of art is available at the Presbyterian Historical Society.  The original oil painting is at the North Carolina Museum of Art).

As in much apocalyptic art, Long’s work isn’t just about condemnation. The artist-evangelist also fills his paintings with impressions of hope and salvation. In “Apocalyptic Scene,” that hope takes a familiar Christian form: a cross, surrounded by angels and gilded with a heavenly glow. It’s far off in the distance, a fleeting glimpse of redemption amid the terrifying immediacy of Hell—just where an evangelist like Long, preoccupied with fire-and-brimstone approaches to Christian conversion, would want it.

Photographs cannot be used without permission from the Presbyterian Historical Society.

The Vote!

Thursday, July 7th, 2011

My partner Michael and I are coming to the end of six months processing at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. We’ll be sad to go, but we’re excited about moving on to the National Archives and Records Administration (Mid-Atlantic Branch). We hear they’ve got an interesting collection for us to dig into! But first things first, we’re finishing up our final collection at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania: the League of Women Voters of Philadelphia records.

The League of Women Voters (LWV) was formed in 1920, replacing the National American Woman Suffrage Association just before the passage of the 19th Amendment granted American women the right to vote. The Philadelphia branch of LWV was founded soon afterward, with the same goals of educating women voters and generally promoting issues of interest to women. The Philadelphia LWV included among its storied members Sarah Logan Wister Starr, that philanthropic powerhouse of 20th-century Philadelphia’s social and political circles, whom we came to know and love while processing the Belfield papers. She wasn’t the only powerful women in LWV, however. Those ladies knew how to take care of business. Accounting for the special interests of half the American population, the LWV wielded real political power and they knew it. They kept an eye on every politician’s voting record; they tracked developments in issues relating to education, the environment, international relations, and women’s rights; they even found time to hold local events, including car care clinics!

The collection is an amazing resource for anyone studying the League of Women Voters or grassroots political action in the context of an inner-city environment. Because the LWV was tracking a diverse number of subjects and keeping tabs on numerous politicians, education, Philadelphia government reform, and other political and social issues of special concern to the League of Women.

Voters are also well documented in this collection. We hope you’ll come to the Historical Society soon to check it out!

Former dancers (subject specialists) process the Pennsylvania Ballet records

Friday, July 1st, 2011

One of the first discussions my processing partner, Christiana, and I had was about our secret past as ballet dancers. This didn’t have much bearing on the first two collections we processed (the papers of the Safe Energy Communication Council and Health/PAC), but our third was the Pennsylvania Ballet records at Temple University Special Collections. Our knowledge of ballets, costumes, performances, and famous dancers would obviously have some effect on how we processed this collection, but we weren’t sure whether our subject knowledge would help or hinder our attempt to process at 2 hours per linear foot. This collection had a lot of photographic materials, and a not insignificant amount of those were unidentified or “miscellaneous.” Would we be so bogged down in trying to assign ballets to unidentified performance photographs that our processing speed suffered? Or would our knowledge of costumes and sets enable us to blithely sort miscellaneous photographs into piles of  Sleeping Beauty, Nutcracker, Giselle, and so on?

Subject knowledge is a clear advantage when doing traditional processing. Knowing something about your collection before you start can save you research hours and make both arrangement and description easier. In the case of minimal processing, however, subject knowledge can only do so much good. There are some strict time limits on processing speed and everything must be considered in terms of trade offs: you can spend more time researching if you process a little quicker. If you leave those “general” or “miscellaneous” folders as they are, then you can do something more elaborate with the next series. Taking the time to utilize subject knowledge must be considered in the same way, which means there is a tipping point when doing so is no longer worth the time.

For example, in the Pennsylvania Ballet Collection there were times when we could have given titles or added description to previously untitled photographs and folders. We tried only to do this only when it would be quick and not break our stride. So if we looked through a folder of publicity photographs from, say, Sleeping Beauty, and found that unlabeled photographs from Giselle were included, it only took seconds to add the second ballet to the folder title. However, there were more situations in which we could have used our subject knowledge but chose not to, because we simply didn’t have the time. At the bottom of one box we found a thick layer of loose and unlabeled photographs of dancers, performances, and fundraising events. It would have been fairly easy to sort out all of the Nutcracker photographs. Or any photographs of a famous dancer. Or photographs we could date to a specific span of years when a certain dancer was in the company. But we couldn’t, because while this would have been easier for us than for processors without subject knowledge, it still would have taken an awful lot of time (which of course we didn’t have). So we decided to place these photographs in the dreaded “miscellaneous” folders and move on, doing the same with a box of loose slides. We also didn’t touch any chunky folders already labeled “miscellaneous,” “general,” or other vague terms that didn’t tell you much about content. (Folders with only one or two items in them, though? Those got re-titled.) If we had taken the time to identify every single one of those unlabeled items, then we would have had to skimp on arrangement and description elsewhere, which was not an option.

In the discussion of minimal processing using archivists with subject knowledge, it’s also worth  discussing how much this can help researchers. In the above Sleeping Beauty and Giselle example, our addition would only help someone who was looking for photographs of Giselle productions by the Pennsylvania Ballet (so, probably not the vast majority of people who will access this collection). The place where subject knowledge was most needed was in the un-arranged jumble of photographs and slides, but these are also the parts the collection that would have taken the most time to deal with and were therefore unlikely to be touched during any minimal processing project.

To sum up, subject knowledge helps in traditional processing and certainly didn’t hurt us here; but it didn’t greatly improve the quality of the description and arrangement we were able to do, nor did it save us much time. Because we were practicing minimal processing, we didn’t have the luxury of using our subject knowledge to its full extent. Having knowledge about the material in your collection before you begin can help you, but the rewards are small given that you might not be able to apply it without devoting more time than you can spare.

THE (yes, THE) William Penn papers

Friday, June 24th, 2011

When our friend and co-processor Jenna heard that Michael and I were working on the Penn family papers at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, she was a little bit jealous. “That’s amazing!” she gushed. “But, you do realize, you have officially peaked in your careers as archivists. It doesn’t get any better than William Penn!”

Truly, the Historical Society of Pennsylvania’s collection of William Penn and family is unparalleled. It is a rich and vital source for anyone studying the history of the Pennsylvania colony, the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), European-Native American cultural encounters, colonial administration, inter-colonial disagreements, the transition of colonial government at the time of the American Revolution, and myriad other topics. Michael and I were fascinated to find treaties upon which the Native American parties had drawn “pictograms” of their names next to the English equivalents. We were blown away by the sheer volume of records relating to the Maryland-Pennsylvania border dispute, which dragged on for many decades. I’m a bit of a Quaker history nerd, so I was thrilled to see Penn’s correspondence with George Fox. All of which is to say that from the perspective of a researcher, Jenna is right: it doesn’t get any better than the Penn family papers.

From the perspective of an archivist, however, I have to say: I hope that wasn’t the peak of my career. The Penn family papers were frustrating to process precisely because they are such an important and frequently-used collection. As an archives student I’m often told that archival processing and description are iterative processes, and this collection really brought that truth home. Almost two centuries have passed since the Historical Society was founded, and the Penn papers seemingly represent a cross-section of every fad, trend, and development in archival theory. There are huge bound volumes of collected documents, custom-size boxes for individual items, and several generations of Hollinger boxes; they are described in volume indexes, outdated finding aids, and a card catalog; important documents have been hand-copied, microfilmed, and photocopied. The collection is all over the place.

Under the auspices of this minimal-processing project, we didn’t have the time to update everything according to today’s standards and best practices. But even if we could, it might not even be desirable. Decades of scholars have used the collection as it is and cited their sources accordingly. While working on this collection, Michael and I had to ensure that nothing we did would inhibit the ability of researchers to find materials they used last week, or chase scholarly citations from 100 years ago. What processing we did was necessarily minimal, but our major objective was to create an online finding aid that would serve as an entry point to the collection. That much we accomplished, and we are pleased to make this contribution to the field. Welcome to the digital world, William Penn!

What have we learned from the experience?

Here are our words of wisdom to researchers: Come to the Historical Society of Pennsylvania! The Penn family papers are an incredible resource. We recommend you consult the card catalog on site to ensure you will have a fruitful experience.

Here are our words of wisdom to archivists: Come to the Historical Society of Pennsylvania! Maybe ask if you can get your hands dirty on an unprocessed collection instead of the Penn family papers. If you do work with the Penn family papers, allow at least 150 years to do a thorough job. At which point archival theory may have changed sufficiently that it will be time to start all over again….but you can worry about that when you get there.

Chaos to Order, in 4 hours or less

Friday, June 3rd, 2011

Written by Celia Caust-Ellenbogen and Michael Gubicza.

When we first saw the boxes holding the Belfield papers, stacked on shelves in the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, we said to each other: “Ohhh boy, I bet there’s good stuff in there!” That was our Pavlovian response: the collection was stored entirely in candy-bar and liquor boxes.

Our next response was anxiety about our 2-hour-per-linear-foot target processing speed: the collection was stored entirely in candy-bar and liquor boxes. Were these boxes packed by a child or a drunkard?

We’re still not sure who packed the boxes, but they were truly a mess. Sometimes documents were folded up and tied together in little packets, but more often the materials were just loose. The Belfield papers seemed insurmountable. But we’re proud to say that we managed to process them more or less on time. With help from Holly and Courtney we finished before our 6-week deadline was up, although if you count man-hours we clocked somewhere around 3.7 hours per linear foot. That’s not bad—it’s almost twice our target speed (2 hours per linear foot) and a bit above the project average (2.8 hours per linear foot), but it’s just under the speed Greene and Meissner suggest for minimal processing (4 hours per linear foot, and that’s for large 20th century collections of business records).  It is well under the speed of traditional processing, which can take up to 40 hours per linear foot!

Most importantly, we are pleased with the finding aid we produced. We didn’t quite manage folder-level description, but we did at least provide subseries-level description. And now that everything is arranged in folders and document boxes, the Historical Society of Pennsylvania can finally grant physical access to the materials.

As much as we dreaded having to paw through the disorganized boxes of the Belfield papers, in retrospect we’re almost glad they were such a mess at the beginning. It forced us to do lots of research and explore related subject material in order to understand the collection well enough to arrange it properly. Don’t get me wrong, this was still minimal processing. We didn’t spend weeks checking books out of the library. But whenever we needed some additional context, we did hop on the computer for a quick Google search or visit to Ancesty.com. Over the course of 6 weeks of processing, we covered a lot of interesting topics. Lucky for us, the Fisher-Wister-Starr-Blain families happened to be involved in some fascinating things. We learned about Women’s Medical College of Pennsylvania, Colonial Dames of America, the Sesquicentennial Exposition, stamp collecting, world travel during the Great Depression, twentieth century psychiatry, and nineteenth-century industry and legal practice, just for starters. The Belfield papers will prove to be an amazing resource for researchers in these, and many more subject areas, and we are proud to say that we were able to make the collection serviceable for them—in less than 4 hours per linear foot!

Did we process 52 cubic feet in one day?!

Tuesday, May 31st, 2011

When Devin and I started working for the PACSCL/CLIR Hidden Collections project, I thought that we would at most process 7 or maybe even 8 cubic feet of materials in a single day. My assumption turned out to be very wrong. Over the course of one day in March, Devin and I processed 52 cubic feet of materials. The discovery that we had processed so much in such a short time prompted me to ask two questions: How did we do it? And, did we really process all of those materials?

Before I can answer these questions, let me give some information about the collection Devin and I were processing at the time – The Religious News Service (RNS) records at the Presbyterian Historical Society. The creator of these records, RNS (now called the Religion News Service) is a news service that has been dedicated to providing information about religion and ethics to newspapers and radio stations in the United States. Since its founding in the 1930s, the service has distributed a wide range of publications including syndicated articles, editorials, and photographs.

The RNS records contain copies of nearly every publication and photograph distributed by the organization between the late 1930s and early 1980s. During that period, RNS not only covered a wide range of subjects (e.g. World War II, the civil rights movement, ecumenical movements, evangelism and religious cults), it was also very prolific. According to our calculations, the RNS collection consists of over 600 cubic feet of materials.

Devin and I faced a major challenge when we began the RNS project, how were we going to process such a large volume of materials in ten or less weeks? Before we started the RNS project, we were told that we would not be able to use exactly the same processing methods that we had used for other collections at Presbyterian Historical Society. For example, early estimates showed that it would have likely taken Devin and me at least two months to type every folder title in the collection into the finding aid’s container list.

So, what did we do? How did we process over 600 cubic feet in a little over two months? Well, there were three major factors that contributed to the timely processing of the RNS records collection.

  1. The RNS records collection is ideally suited for minimal processing methods. The original arrangement and folder titles of the collection were so clear that little additional arrangement was needed. Every RNS publication was organized by publication type and in chronological order. If Devin and I had wanted to find a single RNS publication for any given day between 1940 and 1981, we could easily find it. Also, if Devin and I had wanted to search for materials covering a major historical event, we could consult the collection’s series of subject files where additional copies of the RNS publications had been filed by topic.
  2. Rather than examining the materials in every folder we sampled the materials in the collection. Devin and I pulled 8 folders from every cubic foot box and examined the materials they contained. We took notes about these materials and later used the notes to develop a finding aid for the collection.  We were confident that this approach would allow us to develop a fairly accurate view of the entire RNS records because of the nature of the materials in the collection. Early in the project we discovered that while most of the RNS publications contained unique information, certain editorial patterns (e.g. the format of the publications, the kinds of subjects that were covered, the writing style) persisted throughout the entire collection. Because of these patterns, Devin and I were able to gain a good sense about the information researchers would likely find in the RNS records through our sample.
  3. We had some help. Devin and I would not have been able to finish our work with the RNS records without the help of David Staniunas at the Presbyterian Historical Society. David sampled a large portion of the photographs and photographic negatives in the collection and shared his notes with us.

Having explained how we processed the RNS records, let me address the other question posed at the beginning of this post—did we really process the RNS records? I don’t know if I have an answer. On one hand, and I think everybody who has been directly involved with the collection would agree, more work could and should be done with the RNS records. For example, it would be great if we could examine every folder in the collection and describe it at the file level. On the other hand, I recognize that additional work would take a considerable amount of time and money. If we had waited until these resources became available, the collection may have remained hidden for a long time. To paraphrase what Holly has written in an earlier post on this blog, our work will ideally be a first step in the arrangement, description and preservation of the RNS collection.

These issues of course are at the heart of the debates about processing that are going on within the archival profession. I do believe that we have made a valuable contribution to the future of the RNS records. Hopefully, with the completion of the collection’s online finding aid, more researchers will be able to learn about the RNS records and soon make use of the rich and extensive materials.

Atrocities in the Congo

Friday, May 13th, 2011

In 1898, a Southern Presbyterian named Lachlan Cumming Vass II volunteered as a missionary to the Congo Free State. At the time, the nation was still under the oppressive control of Belgium’s King Leopold II. In the 1890s, Leopold’s dummy non-governmental organization, the Association Internationale Africaine, began to exploit Congolese natural resources (including rubber, copper, and other minerals) and to forcibly employ indigenous peoples as laborers. Leopold made huge profits from these endeavors, but only through the violent physical oppression of Congolese workers, many of whom were tortured, maimed, and/or killed. Estimates suggest that this forced labor system directly or indirectly decimated the Free State’s indigenous population by 20%. Gradually, the international community learned of these atrocities, often through consciousness-raising activities of Presbyterian missionaries like William M. Morrison and William H. Sheppard. Upon his arrival, Vass quickly joined his colleagues’ efforts.

Vass’ photographic documentation of the atrocities now resides at the Presbyterian Historical Society, in the Vass Family papers collection. My partner Dan and I recently had the opportunity to process these records. As we did, I was fascinated to learn more about Presbyterians’ roles in exposing the horrors of early colonial Congo rule.

Vass spoke explicitly about the rubber worker atrocities in a 1906 letter to Stanley Hall, president of the Congo Reform Association in the U.S.:

“How bad are the conditions? . . . I am in a position to say from personal experience . . . that the conditions in the Congo have not in the least been exaggerated . . . . It would make your blood boil to see some of the treatment meeted [sic] out on these poor defenseless people . . .”

Vass was also frank about his own cultural and social baggage, having been born in the Reconstruction-era South just seven years after Emancipation:

“I am a Southern [white] man from the black belt of eastern [North Carolina] and I don’t think we are often loaded with praise for our love of the Negro . . . but I wish to protest in the strongest terms to the absolutely inhuman way these poor people in their own country are being butchered by the white man, and all under the cloak of Philanthropy. I believe confidently that there has never been such a contemptably dishonest government on the face of the earth.”

Vass and his fellow missionaries certainly suffered for their outspokenness. In fact, both Sheppard and Morrison were charged with libel after they accused the Company Kasai rubber company of malfeasance and violence against workers. (Both missionaries were eventually acquitted). Nevertheless, the actions of these Presbyterian missionaries contributed to the overall effort to topple the regime, which succeeded on November 15, 1908, when Belgium annexed the state.

What amazing activists! You can learn more about Vass II and his work in the Congo by checking out the Vass Family Papers at PHS.

[Excerpts above from L.C. Vass, letter to G. Stanley Hall, September 4, 1906, Vass Family Papers, 1:14, Presbyterian Historical Society (Philadelphia, Pa.).]

How the Archives Taught Me to Stop and Smell the Roses

Wednesday, May 11th, 2011

When Jenna and I first learned that we would be processing the records of the Conard-Pyle Company at the University of Delaware, all we knew was that they were rose breeders. Well-known rose breeders, but specialists in flowers nonetheless. As someone whose gardening prowess extends only to watering a cactus every couple of weeks, I was convinced that I would be processing some kind of massive storehouse of Martha Stewart gardening advice, long treatises on soil composition, or any number of earthy subjects beyond my ken. With this in mind, what I found was something completely different.

Flowers, and roses in particular, are big business; the process required before any cultivar ends up in the average garden is staggering in its scope. Tens of thousands of plants are grown, examined, and discarded in the search for a single plant of suitable characteristics. For any variety to really sell, or be purchased for resale, it has to enter into the All-American Rose Selections judging process, placed in test gardens around the country and evaluated for years before being a winner. Though not all commercial roses are AARS award-winners, those that are reap fame and fortune, and may be hybridized for years to come. There is no better example than the rose named ‘Peace’. Shipped to Conard-Pyle in 1942 by French hybridizer Francis Meilland,  budwood of Peace was spirited out of France on one the last (legend says the last) planes to leave the country before the arrival of the German blitzkrieg. Originally named ‘Mme A Meilland’ in memory of Francis’ mother Claudia, the rose was propagated by Conard-Pyle during the war and given the name ‘Peace’ on the very day that Berlin fell to the Allies. Blooms of Peace later adorned the breast pockets of each delegation during the inaugural meeting of the United Nations in San Francisco. Since then, there have been somewhere between 30 and 50 million Peace roses grown. That, ladies and gentlemen, is a lot of roses.

Yet this collection isn’t all pretty flowers. Its greatest strength is that it is a window into an industry that most people, including myself (before this project), never knew a thing about. The Conard-Pyle Collection is a nearly unbroken history of business from the company’s founding in 1897 to the early 2000s. That’s over a century of roses, and nearly all of those records are here, including every retail sales record from 1897 to the cancellation of retail by the company in 1978. Beyond sales, the collection provides insight into the lengths required to market new rose cultivars, including press releases to announce the strengths of each variety and careful cost-benefit analyses of advertisements, recorded in detail in massive ledgers covering 40 years at a time.

And, archivists and librarians, if you think intellectual property issues are a concern for modern times, ask a rose breeder about plant patents. The Conard-Pyle collection contains over two thousand plant patents, each describing ownership of the cultivar in terms of coloring, bud quantity and dispersal, and petal size and quantity, among other characteristics. These patents, coupled with the documentation concerning the transfer of rights from the original hybridizer, documentation about infringement litigation, and huge quantities of correspondence, paint a detailed picture of the refined and complex business process that lies behind every rose.

For those of you that aren’t as utterly fascinated by business records as I am, the collection is not without its visual appeal. I wouldn’t be stretching the truth if I said that many of the early catalogs are works of art, many of them having printed or inked depictions of flowers in place of photographs (color catalogs were also something of a coup in the industry, at the time). Many of the printing plates used for those catalogs are also in the collection, offering further insight into the production of those materials (or the history of printed advertising, if you’re a graphic designer).  I have never before worked on a collection that so succinctly and completely documents the inner workings of a single (and somewhat obscure) industry, and I found myself enthralled by a subject that, according to the dead ferns in my backyard, is completely outside my usual interests. So, if you’ll forgive my use of the phrase, I urge everyone to stop and smell the roses while you process or research an archival collection. You just might find something fascinating you never thought would be.

Oh, and it has beer.

Yes, beer.

A Touch of Archival Drama

Monday, May 9th, 2011

“If I weren’t going to be an archivist,” I declared one afternoon, “I’d go to New York and pursue the stage!”  I turned to Brian.  “Are you shocked?”

“No,” he replied, busy with folder numbering.  “And what are you even talking about?”

“Little Women!” Holly chimed in.  “It’s a quote from the movie.  Sort of,” she laughed.

I sighed and stared down at the glossy black-and-white photos strewn across my desk.  They were headshots from the 1980s, and they were marvelous.  They had been pulled from the boxes stacked high around the room – boxes filled with set designs, stage directions, and dog-eared scripts.  As I sat there, looking down at the artfully posed figures silently pleading, “Hire me!” I felt the atmosphere in the room begin to change.  The glamour, the excitement, the drama contained in those boxes somehow slipped out and began winding their way around the room.  From that moment on, I knew that the papers of the Delaware Theatre Company at the University of  Delaware would be my favorite collection that I’d process with PACSCL.

The Delaware Theatre Company (DTC) collection is truly a treasure-trove of information for both researchers and artists.  The materials range from board meeting minutes and financial records, to posters and advertisements for each season’s productions.  My favorite part of the collection, however, are the papers of Cleveland Morris, DTC’s co-founder and first Artistic Director.  These include Morris’ production plans, as well as director’s notebooks, set design drawings, costume sketches, stage directions, and casting information.  The material for each production – and there were many over Morris’ career – are contained in folders packed full of photographs and letters, most containing opening night well-wishes and thank-you’s from the cast.

It was the first time I ever found myself so affected by the materials I processed.  I began striking dramatic poses as I foldered, attempted to script our days, and even tried to “direct” Brian (“If you could just say that again, but this time, with FEELING!”)  I frequently lamented my office-bound state and complained that I could be “treading the boards” instead of writing folder titles.  I even began referring to the shelving space as “stage right” and “stage left.”  For awhile, it seemed as if diva-status had been achieved.

With the completion of processing, however, all returned to status quo.  Despite the excitement, and the drama, we were happy to help raise the curtain on the Delaware Theatre Company collection.  The collection merely awaits some enthusiastic researcher – perhaps one with a flair for the dramatic – to continue the discovery process.