Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Acquisition of photographs : determining archival quality Carroll, Ann Elizabeth 1989

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1989_A3 C37.pdf [ 13.65MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0097347.json
JSON-LD: 1.0097347+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0097347.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0097347+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0097347+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0097347+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0097347 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0097347.txt
Citation
1.0097347.ris

Full Text

ACQUISITION OF PHOTOGRAPHS DETERMINING ARCHIVAL QUALITY BY ANN ELIZABETH CARROLL B.A., McGill University, 1967 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARCHIVAL STUDIES \ in THE FACULTY OF ARTS (School of Library, Archival and Information Studies) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA February 1989 0Ann Elizabeth Carroll In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of S ^- A \*Z> The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT This thesis examines the collection or acquisition of photographs by archives. It focuses on those documents which are not generated by the archives' sponsoring institution but are potentially archival. The thesis identifies the characteristics of archival documents by which archivists can judge the archival quality of photographs and thus their suitability for acquisition. Such documents form organic collections which have been set aside by their creator and responsibly cared for. These characteristics are drawn from the theories formulated by European archivists, Sir Hilary Jenkinson, S. Muller, J.A. Feith, R. Fruin, Eugenio Casanova, and American archivists, Theodore Schellenberg and Lester Cappon. This paper also examines the question of whether archives should establish a separate collections policy for photographs. Conservation, description and copyright implications posed by photographs suggest this as a plausible procedure to take. However, the integrity of collections and their increasingly multi-media nature suggest otherwise. Archival documents should not be collected focussing on the form of the record, but rather as forming part of the total documentation of their creator. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract Page ii Acknowledgements i v Chapter One Introduction.. 1 Notes to Chapter One 8 Chapter Two Acquisition According to Form of the Material 9 Notes to Chapter Two 23 Chapter Three Nature of Archival Documents 25 Notes to Chapter Three 54 Chapter Four Evaluating Photograph Collections' Archival Nature: A Case Study 58 Notes to Chapter Four 97 Chapter Five Conclusion 98 Notes to Chapter Five 105 Bibliography. 106 9 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Grateful acknowledgement is made to Terry Eastwood his encouragement and advice in the preparation of this thesis. for 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Archivists have a twofold responsibility. The first is to preserve the records of permanent value of the body that sponsors the archives. This may be a government, business, institution, or association. In this instance, archivists receive or accession records, appraising or evaluating them and selecting those which have enduring value based on the evidence they contain. They are selected for what they reveal of the organization that created the records and for other information they may provide that is considered useful to researchers. The second responsibility of archivists is to preserve those records that document society. These may be records of government, businesses, institutions, associations or individuals. In this case, records are gathered or acquired mostly from outside the body that sponsors the archives. This may be either by donation or purchase. Records are appraised, as in the first case, before being selected for inclusion in the holdings of the archives, that is they are identified as being of interesting subject matter and then evaluated for their worth for acquisition. In this second situation, archivists look beyond the subject content of the 2 materials in an effort to determine the nature of the records. This is necessary because the origins and completeness of the documentation is less certain than in the former case and therefore their authenticity and value as records which accurately document society is less certain. Acquisition, thus, concerns not only identifying records that are valuable for their subject content. It also involves considering the records from the point of view of how they were created. Acquisition is an important area of archival practice to study as decisions made at the time of acquisition affect the worth and usefulness of materials held in an archives. Collection of authentic, original documents as opposed to those of dubious authenticity or copies which may have been tampered with has a bearing on the value of the documents. Acquisition is also but the first step in the archival process or continuum of arranging and describing and conserving the records, and greatly affects these latter activities. As American archivist Gerald Ham commented, "this age of overabundant records and information, combined with a scarcity of resources, is forcing archivists to replace their essentially unplanned approach to archival preservation with a systematic, planned and documented process of building, maintaining and preserving collect ions." (1) 3 Recent concern about acquisition as reflected in archival literature on acquisition tends to focus on the need for cooperation between repositories in their acquisition policies and strategies, the role of the archivist in selecting materials which document society, and the need to collect documentation from the overwhelming mass of available materials. This paper focuses on archival documents examining them for the criteria which determine their suitability for .acquisition by an archives. (2) Archives today are comprised of many forms of material other than the traditional written or textual documents. Sometimes collections contain only these other forms of record. These may be maps, sound recordings, films, photographs or machine readable records, to name a few. This thesis concentrates on acquisition of a form of record other than textual. It discusses how present theory on the archival nature of records can be applied to the acquisition of photographs by archives and tests collections of photographs according to defined characteristics of archival records. As part of the discussion of acquisition of photographs by archives, it examines the theoretical and practical justifications for considering acquisition of archival documents from the viewpoint of the form of the material. 4 A focus on photographic archives may be justified in four ways. Firstly, photographs are collected by many cultural institutions. These include federal, provincial and municipal archives, university archives, historical societies, libraries, museums, research centres, private companies and photography studios, to name the most common. Archives base acquisition on a particular philosophy. This philosophy runs counter to the commonly held dictum that "a picture is worth a thousand words," and as such it needs to be examined. Secondly, acquisition of photographs by archives is an important area to study as most archives collect photographs. In 1980, a study reported that 83.6% of Canadian archives provide service on photograph collections and that the number of photographs held in the repositories was growing annually. (3) In British Columbia, in 1988, this national picture was confirmed by a study which showed that 51 out of the 63 archives held photograph collections. (4) Thirdly, the number of photographs being produced in North America and therefore potentially available for acquisition is increasing at the alarming rate, it is estimated, of 10 billion images annually. (5) A coherent collecting or acquisition philosophy thus needs to be identified, in order to select from such numbers. 5 Fourthly, photographs as documents provide yet another record of the past and as such are part of our heritage. As National Archives of Canada archivist Joan Schwartz noted, photographs reflect "the intellectual, political, economic and social milieu within which [they were] created." (6) It is also the most commonly understood language of communication in the world. Anthropologist John Collier has observed that "we think photographically and certainly communicate photographically. The nonverbal language of photorealism is the language that is most understood interculturally and cross-culturally." (7) Consequently, we should be concerned to sharpen our understanding of archival acquisition of photographic documents. Chapter Two examines the reasons for focussing on the qualities of photographs during acquisition. It explores the reasons why archivists consider the characteristics of form important in assessing the value of photographic documentation. These characteristics include the kind of information that is only provided by visuals, the conservation implications posed by certain types of photographic collections, the special descriptive needs of photographs and copyright problems posed by such documents. It then discusses the implications of considerations of form on acquisition. Such a focus encourages archivists to consider the artifactual and artistic value of the images 6 rather than their value as documentation. Context of creation and function of the records become secondary to considerations of form. The chapter concludes that archival acquisition of photographs should be guided by a multi-media collections policy as opposed to one based on form of the material. Conservation, description, and copyright implications posed by photographs are important elements of acquisition but, photographs, like other documents archives acquire, should firstly be appraised for their archival nature. Chapter Three defines the archival nature of documents. Firstly, it characterizes archives based on the philosophy of archival science of European archivists, Sir Hilary Jenklnson, Eugenio Casanova, S. Muller, J.A. Feith, and R. Fruin, and Michel Duchein, and American archivists, Theodore Schellenberg and Lester J. Cappon. It underlines the fact that the archival nature of documents is based upon certain characteristics of the records. These characteristics are threefold. The first is that archival documents are part of an organic whole. The second is that they show responsible custodianship and the third is that they have been considered valuable enough to be set aside for preservation by their creators. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the elements of these three characteristics as they apply to all records and in particular to photographs. 7 The fourth chapter examines photograph collections already held by a repository that is a hybrid institution containing both special library materials and archival documents. A number of photograph collections from Special Collections, University of British Columbia, are tested for their suitability for inclusion in an archives based on the conservation, copyright and descriptive implications inherent in their acquisition and on the three characteristics of archival nature outlined in Chapter Three. It concludes that the archival value of documents is relative, depending on the extent to which their context of creation and the nature of their custody is documented. 8 Notes to Chapter One 1. Gerald Ham, "Managing the Historical Record in an Age of Abundance," in Nancy Peace, ed., Archival Choices (Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath and Company, 1984), 134. 2. See the National Archives of Canada, Acquisition  Evaluation Study Volume 1 (Ottawa, January 1988): 1-6; Frank G. Burke, "Archival Cooperation," American Archivist 46 (Summer 1983): 292-304; Hans Booms, "Society and the Formation of the Documentary Heritage: Issues in the Appraisal of Archival Sources," Archlvarla 24 (Summer 1987): 69-107; F.Gerald Ham, "The Archival Edge," Amer ican  Archivist 38 (January 1975): 5-13; Helen Willa Samuels, "Who Controls the Past", American Archivist 2 (Spring 1986): 109-124; Richard M. Kesner, "Archival Collection Development: Building a Successful Acquisition Program," Midwestern Archivist 5 (2 1981): 101-112. 3. Canadian Archives: Report to the Social Sciences and  Humanities Research Council of Canada (Ottawa: Information Division of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, 1980), 36-41. 4. British Columbia Archives Council, Needs Assessment  Survey Report (Victoria, British Columbia, 1988), 154. 5. William Leary, Appraising Archival Photographs: a RAMP  Study with Guidelines (Paris: General Information and UNISIST, UNESCO, 1987), 93. 6. Joan M. Schwartz, "The Photographic "Record of Pre-Confederation British Columbia," Archivaria 5 (Winter 1977-78): 8. 7. John Collier, Visual Anthropology: Photography as a  Research Method (New York: Rinehart & Winston, 1967), 5. 9 CHAPTER TWO ACQUISITION ACCORDING TO FORM OF THE MATERIAL In 1978, Richard Huyda, Chief Curator of the National Photography Collection at the Public Archives of Canada (now the National Archives of Canada) estimated that there were over ten million photographs in Canadian archives. (1) A conservative estimate of their numbers ten years later is eighteen million and growing. (2) This tremendous inventory of resource material attests to its place in our documentary heritage. As Huyda noted, "that this many documents have been collected, preserved and made accessible to the public demonstrates our deep commitment to this segment of our heritage." (3) Parallel to and both influenced by and influencing archives' commitment to preserving photographs is their widespread appeal. The evidence of this interest is easily seen in the reproduction of archival photographs in books, journals, magazines, newspapers, films and television. Photographs are used for reference or for illustration. As communications critic Estelle Jussim summarizes it, "visual forms tare] used both to generate evidence and document findings." (4) 10 The general literature on photographs deals mainly with the history of photography, interpretation of photographs and the technical aspects of photographs. The archival literature includes commentary and instruction on proper care and handling as well as arrangement and description of photographs. Less attention has been devoted to the acquisition of these materials by archives. Two aspects in particular bear examination because of this minimal coverage. Firstly, are there special considerations which should be applied to photographs when evaluating or appraising them for acquisition? If so, are these important enough to necessitate establishing a separate collections policy by form of material? Secondly, supposing that photographs have special qualities, should they be acquired according to principles different from those for other archival documents, most notably textual materials, the traditional archival documents? This chapter examines the question of whether archives should establish a separate collections policy for photographs. As explained in the introductory chapter, this discussion is not concerned with the acquisition of photographs in a functional archival context such as university records or government records. It is concerned with the collection of materials which are not created by the sponsor but which archives collect because of their 11 documentary value. It assumes that archives acquiring photographic records can provide proper storage for the materials to ensure their_preservation and proper access to them. Photographs like materials in other forms collected by archives tell us of our history and inform us of people and events. Thus they are like other documents archives acquire. Certain qualities of photographs, however, differentiate them from other archival documents and suggest that they be given separate attention. Arguments for separate consideration Firstly, focusing on form of the documentation enables archives to preserve information best documented by photographs, such as portraits of people, microscopic images of plants or the remote controlled images of the lunar landscape which the written word cannot as accurately or realistically describe. By providing this focus on subject matter best revealed by the visual image, archivists can preserve information which would otherwise be unavailable. It also focuses attention on those subjects which may already be documented textually or by other media but not by still images which are a common twentieth century means of communication. Klaus Hendrlks, a specialist in photographic conservation at the National Archives of Canada, comments that "the photographic record...is indispensable to archival 12 institutions and researchers. Photography has preserved a unique view of the past in a form particularly suited to an increasingly visually oriented society." (5) Well-known historian, editor, and writer on historical photographs, Robert Weinstein, observes how photographs "add greatly to what people can glean from history by illuminating, believably, the terrain, the artifacts, the participants, and the particular aspect of significant events." (6) Archivist William Leary concludes that photographs have a "marvelous capacity to capture the look and feel of the natural and man-made environment of everyday life and working conditions." He adds that they provide "evidence about little known or often ignored places and people." Beyond the question of the unique capabilities of photographs to document events and conditions, it is vital to take account of the special conservation needs of photographs. It is necessary to make careful judgements about the viability of preserving photographic images from the point of view of cost. For example, the difficulty of preserving color photographs should be a factor bearing on acquisition. Color photographs are made by a variety of processes. These include screen plate processes, such as the Autochrome slide, Tri Color Carbos, Dye Transfer or Dye Imbibition prints, Chromogenic development materials, which make up the majority of color photographs made since 1940, 13 Clbachromes, and Color Diffusion Transfer Process materials, such as Polaroid instant prints. Each of these processes uses dyes to create the color effect. All will eventually fade, even if stored in the dark. However, tests and experience have shown that different types of color materials last longer than others under the same conditions. Cibachrome prints on fibre based paper, for instance, if stored under normal room temperature conditions, will last over a 100 years before they start to fade. Dye Transfer Prints are very stable and will last a long time if stored in air conditionned rooms at a temperature of 35 degrees F (2 degrees C) or less and a relative humidity of 25-30%. (9) Prints from the dye diffusion process, by contrast, have a very short lifespan. All color photographs will last for a much longer time if refrigerated or frozen. Photographs produced using the chromogenic process show a noticeable fading (about 10%) within 10 to 20 years when stored at normal room temperature. They may be expected to last 100 years or more in frost-free storage. Kodachrome and Cibachrome prints could last as long as 800 years in refrigerated storage. (10) Proper conservation of all photographic materials entails more work than for textual records. Photographs usually have to be rehoused, often individually re-enveloped or resleeved and numbered. Often information on original 14 envelopes must be transcribed so that the identification of the material is not lost. Both the rehousing in archival quality containers and transcribing are time-consuming operations which should be taken into account in acquisition of photographs. Textual records, of course, require proper conservation in a climate controlled environment. However, the conservation measures for photographs are more extreme than for such records. In some cases, such as the color materials described above, these might well suggest that a collection not be acquired. The same argument can be made for deteriorating nitrate negatives which cannot feasibly be restored or for which resources for restoration are lacking. This is important as the value of photographs as documents is directly related to their "legibility." Unless conservation problems posed by photographs are recognized and addressed specifically in a collections policy, they are likely to get brushed aside in the consideration of the mass of documents in a collection. Acquisition according to form allows archives to consider the special descriptive needs of photographs which are much more extensive than for other materials, requiring a big budget and more staff time to make the materials accessible to researchers. Huyda complains that in the past, "[photographs] were accessioned like other documents with little information beyond provenance, general content 15 description and a statement of restrictions. Textual information accompanying photographs was normally not verified for completeness or accuracy." (11) Photographs need expanded accession controls in order to be accessible. This includes descriptions of image content, physical format, the photographer and the purposes of the photographs, copyright and physical condition as well as location. All of these are significant factors in making the records accessible to researchers. This more intensive intellectual control of photographs is necessary as researchers usually request photographic records at the item level. Leary notes that this is costly. "Because of the frequent need for item access to photographs, the unit cost of processing and providing reference service on them is substantial." (12) Focusing on form encourages archives to address considerations of copyright. Photographs are used by researchers in publications, displays and for broadcast. Under law, only the copyright holder has the legal right to reproduce, publish, exhibit or otherwise make available to the public materials that are protected by copyright. (13) Under Canadian law, copyright exists in all photographs, automatically, without the need for registration, for a period of fifty years from the time of their creation. (14) Thus, all photographs within this time period are 16 copyrighted unless stated otherwise. Ownership of copyright belongs to whoever caused the photograph to be made which could be the photographer or the person who commissioned the photograph. Although a photographer may have the negatives, if he is asked by someone else to take the photographs in return for payment, this person owns copyright to the photographs, unless the client signs a contract surrendering copyright to the photographer or studio. (15) The same applies to newspaper or magazine photographers. (16) Archives, therefore, should know who owns copyright as publication without copyright is against the law. This is a concern to archives because, "unlike written materials photographs cannot be easily summarized or paraphrased if their reproduction violates copyright law. Furthermore, because photographs are frequently used in books and magazines that return profits to authors and publishers, they are more likely than most records to occasion complaints or lawsuits over violation of copyright." (17) Additionally, disclaimers of responsibility for copyright infringement may not stand up in a court of law. (18) Thus, archivists must focus on the implications of copyright on acquisition. Focusing on form also permits archivists to respond to researcher requests more effectively as it recognizes the special needs of photographic researchers who desire good 17 quality images. Concentration on the form of the documentation recognizes this important aspect of photographic documents emphasizing the collection of photographs which photograph curator Paul Vanderbilt says should be "striking pictures of broad connotative interest", "that stick in the memory as photographs" that "continue giving after their factual basis is absorbed" that "show quality of vision." This is "what is particularly sought in photographs today, both in current work and in retrospective editorial selection, and they are, therefore, to be considered in planning, because they influence use and appreciation." (19) This concentration on the photograph as a visual image as well as a form of documentation recognizes that they should be interesting visuals that are clear and sharp in definition. Textual documents may only need to be decipherable, but photographs must be more than that. As Weinstein says, "the most popular view of photographic quality emphazises such factors as sharpness, crisp definition, full tonal contrast, and in-focus images." (20) These not only provide researchers with the best proof of the subject matter in the photographs but also permit the best reproduction of these images. He continues, "the highest possible level of straight photographic quality is 18 needed when duplicating images whose principal function is to transmit detailed information accurately." (21) This is particularly important to consider as photographs are used as much for illustration as for reference. (22) Witness their Inclusion in magazines, such as those on topics like fishing, forestry, engineering, furniture and fashion; in science books, anthologies like Famous Canadians, or history books to name but a few. Photographs are also used as decoration on coffee mugs, postcards, calendars, t-shirts, and the walls of restaurants and bars or as exhibit materials in museums and art galleries. They are also used as source material in slide shows, filmstrips, films and videos. The media use them for news broadcasts and documentaries. The list is endless. Focusing on the form of documentation is more likely to ensure that their suitability for reproduction is also considered when evaluating photographs for acquisition. Lastly, focusing on the record itself forces archivists to treat the documents with care. It also forces archivists to understand the records, their special attributes and shortcomings as documentation. How the documents physically were created increases archivists' ability to interpret photographs and thus appraise them appropriately for acquisition. This is an important aspect of preserving records. 19 Arguments against separate consideration As noted earlier in this thesis, archives collect materials for their value as documentation related to the activities of their creator. Focusing on the carrier of the information, on the form of the material, mitigates against such a goal. Firstly, it invites concentration on the artifactual and aesthetic values of the materials Instead of on their value as documentation. Archivists in the Sound and Moving Image Division of the National Archives of Canada refer to this as the, "development of an artefact orientation to archival documents" where "information becomes secondary to the physical document itself." (23) Photographs, when considered according to such an orientation, may be acquired because they are works of art or rare items rather than as sources of information. The emotional appeal of old photographs in particular may incline archivists to consider their acquisition based on the nostalgia they evoke, on the window they appear to open to our lost past. This tendency is particularly encouraged by excellent quality images. Secondly, focusing on the form invites concentration on the medium and its development rather than on its documentary value. As Terry Cook, Chief of Social Affairs and Natural Resources Records at the National Archives of Canada says, "Documenting the history of the medium itself -20 the medium is the message - is dangerous because of the isolation it symbolizes and invites." (24) He complains about the collection of one media of records, maps, as being "acquired more to demonstrate cartographic techniques and processes or to document the oeuvre of individual cartographers, rather than to obtain any previously unknown historical information revealed on the face of the map itself." (25) Most importantly, such a policy forces archivists to focus on one medium of record to the exclusion of other media. Not only does this complicate relations with donors, who often have records in a variety of formats, (26) but it also blinds archivists to the fact that most collections are integrated multi-media collections, even if the central focus is photographic. (27) Focusing on the form of the material ignores this important fact. It compromises the integrity of the total record in favour of the concerns of the media. Conversely the documentary value of the photographs is diminished because of a lack of concern about their relationship with other documents. As will be examined in ensuing chapters, the archival nature of documents and hence their value as documentation depends on this relationship amongst documents. Photographs, like other records, achieve greater documentary value if this relationship is maintained. This is because preserving the 21 original relationship between and among documents itself reveals information about the activities of the creator. Interpretation of photographs depends on an understanding of their function and relationship to other j records. Photographs may seem to document places, persons or events accurately. However, they are as much a result of point of view, as other records. They are not accurate documents on their own. They do not show all there is to see. As philosopher Max Wartofsky explains, "the photographic image is taken to be the way things look, whether anyone is looking or not... There is a hidden or tacit presupposition that the camera 'sees' what we would see, were we present; and that the photograph represents what there is there for the eye to see, even when there are no eyes to do the seeing. Thus, it is tacitly assumed that the camera records 'objectively' the way things look, and that this sort of 'seeing' is indeed the duplicate of the eye's own work." (28) Understanding that photographic records are part of a larger archives and hence preserving information about the context and interrelationships of these records militates against the tendency to evaluate individual photographs for the supposed reality they capture. In addition, it must be remembered that photographs derive their meaning from the viewer. As writer Philip 22 Stokes comments, "the greatest problems in the ascription of photographic meaning are encountered because of our tendency to see meaning as self-evidently inherent in the images, when they are really dependent entirely upon the interaction of a perceiver with the image. It is moreover, easy to forget the subjectivity of a perceiver's contribution." (29) Context provides the background knowledge against which to weigh the documentary evidence of the images. It is particularly relevant to the archival acquisition of photographs. In conclusion, although acquisition according to form of the material encourages archives to exploit the potential of the medium to its fullest extent and to attend to the special conservation requirements and copyright implications posed by photographs, archives should not set up a separate collections policy for photographs. Photographs that archives acquire should be appraised for their archival qualities predominantly. As photographs are created, like other documents, as part of an activity, they should be evaluated in relationship to all the documents generated by that activity and not separately. Their archival value depends on this fact. 23 Notes to Chapter Two 1. Richard Huyda, "Photographs and Archives in Canada," Archivaria 5 (Winter 1977-78): 5. 2. Canadian Archives, 34-36. 3. Huyda, 5. 4. Estelle Jussim, "The Research Uses of Visual Information," Library Trends 25 (April 1977): 775. 5. Klaus Hendriks, "The Preservation of Photographic Records," Archivarla 5 (Winter 1977-78):92. 6. Robert Weinstein, "Why Collect Photographs," Plcturescope (Winter 1981):120. 7. William Leary, The Archival Appraisal of Photographs, 20-21. 8. Gail Fisher-Taylor, "Interview: Henry Wilheim," Photo  Communique 3:1 (Spring 1981), 17. 9. Henry Wilheim, "Storing Color Materials" Industrial  Photography 27 (October 1978): 33. 10. Ibid. 11. Richard Huyda, "Photographs and Archives in Canada." Archivaria 5 (Winter 1977-78): 10. 12. Leary, 25. 13. Corrado A. Santoro, "The Association of Canadian Archivists and Coypright Revision: An Update" Archivar ia 21 (Winter 1985-86): 111 and Judith Felsten, "News Photographs," Plcturescope 30 (Fall/Winter 1982) : 100. 14. Jim Keon, "The Canadian Archivist and Copyright Legislation," Archivaria 18 (Summer 1984): 92 and Corrado A. Santaro, 121. 15. Andrew Rodger, "Copyright' The Photograph: An Annotated Bibliography for Archivists," Archlvaria 5 (Winter 1977-78): 134. 16. Ibid. 24 17. Mary Lynn Ritzenthaler, Gerald J. Munoff, and Margery S. Long, Archives and Manuscripts; Administration of  Photographic Collections (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1984), 104. 18. Ibid., 138 . 19. Paul Vanderbilt, "Evaluating Historical Photographs: A Personal Perspective," Technical Leaflet 120, American Association for Local and State History Leaflet 120, History  News 34 ( 1979 ) : 288. 20. Weinstein, 123. 21. Ibid. 22. Leary, 20. 23. Ernest J. Dick, Jacques Gagne, Josephine Langham, Richard Lochead and Jean-Paul Moreau, "Total Archives Come Apart," Archivaria 11 (Winter 1980-81):225. 24. Terry Cook, "The Tyranny of the Medium," Archivaria 9 (Winter 1979-80): 144. 25. Ibid., 143. 26. Ernest J. Dick et al, 225. 27. Terry Cook, "Media Myopia," Archivaria 12 (Summer 1981) :151. 28. Max W. Wartofsky, "Cameras Can't See: Representation, Photography and Human Vision," Photo Communique (February/March 1980), 2. 29. Philip Stokes, "Language and Photography," British  Journal of Photography (May 23, 1976), 1. 25 CHAPTER THREE NATURE OF ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS In Canada, a variety of cultural institutions collect photographs for their historical interest and significance; the three main ones being libraries, museums and archives. As a consequence, it is often assumed that the philosophy governing their acquisition of photographs is the same. This is understandable as these institutions share common goals and similarities in methodology. They all see as their responsibility the acquisition, conservation and making available of materials, often unique, of cultural, historical and scientific interest. Each sees the need for professional processing and preparation of the materials before they can be made available for use by scholars, students and the general public and each of the professions sees as part of its role, the promotion of scholarship. However, the bases upon which these repositories collect the materials which promote scholarship are very different. For the most part, libraries collect materials for their subject interest and bring together items to form collections based on user interests. Librarian and writer Robert Clark says that librarians "select from a universe of books or papers those which they wish to add to their collections." (1) Librarians approach materials by "pulling 26 together discrete items and organizing that information according to a standard classification of human knowledge."(2) Thus, libraries collect items as important documents of cultural or research interest. Their significance is independent of their relationship to other items. Museum curators collect items as well, primarily for their artifactual and artistic value. They collect items as examples or specimens of a culture. Museologist Ellis Burcaw notes that "museums are concerned with objects. Objects are the starting point of a museum...objects justify museums."(3) Other museologists confirm this saying that a museum "performs its functions by the collecting and use of artifacts or specimens, or both." (4) By contrast, archivists primarily acquire groups of documents which are related to each other in an activity of their creator. In the process of "acquisition" they see their repositories as housing and gathering bodies of records of other institutions or persons. Items of cultural, artifactual or artistic value are not their primary concern. "Archives are chiefly the non-current substantive records of the institutions or individuals they document....Their usefulness is enhanced if the relationship to the original transaction remains apparent." (5) Thus, the nature of the materials (informational, artifactual or archival), dictates the distinctive approach to photographs taken by each institution. 27 Archives embarking upon collecting or acquiring photographic materials should understand that there are basic differences between the three types of institutions for materials will be brought into the archives that rightfully belong in a museum or library. The distinction between archives on the one hand and libraries and museums on the other hand may be blurred when acquisition of historical photographs takes place in a library or museum. For instance, archivists working in special collections divisions of libaries face the problem of reconciling archives and library principles. As American archivist Richard Berner points out, "Special Collections units were formed for administrative convenience in libraries to take care of miscellaneous nonconforming library materials such as photographic collections, incunabula, and historical and literary manuscripts.... Traditionally, these materials have been administered by existing techniques and practices of librarianship." (6) Often, acquisition of archives is taken on after the Initial establishment and definition of the mandate of a special collections division. (7) Archivists working in such an environment need to be able to differentiate between various kinds of documents so that each may be treated according to the proper principles and practices. 28 How then do archivists decide which documents to collect and which to reject? Specifically, how do they decide which photographs constitute archives and should therefore be treated according to archival principles? The characteristics of archives From the first, archival theorists were concerned with defining the nature of archival materials. English archivist and writer Sir Hilary Jenkinson, whose concepts form the basis of archival theory in the English speaking world today, described archives as documents "drawn up or used in the course of an administrative or executive transaction (whether public or private) of which [they] formed a part; and subsequently preserved in their own custody for their own information by the persons responsible for that transaction and their legitimate successors." (8) He added, "To this Definition we may add a corollary. Archives were not drawn up in the interest or for the information of Posterity." (9) Jenkinson felt that documents archival repositories collect should provide "verifiable', "first-hand evidence" of facts (10) as they were documents used in the study of history which could be depended upon for their "impartiality" and "authenticity". (11) Their impartiality derives from the fact they they were drawn up in the course of an action, for a purpose quite other than that for which 29 they might be used as the sources of history. They are impartial to the extent that they faithfully express the actions which brought them into being, to the extent that they were not created to instruct posterity. Their authenticity comes from the fact that, by being preserved in the custody or care of the body or person who created or produced them or their successors, they have been protected from alteration or disturbances of any kind which would explain their quality as evidence. Archival documents could only be those materials that an office produced in the transaction of its business. Thus, he defined them as documents of an administrative transaction. They could be those created by the office or collected by the office in pursuance of its activities regardless of their form. They might, for instance, be materials of a printed nature, such as maps and plans. Dutch archivists S. Muller, J.A. Feith and R. Fruin concurred with Jenkinson. "An archival collection is the whole of the written documents, drawings and printed matter, officially received or produced by an administrative body or one of its officials." (12) Jenkinson determined that these official documents became archival when they had been set aside for preservation for future reference "at the point at which, having ceased to be in current use they are definitely set 30 aside for preservation, tacitly adjudged worthy of being kept." (13) It is also important that the person who set them aside for preservation was the person responsible for their creation or accumulation. "Archives are documents which formed part of an official transaction and were preserved for official reference." (14) Muller, Feith and Fruin also held that such documents were archival "in so far as these documents were intended to remain in the custody of that body or of that official [who officially received or produced them]." (15) Italian archivist Eugenio Casanova was of the same opinion. Archival documents were "the orderly accumulation of documents which were created in the course of its activity by an institution or an individual, and which are preserved for the accomplishment of its political, legal or cultural purposes by such an institution or individual." (16) Thus, documents were archival once they were consciously preserved by the creator of the records. Ultimately they would be cared for In an archives, but the archivist would not determine whether they were archival or not, for the act of preservation for reference is performed by the persons who created the records. The archivist's duty was merely to "compile archives." (17) Muller, Feith and Fruin viewed the archivist in the same light, "...the archivist generally receives the archival collection into his custody when it is 31 dead, or at any rate only the parts of it which must be considered as closed." (18) Jenkinson felt that archival documents should remain in the custody of their creator, who made the selection of those documents to be preserved, and their successors, which included the archivists who received them. This would be the best way of ensuring their authenticity. However, he recognized that in some cases these archival documents could be taken over by someone else. "The question now arises --supposing there Is neither heir nor any one willing to take the first step of depositing, can the Public Archivist go out of his way and intervene uninvited to save the life and character of the Archives?" (19) He replied in the affirmative and went on to state that under certain conditions, archival repositories other than that of the Public Archivist, that is the official government archivist, could also look after the records of another institution to save them from being destroyed or broken up. (20) Jenkinson recognized that in order for the documents to retain their authenticiy and impartiality they must not be tampered with once out of the office of their creator/accumulator. -He therefore came to the conclusion that to remain archival the documents had to be kept intact and maintained by an "unblemished line of responsible custodians." (21) By this he meant that the persons 32 responsible for the preservation of the documents retain the records together in the order designed by their creator and identified as originating from that creator. "In all cases, then, the authority taking over [the archives] must be prepared to take them over en bloc: there must be no selecting of pretty specimens." (22) "No archivist ... could possibly allow full archive value to documents which have been violently torn from the connexion in which they were originally preserved." (23) This idea that records of a body should be kept together was first introduced in 1841 in France by French historian Natalis de Wailly, in a circular signed by the Minister of the Interior. In it he introduced his concept of "respect des fonds." He explained that it meant, "to gather together by fonds, that is to unite all the deeds (i.e. documents) which came from a body...and to arrange the different fonds according to a certain order." (24) Respect des fonds became official policy in the Archives Nationales in France. Records were to be kept together in the archives under the name of the agency that originated them, though within each fonds they were to be arranged according to their subject matter as an aid to scholarly research. (25) Originally conceived as a method of classification of archival documents as opposed to the subject classification method used in libraries at the time, respect des fonds, 33 became widely accepted in Europe as the guiding principle of archives. It remains so to this day. In Prussia, the principle of "respect des fonds" or "principe de provenance" was adopted under the name of "registraturprinzlp". Here records from the orignal agency were kept together as a group. However, the original order was imposed by the "registry office [which] arranged and serviced the records for the agency. This arrangement was retained when the records were transferred to archival custody." (26) In the Netherlands, Dutch archivists expressed the same principle. "An archival collection comes into being as the result of the activities of an administrative body or of an official and is always the reflection of the function of that body or that official: it is an organic whole, a living organism, which grows takes shape, and undergoes changes in accordance with fixed rules...The rules which govern the ^ composition, the arrangement and the formation of the archival collection, therefore cannot be fixed by an archivist in advance,; he can only study the organism and ascertain the rules under which it was formed." (27) Sometimes, they conceded, "the original arrangement of an archival collection may be modified in order to correct deviation from the general structure of the collection," but this was only to be done by the archivist after receiving the records into his or her custody. (28) In England the 34 principle of provenance was adopted also. The fonds d'archives translated into the archive group. Original order was considered to be that established by the creator of the records. Although Jenkinson defined archival documents as those created in the course of an administrative transaction he did not exclude documents created by persons or private bodies from consideration. "It seems that archives as a term must be extended to collections made by private or semi-private bodies or persons, acting in their official or business activities." (29) Muller, Feith and Fruin agreed, "The administrative offices or officials of private civil bodies may also produce an archival collection." (30) However, they drew the line at collections of family papers, "One should not class with the above, however, so-called family archives....The documents in a family archival collection do not form 'a whole'; very often they have been gathered together in the strangest manner and lack the organic bond of an archival collection." (31) Theodore Schellenberg built upon these theories and refined them to meet the demands of modern records production and the complexity of their origins. He defined archival documents in the following manner. "To be archives, materials must have been created or accumulated for some purpose.... If they were created in the process of 35 accomplishing some definite administrative, legal, business, or other social end, then they are of potential archival quality." (32) Schellenberg thus enlarged upon the definition of archives, allowing that as long as records were created for some purpose, not necessarily an administrative transaction, but any activity in society, then they had potential archival quality. This increased the possible kinds of records that could be acquired and took the focus away from the legal aspect of archival documents. Schellenberg also expanded the definition of archives to include, "all books, papers, maps, photographs, or other documentary materials regardless of physical form or characteristics." (33) Faced with the ^growing numbers of records which were the result of the expansion of government activities and records keeping, Schellenberg concluded that archivists should have a more influential role than his European forebearers granted them. He determined that documents could not be considered archival until the archivist deemed them so and set them aside for preservation. "To be archives, materials must be preserved for reasons other than those for which they were created or accumulated. These reasons may be both official and cultural ones." (34) 36 Schellenberg thought that the creators of records should be responsible for selecting those records which were of value for their current uses. However, he felt that archivists should be the ones to judge the records for the information they contained of interest to researchers and for posterity. Records which had such information he attributed as having secondary values; the primary values being those of interest solely to the creator of the records. He felt the archivist was best able to judge these secondary values, based on his knowledge and training in history, research interests, and records creation and maintenance. (35) The secondary values Schellenberg broke down into two types: "evidential" and "informational". Evidential value refers "to a value that depends on the importance of the matter evidenced, i.e. the organization and functioning, of the agency that produced the record.... The records of an agency that contain evidential value, then, are those necessary to provide an authentic and adequate documentation of its organization and functioning." (36) These are not to be confused with the functional value of records which refers to the role the records played in accomplishing the purpose of the body creating them. For Schellenberg, informational values related to value of the evidence in archival documents for research purposes. 37 "The 'informational' value is ordinarily called research value - that value that inheres in public records because the Information they contain may be useful in research of various kinds." (37) He went on to say that "the information may relate, in a general way, either to persons, or things, or phenomena." (38) Schellenberg, like Jenkinson, favoured only the acquisition of records of the parent institution. "As a rule, [the archival repository] does not rely to an important degree on acquiring material by purchase or gift. It normally has one source, namely the government, the institution, or the person it serves." However, he accepted that archival repositories acquire records of institutions or persons other than their sponsoring agency. (39) Schellenberg considered proper custody an important factor in determining the archival quality of documents. Records were to be kept intact and transferred en bloc. However, Schellenberg differed from Jenkinson concerning the question of custody. "In dealing with records produced under modern conditions of government, proof of an 'unblemished line of responsible custodians' or of 'unbroken custody' cannot be made a test of archival quality." (40) However, he did say to have value as archival documents the integrity of the records had to be preserved. This meant "1) that records of a given agency should be kept together as records of that 38 agency, 2) that such records should be kept, as far as possible, under the arrangement given them in the agency in the course of its official business and, 3) that records should be kept in their entirety without mutilation, alteration, or unauthorized destruction of portions of them." (41) Like his predecessors, Schellenberg determined that records of a private as opposed to a public body could be considered archival. Thus, records of a business, organization or individual were potentially archival, based on their organic nature. As he put it, "most recent private records have the organic quality of public records and are therefore archival in character. (42) The theories outlined above form the basis for practice in North America today. From them it is possible to draw conclusions on the nature of archival documents and apply them to the process of acquiring photographs for archival repositories. Three aspects of archival documents, although not always viewed from the same perspective by the various theorlzers, point to the archival nature of documents. It is upon these three aspects that photographs like other archival documents should be judged. The first is that the documents form an organic whole. The second is that they show evidence of responsible custodianship, and the third, that they have been set aside for preservation. 39 Organic whole As noted earlier, documents are not archival in themselves, but only when considered as forming part of a group which by definition is an organic group of records. (h How does one know when the collection or group of documents is a whole? An archival collection is "a 'whole' as soon as it ceases to be a part, ie...as soon as other parts of the collection are not known to exist elsewhere." (44) Archival collections evidence four characteristics: provenance, functional origins, intrinsic relationships, and original materials. All documents in an organic collection have a single provenance, that is they show evidence of a common origin and they emanate from one body or agency. In the case of records of an institution, business, association or other such official body, this is easy enough to distinguish. Records of the City Clerk's Office of the City of Vancouver show provenance if kept together as the records of that office. In the case of photographs, a collection's provenance might be a photographer's studio or the audio visual department of the advertising division of a company. Provenance of personal papers is equally important. It does not necessarily refer to the donor of the collection. In the case of photographs, like other records, provenance refers to the body creating or accumulating the documents as 40 in the case of photographer or an architect who assembles photographs of buildings he has designed taken by a variety of photographers, for a portfolio of his work or a slide presentation for a prospective client. The same may be said of photographs arranged in a photo album by an individual in a family. Knowing the provenance or the source of the documents provides the first clue in understanding the meaning of the documents. A case in point is a photograph, held in Special Collections, UBC whose provenance had been lost. (See Figure 1.) The donor, noted historian, author and respected judge, Judge Howay was known, but not the origins of the document. On the face of it, this scene appears to show Indians and two priests at prayer. Study of dress, blankets, facial characteristics and vegetation depicted in the photograph suggest that it was probably taken in British Columbia in the late nineteenth century. This obviously was the conclusion of a priest who. recently wrote the division requesting a copy of the photograph which showed religious Indians in British Columbia at prayer in the late nineteenth century. (45) In fact, the photograph is also held at the Provincial Archives of British Columbia and its provenance is known. The photograph is one of a number of photographs taken by and put in an album by a well-known photographer, Figure 1 42 Frederick Dally, who practiced his trade in British Columbia towards the end of the nineteenth century. The original photograph bears the inscription in Daily's own handwriting: "Indians shamming to be at prayer for the sake of photography." Above he also wrote, "At the priests' request all the Indians kneel down and assume an attitude of devotion. Amen." (46) Many other such examples of the lie in photographs exist. Hannah and Richard Maynard, Victoria, B.C. photographers, photographed many Northwest Coast Indians in their studios in the 1860's and 1870's. Often the dress of the Indians or the backdrop was incorrect. As author Margaret Blackman noted, "The Maynards seemed to prefer Haida backdrops for their Indian subjects, regardless of the individual's tribe." (47) William Notman of Montreal also 'created' many misleading Images using backdrops in his studio, special lighting effects and composite montages to create desired effects. By knowing the origins or provenance of the documents and hence the orientation and practices of the creator, the layers of subterfuge of photographs can be stripped away and their essential truth better understood. As photo historian Jack Hurley explains, "it is a basic rule of historical evidence that we must understand the sources 43 we use in order to avoid errors." (48) Thus, knowing the provenance of the collection provides the first clue to understanding their meaning. It also alerts one to the second charateristic of documents in a collection which is an organic whole: the function of the records. Records or documents in an archives are an organic outgrowth of a purpose, activity or transaction. Their meaning and hence interpretation is derived from a knowledge of their function in this activity. As Duchein wrote, "The archival document is present in the heart of a functional process, of which it constitutes an element, however small it may be. It is never conceived, in the beginning, as an isolated element. It always has a utilitarian character." ^ Photographs like other documentary materials were created as part of such activity and can only be properly understood in this context. Lily Koltun, Head, Documentary Art and Photography Division of the National Archives of Canada, in City Blocks,  City Spaces points out how this is important to interpretation of the photographs and an understanding of their meaning. She notes how camera placement influences the perception of buildings, individuals and places and how the photographer often reflects the perception of his or her time. In nineteenth century eastern Canada for Instance, "Big buildings were weighty symbols of the nature and 44 importance of their functions in the moral and intellectual organization of their society.... Photographers responded to this and took images from ideal viewpoints at ideal times of day and [maximized] size and detail on a large and elaborate building, while minimizing distortion of its symbolic contour and style characteristics...as symbols outside space and time, the photographer shows the building bare of human contact and a sense of functioning utility. A few figures are provided only to increase their grand proportions by contrast." (50) Photojournalist Gisele Freund, in Photography and  Society, echoes Koltun. She points out the important role photographs played in the glossy view of life provided by publisher Henry Booth Luce. "What gave so much credibility to Life was its extensive use of photographs.... The world reflected in Life was full of light and had only a few shadows. It was ultimately a false world, one that inspired the masses with false hopes." (51) The photographs were created as part of an activity and thus reflect the purpose of the activity. Alone they cannot be properly understood. Their meaning is only clear if considered in relation to this activity of which they formed a part. Thus, the purpose for which the photographs were produced is important to understand and is discerned by analysis of the activity or purpose for which they were 45 created. If they are not part of an activity as a group, they are like disparate images void of context. As Duchein notes, "to appreciate a document, it is essential to know exactly where it was created, in the framework of what process, to what end, for whom, when and how it was received by the addressee." (52) This same concept is applied to photographs by Alan Trachtenberg, "The principle is to recognize that the meaning of the photograph - what the interpreter is after - is rarely given within the picture, but is developed in the function of the picture in its particular social use by particular people." (53) Thus, the archivist's concept of archives is consonant with the interpreter's needs in order to evaluate his evidence. The intrinsic relationship among documents forming an organic whole is the third characteristic of archives. Records created during the course of an activity or transaction naturally relate to each other as a consequence of their part in those activities or transactions. Even when the activity is overtly documentary, as in the example of an architect accumulating photographs of buildings he has designed, the documents as assembled reflect his activities as an architect. Thus, a distinguishing feature of archives is the relationship among the documents forming the whole of the body of records in question. Importantly, this extends beyond any single form of document. For Instance, other 46 records of the architect, such as correspondence with clients, have a direct, transactional relationship to the photographs he accumulated in a portfolio to illustrate his work to the client. Is it ever possible for a single document to be considered archival, such as a monetarily valuable daguerreotype identified by date and sitter, even if it does not show these connections? Muller, Feith and Fruin contended that a collection is a whole as soon as it ceases to be a part, as soon as other parts of the collection are not known to exist elsewhere. "If, however, only a single paper [Now almost 100 years later in this age of visual communications, we may be justified in interpreting this to mean photograph] of an archival collection is preserved, that one paper constitutes the collection, it is in itself a whole." (54) j Jenkinson referred to single documents as "specimens" and recommended them for inclusion in the holdings of museums, not archives. He said the ideal situation would be one whereby "they [museums] took over isolated specimens whose connexions were already lost, leaving the archivist to deal with all more or less intact collections." (55) Schellenberg agreed that such documents did not belong in an archives. He pointed out that an archives is not a 47 library, though the latter also collects cultural materials. Archival documents he said were created for a purpose and their significance "depends on their organic relation to the agency and to each other. Their cultural values are incidental. Library materials, on the other hand, are produced in the first instance for cultural purposes. And for this reason they usually consist of discrete items, whose significance is wholly independent of their relationship to other items." (56) Thus, a single photograph poses a dilemma, for it can be seen as representing an end in itself or as evidence of activities not available elsewhere, representative of the whole activity and therefore worthy of acquisition. The only occasion where it is definitely justified in being collected (and even Jenkinson admits this is acceptable) is where the photograph forms part of an archival collection already in the archives and its location in the original order can be ascertained. (57) Certainly, in the case of an original negative, for which there is a print in the collection, archivists would be justified in acquiring the negative which is indeed the original or record copy. A note in the inventory as to its provenance should dispel any qualms about its entry into the collection at this later date. Where an individual photograph forms part of a series, as for instance the fifth view in a series of photographs 48 recording the progress of construction of a building, it, too, should be acquired. Last, but not least, of the characteristics of photographs which are part of an organic collection is that they are original materials. Only by ensuring that the collection contains originals and not copies can the authenticity of the document as part of the original activity or purpose be assured. Muller, Feith and Fruin referred to "original archival documents" as those which were created over the period of time covered by the archival collection and never as those made at a latter date and added to it. (58) As we have seen, Jenkinson referred to archival documents as authentic documents "drawn up or used in the course of ...[the] transaction of which [they] formed a part." (59) Schellenbeg said these "materials must have been created in the process of some ...end." (60) Authenticity of photographs as source documents depends on this characteristic. Copies do not reveal the same information as originals because they can be manipulated and because their physical characteristics, which are different for photographs created by different technologies, may change how the information^ is interpreted. If the silver gelatin twentieth century photoprint of Indians at prayer had been recognized as being a copy of the original albumen print, its credibility might have been questioned. 49 Responsible Custodianship Commenting on the matter of custody, an important report on Canadian archives pointed out that "records should be retained and preserved by those responsible for creating them. In actual fact, of course, it is impractical to adhere rigidly to this principle, applying it to the great breadth of archival material which ideally should be preserved." If creators don't always assume custody of their own documents of enduring value, what kind of custody can be considered sufficient to ensure what Schellenberg referred to as the "integrity of the records"? What kind of custody is important for archival collections of photographs? The first characteristic of such custody is that the complete record of the transaction or activity is acquired. This is what Schellenberg referred to as transferring documents en bloc. This would mean for instance, a photographer's records that were bought by a private dealer and later sold to an archives should represent the whole collection and not just part of the records. Responsible custodianship therefore implies that the records are kept intact with no picking of "pretty specimens" or breaking up of the whole. If the whole of the collection is acquired it will aid in the interpretation of the records. As Berner says, "The degree to which completeness of documentation has been preserved also provides a solid basis for appraisal of ... 50 documentary value." (62) Archivist Mary Lynn Ritzenthaler adds, "Completeness of the visual documentation of a collection of photographs is necessary to support research into the history or development of a subject or topic." (63) The second characteristic of responsible custodianship is that the collection has not been altered and contains only the documents in the form they were in when created. Replacing old, faded albumen prints or the bright blue cyanotypes with sharp black and white silver gelatin photoprints would misrepresent the original nature of the collection, even if the new prints were made from the original negatives. It also means that the order of the photographs has not been altered en route from creator or collector to the archives. As in the case of textual documents, the order devised by the creator places the photographs in their proper relationship. Photographs which have been refiled by someone other than their creator, confuses the purposes for which the images were created. For example, files of studio shots of babies if interfiled with hospital ward photographs of sick babies on the basis of subject matter, babies, would alter the evidence these filing relationships bear. Lester Cappon pointed out that for historical manuscripts, or personal papers as they are now called, (64) custody may have been broken several times as the records ( 51 may have passed through several hands. "However, with respect to organic groups, they may not have lost any of that valuable attribute of unity by reason of transfer. Their historical value is not necessarily lessened." (65) This is true whether they be textual or other media records, such as photographs. Broken custody can be compared to changes in administration of public records which does not impair their potential as archival documents. As noted earlier in this chapter, Schellenberg saw the difficulty of determining the effects on records of changes in custody and therefore rejected Jenkinson's rigid definition of responsible custodianship. It is how successive custodians look after the materials not whether custody is broken that qualifies these collections as being potentially archival. Set aside for preservation The last important aspect of archival documents is that they have been set aside for preservation by their creator. Casanova considered that documents become archival the moment their creator decides to file them rather than to throw them out. He referred to "the orderly accumulation of documents which were created in the course of its activity by an instituion or individual." (66) Jenkinson considered documents archival that were set aside for reference by the creators of the documents, "preserved in their own custody for their own reference." (67) Although as Schellenberg 52 forsaw, it would be impractical to base all appraisal decisions on this notion, it is an important element in acquisition. The fact that the creator of the collection set the documents aside for preservation indicates that he or she felt they were important to preserve in the context of his or her activities. Set aside for preservation also Implies that some sort of order has been applied to the materials by their creator. Boxes of materials in disarray without any system of arrangement hardly qualify as being set aside for preservation. They are more likely the result of negligence. If an order has been imposed on the material, even one as basic as a listing of the materials or in the case of photographs, being arranged in an album, then we can presume they were considered worth keeping and thus set aside for preservation. Such documents might also show evidence of having been given special treatment in order to prevent them from being damaged. This might be in the form of special wrapping or boxing. Thus, the archival nature of materials does not depend on whether the documents are official or unofficial records, but rather on whether they have been considered important enough to set aside by their creators and whether they are an organic whole that has been carefully preserved in context, unaltered and not mingled with other materials in whatever format. Only their context of creation and 53 preservation as outlined above can attest to their "value [as] documentary materials for continuing preservation in an archival institution." (68) 54 Notes to Chapter Three 1. Robert L. Clark, Jr. ed., Archive-Library Relations (New York: R.R. Bowker Company, 1976), 37. 2. Canadian Archives, 16. 3. G. Ellis Burcar, Introduction to Museum Work, (Nashville: American Association for State and Local History, 1975), 47. 4. George MacBeth and S. James Gooding, ed., Basic Museum  Management (Ottawa: Canadian Museum Association, 1975), 43. 5. Canadian Archives, 16. 6. Richard C. Berner, "Manuscript Collections, Archives and Special Collections: Their Relationships," Archivarla 18 (Summer 19 8 4): 24 8. 7. Ibid. 8. Hilary Jenkinson, A Manual of Archives Administration, Edited by Roger H. Ellis, (London: Percy, Lund, Humphries and Co., 1966), 11. 9. Ibid. 10. Ibid., 4. 11. Ibid., 12. 12. Muller, Samuel, J.A. Feith and R. Fruin, Manual for the  Arrangement and Description of Archives, translated by Arthur H. Leavitt, (New York: H.W. Wilson, 1940), 13. 13. Jenkinson, 8-9. 14. Ibid., 4. 15. Muller, Feith and Fruin, 13. 16. Eugenio Casanova, Archivist lea, (Second Edition, Siena, 1928), 19. 17. Jenkinson, 157. 18. Muller, Feith and Fruin, 19. 55 19. Jenkinson, 39. 20. Ibid., 39-40. 21. Ibid., 11. 22. Ibid., 41. 23. Ibid., 42. 24. Michel Duchein, "Theoretical Principles and Practical Problems of Respect des Fonds in Archival Science," Archivarla 16 (Summer 1983): 66. 25. Richard C. Berner, Archival Theory and Practice in the  United States: A Historical Analysis (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1983), 3. 26. Ibid. 27. Muller, Feith and Fruin, 19. 28. Ibid., 62. 29. Jenkinson, 8. 30. Muller, Feith and Fruin, 20. 31. Ibid. 32. Theodore R. Schellenberg, Modern Archives Principles and  Techniques, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956), 13 . 33. Ibid., 16. 34. Ibid., 13. 35. Ibid., 28-30. 36. T.R. Schellenberg, The Management of Archives (New York: Columbia University Press, 1965), 139-141. 37. Ibid., 140. 38. T.R. Schellenberg, "The Appraisal of Modern Public Records," National Archives and Records Service Bulletin 8, (1956): 7. 39. Schellenberg, Modern Archives, 19. 56 40. Ibid., 14. 41. Ibid./ 15. 42. Schellenberg, The Management of Archives, 65-66. 43. Muller, Feith and Fruin, 19. 44. Ibid. 45. See letter to Special Collections from Father John Tritschler, August 19, 1987, Correspondence, Photo Collection Records, Special Collections, UBC Library. 46. J. Robert Davison, "Turning A Blind Eye: The Historian's Use of Photographs," B.C. Studies 52 (Winter 1981-1982):19. 47. Margaret Blackman, "Copying People: Northwest Coast Native Response to Early Photography," B.C. Studies 52 (Winter 1981-1982): 88. 48. Jack Hurley, "There's More Than Meets the Eye," Centre  for Southern Folklore 3 (Winter 1981):6. 49. Michel Duchein, 67. 50. Lilly Koltun, City Blocks, City Spaces: Historical  Photographs of Canada's Urban Growth, 1850-1900 (Ottawa, 1980), 46-47. 51. Gisele Freund, Photography and Society (Boston: D.R. Godine, 1960), 149. 52. Duchein, 67. 53. National Archives and Records Service, The American  Image, xxv-xxvi. 54. Muller, Feith and Fruin, 55. Jenkinson, 56. Shellenberg, Modern Archives, 17. 57. Jenkinson, 42. 58. Muller, Feith and Fruin, 151. 59. Jenkinson, 11. 60. Schellenberg, Modern Archives, 15. 57 61. Canadian Archives, 15. 62. Berner, "Manuscript Collections", 250. 63. Ritzenthaler et al, 58. 64. Maygene Daniels, "Introduction to Archival Terminology," Maygene F. Daniels and Timothy Walch, ed., A Modern Archives  Reader: Basic Readings on Archival Theory and Practice (Washington, D.C.: National Archives Trust Fund Board, 1984): 341. 65. Lester J. Cappon, "Historical Mansucripts as Archives," The American Archivist (April 1956): 104. 66. Casanova, 19. 67. Jenkinson, 4. 68. Daniels, 339. 58 CHAPTER FOUR EVALUATING PHOTOGRAPH COLLECTIONS' ARCHIVAL NATURE A CASE STUDY The following discussion examines five photograph collections held in Special Collections at the University of British Columbia to determine whether or not they have archival nature and the extent to which archival value is present in them. In order to qualify as having archival nature, as outlined in the previous chapter, a collection must form an organic whole. It should contain records having a common provenance and that were created for a common purpose. The collection should only contain original documents. An archival collection should also have been set aside for preservation by its creator, originally for reference and later because the collection was deemed valuable for historical research. The archival value of a collection depends on responsible custodianship. If it can be verified that the collection described has been responsibly cared for by being passed on to a repository without the addition, extraction or alteration of documents after leaving the hands of the creator, it is deemed to have archival value. This is because such a collection will provide evidence of the relationships among the documents relating to the activities of the creator. Such custody 59 ensures that the original order of the documents is not disturbed and that all of the records in all their formats are included in the collection. Such a collection has both evidential and informational value. The purpose of this examination is to bring out this important matter - archival quality - as the major factor conditioning acquisition of photographs by archives. It is what differentiates materials acquired by archival repositories from those collected by libraries and museums. The extent to which collections contain all of the elements determines their archival quality and thus their value as documentation. Graham collection This collection consists of the six images reproduced as Figures 2 to 7. They were gathered together by a Vancouver family, the Grahams, and donated to Special Collections. (1) The images are in good condition, only the cabinet card itself needing repair. Thus, conservation of the images is not a major concern for acquisition. Copyright has expired as the visuals were created over fifty years ago and the descriptive needs of the photographs is minimal. Each simply requires a caption identifying the people, places and/or events and dates of the images. The photographs are we 11-composed, sharp images and therefore capable of good Figure 2 61 Figure 4 66 quality reproductions. Thus, the photographs can be considered collectible. Are these images archival? The first question to be answered is whether they form an organic whole. Although the donor of the photographs is known and we know that the Graham family members collected these items, the photographs cannot be said to have a common provenance. They, originate from different sources and were created at different times, as much as fifty years apart. Their creators were different photographers, living in different countries. The Queen Victoria cabinet card most likely was taken in England, probably by the Queen's photographer. We know from the evidence provided on three of the photographs, that two different photographers were responsible for the New Westminster images: W.T. Cooksley of New Westminster, B.C. and Hammond &.Wilson of Victoria, B.C. The functional origins or purpose of the images is also open to speculation. What was the purpose of the Queen Victoria cabinet card? Was it a collector's item? What was the purpose of the image? We can guess that the image was meant for display and dates somewhere between 1870 and 1900. This can be determined from the information in the photograph as well as from the format of the photoprint. Cabinet cards were much in vogue in England at this time and were usually displayed on tables in the Victorian parlour.(2) The Prince of Wales image, which is a postcard 67 mounted in a frame, probably was mass-produced as a souvenir of his visit to Canada. The purpose of the New Westminster Fire Hall images is less certain. Perhaps they were intended to be framed and hung on the wall. The fact that one of the images was developed on silver paper suggests that it was a special image meant to show off the subjects in the visual, the firehall and firemen. The parade image and the New Westminster townscape do not readily reveal their functional origins and therefore are more open to interpretation. Possibly the townscape is a contact print of a negative from a Panorama camera and thus a miniature version of the final image which the photographer intended for display. However, it must be admitted that the functional origins and therefore understanding of the intent of the images is unclear. There is no intrinsic relationship among the documents. They were obviously not created as part of the same activity and thus have no relationship with one another as part of a common activity except that of being accumulated for their subject interest by a collector. Even as part of an accumulated collection the photographs are lacking in intrinsic relationships as they have been disassociated from the body of records which the donor still has at home and of which these photographs form a part. Other images, which formed part of the family's collection were presumably 68 retained by the donor because of the personal nature of the images which contained shots of people, events and places of interest to family members. These images do not appear to have any connection with the lives and activities of the Graham family but were accumulated from simple interest. All of the items in the collection are originals. The technologies which created them, the papers on which they are printed, and the mounts to which the images are attached, fit the time period of the visuals. The Queen Victoria cabinet card contains an albumen photoprint, the only practicable process available at the time the image was created.(3) Gelatin emulsion and the resulting silver gelatin prints were not introduced to photography until the mid 1880s and albumen still was used into the twentieth century.(4) Standard size cards, such as the cabinet card were much in vogue at the time of this image. (5) The small panorama of New Westminster appears to be printed on printing-out-paper which was quite common in the early 1900s, but rarely used now. It was superceded by developing-out-papers, on which the later photographs appear to be printed. (6) Less standard size mounts became the norm also. The other characteristics of archival documents is that they have been set aside for preservation by their creator and then passed on to an archives for safekeeping. In this 69 case, we can only presume that the family accorded these . photographs value and preserved them, but the question is why, for what purpose. Certainly, there is evidence that the accumulators of the collection thought the photographs were worthy of preservation for they retained them over a period of eighty or more years. However, they were kept as momentos or keepsakes and not as part of some transaction or family business or even the conscious recording of family events or or even family members. They thus have not been preserved evidentially but rather for the sake of interest or sentiment. There is no obvious order to these images as they have not been numbered or arranged in any way, not even in an album. This would suggest that they are incidental items of no great value to the collector. No preservation measures other than that of retaining them has been practised on these documents. They have not even been carefully packaged to prevent them from being damaged. Thus, it is possible to deduce that they have not intentionally been set aside for preservation. How then does this collection of photographs measure up? Can it be considered archival and consequently valuable as authentic documentation? As has been shown, the photographs are not an organic collection nor is there any evidence of their being kept in relation to family activities. Thus, their value as archival documents Is diminished because the 70 relationships among the documents is not apparent and the context of their creation is unknown. These images have value as examples of images of the time or for the subject matter of them but this is divorced from their origin. They have little value as authentic documents relating to the activities or transactions of their creators. As historical documents, their value is diminished. Their interpretation depends largely on the archivist's and researchers' knowledge of the styles, technology and history of photography. The photographs do not provide confirmable evidence. It is not inherent in the collection Itself. Jessie Miller Collection The Jessie Miller collection consists of sixty-six hand colored lantern slides belonging to Jessie Miller which her brother donated along with her books, other printed material and china to the University after her death. (7) They depict street scenes in Tokyo and the summer resort of Nojiri-ko in Japan in the 1930s. The lantern slides are in good condition, devoid of copyright problems and only require someone knowledgeable about the architecture and buildings of Japan to identify the subject matter in the visuals. The images are fairly well-composed and clear enough for reference. Thus they are suitable for collection. Are they archival? 71 The provenance of these images is known. They were created (probably taken) by Anglican missionary, Jessie Miller, who worked in Japan from 1935-1969 and received an award for her work from the Emperor of Japan.(8) Examination of the internal evidence of the photographs suggests that all of the images were taken by the same person for the style of the photography and the hand-coloring of the images is uniform throughout the collection. Thus, the photographs may be seen as having a common provenance. The function or purpose for which the images were created is less certain. Perhaps they were made for display. Maybe they were intended to be used as a slide show to entertain or educate friends or the public or to show off Miller's artistic skills. Lack of documentation either on the visuals, or in an accompanying caption list or slide set script, renders it difficult to determine the exact function of the photographs. Certainly there is an intrinsic  relationship among the images as they are sequences of images which appear to have been taken from a common point of view or vantage point. The images are mostly street scenes, shots of pagodas, and shots of people whose friendly faces would suggest a close relationship with the photographer. They are in the same handcolored lantern-slide format and carry similar identifying numbers. There appears to be an order to the documents as all but six of the images 72 are numbered, from 1 to 153. Unfortunately, the purpose of the numbering system is not deciperable, making it difficult to determine the exact relationships among the documents. Neither do we know why the last six images are not numbered or who numbered the slides. Was it Miller, her brother who donated the collection, or someone in the Asian Studies Department? Was the numbering done arbitrarily to identify and control the images or was it meant to fix them in some meaningful sequence based on the nature of their creation? Lack of answers to these questions makes it difficult to determine the connections between the documents except on analysis of the subject matter of the images. The last element of organic collections is evident as the photographs are original materials of the activity which created them. They are not copies. The photographs show evidence of having been considered worthy of being set aside for preservation by their creator. In returning to Vancouver from Japan, Miller must have made a conscientious decision to keep the lantern slides despite their fragility. They must have had some significance for her, and thus were worthy of retention. They arrived in Special Collections in their original padded lantern slide boxes suggesting the importance of their preservation. The history of custody of the collection also raises questions. We cannot be sure that all of the documents from 73 the collection were transferred to the archives. Firstly, this is because they were sent originally to the Asian Studies Department of UBC, copied and then forwarded to Special Collections. Were there any slides broken or lost on the way? Lack of any accompanying documentation raises questions as to whether all of the collection was transferred to Special Collections. Moreover, responsible custodianship would have ensured that the reasons for the ordering and numbering of the photographs was carefully documented. Thus, the collection can be considered an organic collection in that the images have a common provenance, are documents apparently used in some function or for some purpose, showing intrinsic relationships, and consisting of original documents. The lack of repsonsible custodianship, however, lessens their archival value as documentation of Miller's life in Japan. Uncertainty as to the original order and relationships among the photographs renders the images primarily important for their subject matter alone. Acquisition of other documents of Miller's life and activities would have given greater value and "understandabi1ity" to these photographs. Lack of adequate documentation, missing or otherwise impaired records lessens the quality of this collection as evidence of the activities of its creator. Collection of other records of her Japanese 74 experience or of information explaining why the photographs were taken, when, and by whom would have made them more useful as evidence of her activities. As a corollary, it would also have increased the images' value as we would then know from what vantage point they were taken, for whom they were intended, and therefore we would be in a better position to interpret their message. Georgia Straight Collection The photographs in this collection were acquired by Special Collections from Vancouver bookseller William Hoffer. (9) They number over five thousand images, consisting of photoprints and negatives. They depict the youth of the sixties and early seventies in Vancouver Involved in demonstrations, conflicts with the police and attending events such as concerts arid picnics. There are also shots of musicians and politicians. The photographs were mainly taken by professional photographers. They are from the files of the Georgia Straight newspaper when it was an underground newspaper probing controversial issues such as sexual freedom and police brutality. The photographs are in good condition, and require little work to preserve them properly, the most time-consuming task being the re-enveloping of negatives. Some description is already provided on the file folders which contain the images. Many of the individuals depicted in the photographs are readily 75 identifiable. Many of the photoprints contain a pencilled or penned in notation of the page of the issue in which the photograph appeared, which facilitates identification of the images. Copyright is an issue with this collection as the photographers still own copyright. Many of them no longer live in Vancouver or have an unknown address and so would be difficult to contact for permission to reproduce the images. As these photographs are not more than twenty years old, the usefulness of the collection for the next thirty years is limited. The images are clear and well-composed and negatives exist for most of the photographs. Thus, once copyright has expired, this collection is a desirable because of its subject nature and the well-composed clear images which make up the collection. Do the images form an organic collection? This body of photographs was generated as part of the activity of publishing the Georgia Straight newspaper. This is their source as a collection. They have a discernible function. They were created to illustrate and document events, scenes, and people which were written up in the newpaper. The intrinsic relationship among the documents is evident. Contact sheets and sheets of negatives, which appear to represent assignments undertaken by photographers, evidence a relationship among groups of images. Often one roll of film was taken to cover an event. The photographs cover 76 similar events from a similar viewpoint. The images are original photographs. The records thus form an organic collection. The characteristics of being set aside for preservation and showing responsible custodianship, should be examined together for this collection. Certainly, the photographs were set aside for preservation by the creator, though most likely as an asset to raise money as a bookseller had them before Special Collections. (Unfortunately, there is no documentation on how the bookseller acquired them.) Perhaps they represent images the newspaper deemed to be of little value. Perhaps the newspaper, which continues to be published to this day, retained the most important of the records. Their evidential value as source material on the Georgia Straight newspaper is diminished by this uncertainty. Although the collection has an order there, is no guarantee it is the original order imposed by the creator. The images are contained in labelled file folders. The file folder labelled "Communes" contains photographs showing exteriors of various communes in British Columbia in the 1960's. However, we do not know who established this subject classification scheme. Was it the bookseller, in order to make the collection more orderly and therefore more appealing for sale, or was it the newspaper? There is also the possibility that records from other sources could have 77 been added to the collection. Such additions would alter the message of the photographs causing misinterpretation of the newpaper's philosophy. This lessens their value as evidential information. Additionally, the failure to acquire other records of the newspaper lessens the photographs' value as documentation on the activities of the newspaper and on the subject matter of the images. Thus, though the Georgia Straight collection exhibits all the elements of an organic collection, its archival value is diminished by uncertainties as to its custody and lack of other records of the newpaper to which the photographs are related. These difficulties might have been avoided had the newpaper itself donated or sold the collection to Special Collections, or, at least, if the bookseller had been able to show that all the documents he had acquired and subsequently passed on composed the complete photographic record of the newpaper over a given period which had not been altered in any way in their passage to the archives. Early Vancouver Views The photographs shown In Figures 8 to 11 are examples from a group of photographs donated to Special Collections. The donor is unknown. The photographs are in good condition, copyright is not a problem as it has expired. The photographs are already captioned. The photographs thus 78 79 80 82 could be considered a valuable visual record. How valid is this from an archival viewpoint? Firstly, are the Images an organic whole? Do they have a common provenance? They appear to be from a common source. They are all printed on the same kind of paper, are all of the same size, contain captions in identical printed handwriting. They all depict the same general subject matter during the years, 1886-1900. However, there Is no guarantee that they emanate from one source, from one photographer or from one collector because there is no documentation to explain such matters. Secondly, the purpose of the photographs, their part in an activity can only be guessed at. Perhaps they were created for an album of Vancouver views, but we cannot be certain. Again, lack of documentation makes it difficult to be sure. Thirdly, the intrinsic relationship among the materials is unknown. Do they represent the work of the same photographer and thus naturally relate to each other or were they assembled as a group relating to a common activity? We do not know. Lastly, and most importantly are these Images original photographs? Close examination of the images, which are not sharp in definition, suggests that they are copy prints. Six copy negatives that are part of the collection confirm this. Thus, they are not part of the original purposeful activity that caused the creation of such images. Examination of 83 collections held in other repositories reveals that these images are also held by the City of Vancouver Archives which has the original glass plate negatives and the original prints which the Historical Photograph Division of the Vancouver Public Library also holds. These photographs are most likely later reproductions from the original photographs. As they are copies of originals held in other repositories, we may dismiss the idea that the collection is archival in any sense. Fisherman Publishing Society Collection The last collection of photographs to be examined is large, consisting of over 20,000 images. They were donated to Special Collections by the Fisherman Publishing Society which is part of the United Fisherman and Allied Workers Union, mainly responsible for publishing the union newspaper, The Fisherman. (11) The photographs are the non-current photograph files of the newspaper. They date from 1900-1980 with the bulk of the images covering the years 1950-1980. The images cover three broad subject areas: labor and union activity, B.C. fishing vessels, and people working in the fishing industry. Examples are shown in Figures 12 to 21. The images are generally in good condition, the main conservation work required being the re-enveloping of the Figure 13 Figure lk Figure 15 87 88 Figure 19 89 Figure 20 91 images from their kraft containers into archival quality materials. Description of the images involves transcribing information from the envelopes. Copyright was transferred with the images to Special Collections. Thus, the collection is a desirable one. How does it measure up archivally? Firstly, the provenance of the collection is known. The photographs were donated by the creator of the collection, the Fisherman Publishing Society. The images were taken by a great variety of photographers, like the Georgia Straight collection, and like that collection, this body of photographs was generated as part of the activity of publishing a newspaper. They are the photograph files of The  Fisherman newspaper which are no longer In current use. They were either gathered or caused to be created by the editor of the newspaper in a purposeful activity. They therefore evidence function. They were collected in order to illustrate, record, or identify people, places, events, and objects about which the newspaper published items. There are instrlnslc relationships among the documents. Examination of' the files reveals this relationship. Labelled file folders contain photographs taken to cover the same event. The images reproduced in Figures 12 to 17, for example, were all taken from the file folder labelled "Arrests/Jai1ings 1967: J.Nichol @ Airport Before Oakalla Demonstration, June 12, 1967" and are sequential images of Nichol's arrival from 92 Prince Rupert at the Vancouver International Airport where he was immediately placed under arrest and taken away in a police wagon. They also depict the over 250 demonstrators who turned up at the airport to protest his arrest without bail. The photographs therefore have a definite relationship to each other and thus enable us to follow an event through the action recorded in the photographs. This relationship among the documents as well as the labelled file folders containing the photographs, helps interpretation of the content of the images. Of course, these are further explained by an examination of back issues of The Fisherman newspaper. Figures 18 and 19 are from the same file folder. Taken on its own figure 18 is hard to interpret. What is its meaning? Why are the riot police outside the Hotel Georgia? We can only guess. Are they there to protect an occupant of the hotel or to prevent some likely trouble on West Georgia Street? Perhaps they are on strike. We understand the message and therefore meaning of the image better when we look at it along with all the other photographs in the file which Is labelled, "Demonstrations: War Measures Act 1970." The same may be said of Figures 20 and 21 which are not meant to show that the Vancouver harbour is busy in winter but rather to depict the effect of a longshoreman's strike. The images come from the file folder, "Strikes/Pickets 1966: 93 ILWU Strike of Foremen-1966, Nov.-Dec. Ships @ English Bay." Interpretation of the images thus is provided by this identifcation and their relationship to the other images in the file folders. We are therefore better able to understand their message. The fourth element of organic collections is shown by these photographs which are all original materials. They are either original negatives taken at the time of the event they portray or prints made from them at that date. The second characteristic of archival documents is also inherent in the collection. The editor of the newspaper set  it aside for preservation and carefully designated Special Collections as the legitimate successor of custody. The donor's not infrequent referral to photographs in the collection to this day attests to the usefulness of the images and therefore their value as documentation and source material. The collection also reveals responsible  custodianship. The files were transferred to Special Collections directly from the editor of the newspaper who created the later files and inherited the earlier files from his predecessors. This provides a reasonable guarantee that the collection is intact and has not been altered in any way. 94 Taking these sample collections together, we get a clearer picture of the archival value of photographs. Photograph collections can be examined like other materials for their archival value and this value discovered by analyzing photographs based on whether they provide evidence of fundamental characteristics of archival documents. Collections such as the Graham photographs may be considered what Cappon and Schellenberg referred to as "artificial collections" of disparate items gathered according to some plan but not the outgrowth of some organic activity. Because they have been disassociated from the context in which they were created or even accumulated, their value as evidence of the activities which brought them into being is diminished. The collection of Early Vancouver views is also an artificial collection. The images are not even originals, and have no value as archival documentation. The Jessie Miller collection, although more clearly an organic collection than the previous two, in that the photographs emanate from one source and the images appear to relate to each other, has less archival value than might be thought as a consequence of its history of custody. Not only are we not sure whether all the photographs which she created in this group are present, but the textual documents that most likely went with them are missing. The documents 95 are less useful as documentation than they could be because of the lack of information on the context of their creation. The Georgia Straight and Fisherman Publishing Society collections provide an interesting comparison. Both are newspaper photograph collections. Both contain original images taken by photographers for their respective newspapers. The photographs in both collections were clearly created in the course of the publishing of each of the newspapers, and there is evidence that the images in both collections are interrelated. Nevertheless, the Georgia Straight photographs, because of the circumstance of their acquisition by Special Collections, do not bear the same strong archival quality as the Fisherman Publishing Society photographs. Lack of responsbile custodianship has diminished the Georgia Straight collection's evidential value. This is because we do not know how complete a record they are. We do not know whether they show all of what the newspaper intended to illustrate or just an aspect of it. Secondly, we do not know whether they represent only the records of the Georgia Straight. It is possible that they contain records from another body. This, of course, also makes them less valuable as evidential records of the newspaper. Thirdly, we are not sure of the original order of the collection, or whether it was altered or rearranged by the donor. 96 Most importantly, the factor which increases the value of the Fisherman Publishing Society collection over the Georgia Straight collection is that some textual records of the Society were transferred to Special Collections, expanding our understanding of the operations of the society and thus helping us to interpret the message in the images. Such documentation about the visuals, documentation about the creator of the collection, and documentation about the transferral of the documents increases the value of this collection over that of the Georgia Straight materials. This is because the value of documents archives collect depends as much on knowledge of the context of their creation and how they came into the archives' possession as it does on the documents themselves. 97 Notes to Chapter Four 1. See Gyle Gordon Graham Photograph Collection Accession  Data Record, Manuscript Collections, Special Collections, UBC Library. 2. Mary Lynn Ritzenthaler, Gerald J. Munoff, and Margery S. Long, Archives and Manuscripts: Administration of Photograph  Collections (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1984), 11. 3. Ibid. 4. Ritzenthaler, 46. 5. Ritzenthaler, 42. 6. William Crawford, The Keepers of Light (Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.:Morgan & Morgan, Inc., 1979): 63. 7. See Jessie Miller Accession Data Record Manuscript Collections, Special Collections, UBC Library. 8. Ibid. 9. See Georgia Straight Accession Data Record Manuscript Collections, Special Collections, UBC Library. 10. Fisherman Publishing Society Accession Data Record, Manuscript Collections, Special Collections, UBC Library. 98 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION Archivists no longer consider their job as one of collecting and preserving remnants of the past. Rather they see their role as that of carefully selecting documents from an ever-growing and overabundant supply of information, a supply so large that it threatens to overwhelm archival budgets and storage capacities. (1) Photographs in particular need such careful evaluation as they are being produced daily in enormous numbers. They are also more costly to preserve and time-consuming to describe, and therefore make available, than most other documents archives acquire. Acquisition of photographs which are the records of the sponsoring institution Is a process of transferral of documents from sponsor to its archives. Appraisal of the records after this accessioning subsequently helps to limit the size of the collections, cutting down on the time staff need to spend rehousing and describing them. It also reduces the quantities of archival supplies required to preserve them. In addition, collections are rendered more useful to researchers who should not have to wade through voluminous quantities of redundant or unimportant material. Acquisition of photographs by archives which are not the records of the 9 9 sponsoring institution requires an appraisal of the records to determine whether they should be acquired in the first place. Naturally, the subject nature of the documents is of paramount importance, and decisions on the suitability of the materials for acquisition depends upon the archives' collections mandate. Also important in the decision is the condition of the documents and whether they need extensive conservation treatments. The descriptive requirements of collections, to make the photographs available, are also important considerations. Collections without any or with only minimal Identification are less useful as sources of information. Collections where coypright has not been transferred to the archives pose potential legal problems for the archives. Thus, the subject nature and conservation, description and copyright implications posed by collections are evaluated when considering acquiring photographs. However, important as all these considerations are in acquisition of photographs by archives, they should only be considered in the context of the acquisition of the total documentary record and all the forms collections might contain. The most important factor in considering acquisition of photographs by archives is whether they are archival in nature. This distinguishes such documents from those collected by museums and libraries. Photographs that have 100 this archival quality provide evidence of the activities of their creators. They have evidential value. They can be used as authentic sources of information on their creators. They have informational values, too. They may be useful as sources of information on a variety of subjects which are only limited by the imagination of researchers. Their value as accurate documents which represent what is photographed, however, depends on knowledge of the context of their creation. If the documents are archival, that is those whose significance "depends on their organic relation to the agency and to each other," (2) then they are more likely to be correctly interpreted. This is because we understand their relationships to each other and their function in the activity for which they were created. Photographs, thus, like other documents archives collect, must stand the test of archival quality if they are to be acquired. This thesis Illustrates the conclusion that documents which are archival in nature exhibit the following characteristics: they form organic collections, have been set aside for preservation by their creators and show responsible custodianship. Documents in such collections show provenance, evidence functional origins, and display intrinsic relationships. They are original materials. They are documents which their creator has carefully set aside, in an orderly fashion, for reference and later for 101 preservation. They are whole collections which have not been altered since they were set aside for preservation by their creator. The characteristics of archival documents as outlined have not been arbitrarily assigned. They have evolved from the theories, formulated over the last one hundred years, by European and American archivists, whose ideas are the foundation stones of archival practice in North America today. These characteristics are common to all documents archives collect, and as such may be applied to all records no matter what their format. This thesis provides a framework by which to test the archival nature of photographs. Photograph collections which are acquired from individuals and institutions other than the sponsor of the archives need such a framework of analysis if Only archival collections are to be acquired. This is because photographs are so immediate and so realistic that we tend to accept them immediately as authentic documents and therefore worthy of acquisition. Five collections of photographs held in the Special Collections Division of the University of British Columbia were analyzed for their archival nature based on this framework. However, it was not intended as a critique of the acquisition policies or methodology of the repository. The collections that were examined were chosen to illustrate certain points and do not necessarily represent the holdings 102 which Special Collections considers archival. Such an evaluation would not be appropriate as this repository is not primarily an archival repository. It holds rare and expensive library materials as well as archival documents. As such, the material it collects are acquired based on several collecting philosophies of which the archival is but one . It soon became apparent in this examination which collections were archival in nature. It also became clear that archival quality is relative. The archival value of some collections is greater than others. These could be used as sources of information on their creator as they had been kept intact in their transferral to the archives and were the whole collection of the body that created them. The photographs thus would be capable of informing us of the activities, functions, business and interests of the body that created them. Such collections also provide more accurate documentation on the subject matter of the images because knowledge of their context enables us more accurately to interpret their message. Other collections had some elements of archival collections but indifferent or careless custodianship dimished their archival value. This was because there were possibly gaps in the records or alterations which would alter the relationships among the documents and hence influence their correct interpretation. 103 One collection could not be considered archival at all because it did not consist of original materials. This is an important point as archives only collect documents of the transaction which produced them. Documents made at a later date, such as copy photographs, cannot therefore be considered archival. In conclusion, this study shows that the ability to test collections for archival quality depends heavily upon documentation. Firstly, documentation of custody is an important element determining archival quality. If the records are known to be complete and this information recorded as well as information.on their successive custodians and the circumstances of their acquisition by the archives, then their authenticity is more certain. The documents have archival value. Documentation on their context is also important. Identification of the visuals, information on their function, their relationship to other documents in the collection and on their creator increases their value as documentation. Photograph collections need to be examined for their content but judgements about content are made based on knowledge of this context. Photographs, because of their illusory nature, particularly need such accompanying documentation to explain and authenticate their subject matter. Archivists, therefore, at the time of acquisition must find out how the records came into being, 104 for what purpose and who was responsible for their creation. The more of this information that is recorded the more valuable are the records archives acquire and the more useful will the documents be to researchers. 105 Notes to Chapter Five 1. See Berner, 248 and Booms, 69-107. 2. Schellenberg, Modern Archives, 17. 106 BIBLIOGRAPHY Archivarla 5 (Winter 1977-1978) Special Issue on Photographs and Archives. Ottawa: Association of Canadian Archivist, 1978. Arnheim, Rudolff. Visual Thinking Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1974. Bauer, G. Philip. "The Appraisal of Current and Recent Records." National Archives Staff Information Circular 13 Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Service, 1976. B.C. Studies; The Past in Focus: Photography and British  Columbia, 1858-1914. Special Issue edited by Joan M. Schwartz. 52 (Winter 1981-1982). Beaumont, Newhall. The History of Photography from 1839 to  the Present Day. New York Museum of Modern Art, 1964. Berkeley, Edmund. "The Archives and Appraisals." Georgia  Archive 5 (Winter 1977): 51-63. Berner, Richard C. Archival Theory and Practice in the United States. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1983. . "Manuscript Collections, Archives, and Special Collections: Their Relationships." Archivar ia 18 (Summer 1984): 248-254. Birrell, Andrew. Benjamin Bultzly: Photographs and Journal  of an Expedition Through British Columbia, 1871. Toronto: Coach House Press, 1978. . "The Tyranny of Tradition." Archivaria 10 (Summer 1980): 249-252. Blouin, Jr., Francis X. "A New Perspective on the Appraisal of Business Records: A Review," American Archivist 42 (July.1979 ): 312-320. Boles, Frank and Julia Marks Young. "Exploring the Black Box: The Appraisal of University Administrative Records." American Archivist 48 (Spring 1985): 121-140. 107 Booms, Hans. "Society and the Formation of the Documentary Heritage: Issues in the Appraisal of Archival Sources." Archivaria 24 (Summer 1987): 69-107. Borchert, James. "An Analysis of Historical Photographs: A Method and Case Study." Studies in Visual  Communications 7 (Fall 1981): 30-63. Brannan, Beverly W. "Copyright and Photography Collections" Picturescope (Spring 1981): 14-19. Brichford, Maynard J. Archives and Manuscripts: Appraisal  and Accessioning. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1977. British Columbia Archives Council. Needs Assessment Survey  Report March 1988. Brooks, Philip C. "The Selection of Records for Preservation." American Archivist 3 (1940): 221-234. Burcar, G. Ellis. Introduction to Museum Work Nashville: The American Association for State and Local History, 1980. Burke, Frank G. "Archival Cooperation." American Archivist 46 (Summer 1983): 292-304. Canadian Archives:Report to the Social Sciences, Humanities  and Research Council of Canada by the Consultative  Group on Canadian Archives Ottawa: Information Division of Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, 1980. Cappon, Lester J. "The Archivist as Collector." American  Archivist 39 (1976): 429-435. . "Historical Manuscripts as Archives: Some Definitions and Their Application". American Archivist 19 (April 1956): 101-110. Casanova, Eugenic Archivistica. Siena, 1928. Clark, Robert h., Jr. ed. Archive-Library Relations. New York: R.R. Bowker Company, 1976. Coker, Kathy Roe. "Records Appraisal Practice and Procedure." American Archivist 48 (Fall 1985): 417-421. Collier, John, Jr. Visual Anthropology: Photography as a  Research Method. New York: Rinehart & Winston, 1967. 2 108 Conservation of Photographs. Kodak Publication No. F-40. Rochester: Eastman Kodak, 1985. Cook, Terry. "The Tyranny of the Medium: A Comment on 'Total Archives'." Archivaria 9 (Winter 1979-1980): 141-150. ."Media Myopia." Archivaria 12 (Summer 1981): 146-156. Crawford, William. Keepers of Light: A History and Working Guide to Early Photographic Processes. Dobbs Ferry, New York: Morgan and Morgan, 1979. Danlells, Laurenda. "The Special Collections of the Library of U.B.C," B.C. Library Quarterly 36:4 (Spring 1973): 41-59. Daniels, F. and Timothy Walch. A Modern Archives Reader:  Basic Readings on Archival Theory and Practice. Washington, D.C.: National Archives Trust Fund Board, 1984. Darrah, William C. Cartes de vlsite in Nineteenth Century  Photography. Gettysburg, Penn.: W.C. Darrah, 1981. . The World of Stereographs. Gettysburg, Penn.: W.C. Darrah, 1977. Dick, Ernest J., Jacques Gagne, Josephine Langham, Richard Lochead and Jean-Paul Moreau. "Total Archives Come Apart." Archivaria 11 (Winter 1980-1981): 224-227. Dollar, Charles M. "Appraising Machine Readable Records." American Archivist 41 (October 1978): 423-430. Duchein, Michel. "Theoretical Principles and Practical Problems of Respect des Fonds in Archival Science." Archivaria 16 (Summer 1983): 64-82. Ehrenberg, Ralph E. "Aural and Graphic Archives and Manuscripts." Drexel Library Quarterly (1975): 55-71. Evans, Frank B., Donald F. Harrison, Edwin A. Thompson and William L. Rofes. "A Basic Glossary for Archivists, Manuscript Curators, and Records Managers." Amer ican  Archivist 37 (July 1974): 415-433. Felsten, Judith "News Photograph Collections: A Survey of Newspaper Practices and Archival Strategies." Picturescope. 30 (Fall/Winter 1982): 92-104. 109 Fishbein, Meyer H. "The Evidential Value of Non-Textual Records: An Early Precedent." American Archivist 45 (Spring 1982): 189-190. Fisher-Taylor, Gail. "Interview: Henry Wilheim," Photo  Communique 3 (Spring 1981): 2-21. Freund, Gisele. Photography and Society. Boston: David R. Godine, 1980. Gill, Arthur T. Photographic Processes: A Glossary and A Chart for Recognition. Museums Association Information Sheet No. 21. London: Musuems Association, 1978. Greenhill, R. and A. Birrell. Canadian Photography,  1839-1920. Toronto: Coach House Press, 1979. Haas, Joan K., Helen Willa Samuels, and Barbara Trippel Simmons. Appraising the Records of Modern Science and  Technology: A Guide. Cambridge, Mass.: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1985. Haller, Margaret. Collecting Old Photographs New York: Arco, 1978. Hendriks, Klaus. The Preservation and Restoration of Photographic Materials in Archives and Libraries. A RAMP Study with Guidelines. Paris: UNESCO, 1984. Hurley, F. Jack. "There's More Than Meets the Eye: Looking at Photographs Historically." Centre for Southern  Folklore Newsletter 3 (Winter 1981): 6-7. Jenkinson, Hilary. A Manual of Archive Administration. London: Percy, Lund, Humphries and Co., 1966. Jussim, Estelle. "The Research Uses of Visual Information." Library Trends 25 (1977): 763-778. .Visual Communication and the Graphic Arts: Photographic Technologies in the Nineteenth Century. New York: R.R. Bowker Co., 1974. Keon, Jim. "The Canadian Archivist and Copyright Legislation." Archlvaria 18 (Summer 1984): 91-98. Kesner, Richard M. "Archival Collections Development: Building a Successful Acquisitions Program." Midwestern  Archivist 5 (2 1981): 101-112. 110 Koltun, Lilly. City Blocks, City Spaces: Historical Photographs of Canada's Urban Growth, 1850-1900. Ottawa: Supply and Services, 1980. . ed. Private Realms of Light, Amateur Photography in Canada, 1839-1940. Toronto: Fitzhenry & Whiteside, 1984 . . "Reading the Unwritten Record: How to Dissect Photographs as a Primary Source for Historical Research." Talk delivered at the Mount Saint Vincent University Art Gallery, Halifac, N.S., March 23, 1985. Kromnow, Ake. "The Appraisal of Contemporary Records." Archivum 26 (1979): 45-54. Kula, Sam. The Archival Appraisal of Moving Images: A RAMP  Study with Guidelines. Paris: UNESCO, 1983. Leary, William. The Archival Appraisal of Photographs: A  RAMP Study with Guidelines. New York: UNESCO, 1985. Long, Margery S. "Historic Photographs." History News. 32 (June 1977): 167-170. MacBeth, George and S. James Gooding, ed. Basic Museum Management. Ottawa: Canadian Museum Association, 1975. Mattison, David. "J.A. Brock and Company." Eyes of a City:  Early Vancouver Photographers 1868-1900. Vancouver: Vancouver City Archives, 1986. Minotto, Claude. "II faut le voir pour le croire: la collection nationale de photographie." Archivar ia 1 (1976): 68-73. Muller, Samuel, J.A. Feith and R. Fruin. Manual for the Arrangement and Description of Archives. Translated by Arthur H. Leavltt. New York: H.W. Wilson, 1940. National Archives of Canada. Acquisition Evaluation Study. Volume 1. Ottawa: National Archives, January 1988. Newhall, Beaumont. "Criticism in Photography." After image (November 1975): 10-14. Peace, Nancy E. Archival Choices. Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath and Company, 1984. Reed, David. "The Use of Photography in Sociological Research." The British Journal of Photography. (July 16, 1976). Ill Reilly, James. M. Photographic Prints of the Nineteenth  Century Care and Identification. Rochester, N.Y.: Eastman Kodak Company, 1987. Ritzenthaler, Mary Lynn, Gerald J. Munoff, and Margery S. Long. Archives & Manuscripts: Administration of  Photographic Collections. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1984. Robertson, Peter. "More Than Meets the Eye." Archivaria 2 ( 1976) : 33-43. Rundell, Lawrence. "Photographs as Historical Evidence: Early Texas Oil." American Archivist 41 (October 1978): 373-398. Samuels, Helen Willa. "Who Controls the Past." American  Archivist 49 (Spring 1986): 109-124. Santoro, Corrado A. "The Association of Canadian Archivists and Copyright Revision: An Update." Archivar ia 21 (Winter 1985-1986): 111-114. Sarkowski, John. Looking at Photographs. New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1973. Scharf, Aaron. Art and Photography. London: Allen Lane/Penguin Press, 1968. Schellenberg, Theodore R. The Appraisal of Modern Public Records Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Service, 1956. . The Management of Archives. New York: Columbia University Press, 1965. . Modern Archives: Principles and Techniques. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956. Segger, Martin. "Mirrors of the Architectural Moment: Some Comments on the Use of Historical Photographs as Primary Sources in Architectural History." Material  History Bulletin 14 (Spring 1982): 47-54. Skelton, Robin. "The Acquisition of Literary Archives." Archivaria 18 (Summer 1984): 214-219. Smith, Wilfred I. "Archival Selection: A Canadian View." Journal of the Society of Archivists 3 (October 1967): 275-280. 112 Society of American Archivists. College and University  Archives: Selected Readings. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1979. Sontag, Susan. On Photography. New York: Dell Publishing, 1977 . Stokes, Philip. "Language and Photography." British Journal  of Photography (May 23, 1976): Swan, Alice. "Conservation of Photographic Print Collections." Library Trends 30 (Fall 1981): 267-296. Taylor, Hugh. "Documentary Art and the Role of the Archivist." American Archivist 42 (October 1979): 417-428. Taylor, R.J. "Field Appraisal of Manuscript Collections." Archivarla 2 (Summer 1976): 44-48. Thomas, Alan. Time in a Frame: Photography and the Nineteenth Century Mind. New York: Schocken Books, 1977. Thomas, Ann. Fact and Fiction: Canadian Painting and Photography, 1860-1900. Montreal: McCord Museum, 19 79. Thomas, Joe D. "Photographic Archives." American Archivist 21 (1958): 419-424. Thomason, Michael. "The Magic Image Revisited: The Photograph as a Historical Source>" Alabama Review 31 (April 1978): 83-91. Triggs, Stanley. William Notman: The Stamp of a Studio. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1985. Vanderbilt, Paul. "Evaluating Historical Photographs: A Personal Perspective." American Association for State and Local History Technical Leaflet 120. History News 34 (1979): 279-290. Walden, David. "Stretching the Dollar: Monetary Appraisal of Manuscripts." Archivaria 11 (Winter 1980-1981): 101-114. Walsh, Betty. "Preservation of Contemporary Photographs." Unpublished article. Provincial Archives of B.C., February, 1986. - "Quest for Photographic Enclosures." A Paper Presented at the Pacific Conservation Group Meeting, September 30, 1985. 113 Wartofsky, Marx W. "Cameras Can't See: Representation, Photography and Human Vision." Photo Communique. (February/March 1980): 2-4. Weinstein, R.A. and L. Booth. Collection, Use and Care of  Historical Photographs. Nashville, Tenn.: American Association for State and Local History, 1977. Weinstein, R.A. "Why Collect Photographs." Picturescope. (Winter 1981):120-124. Weldon, Edward. "Lest We Forget: Setting Priorities for the Preservation and Use of Historical Records." Amer ican  Archivist 40 (July 1977): 295-300. Whelan, Richard. Double Take: A Comparative Look at  Photographs. New York: Clakson N. Potter, 1981. Wilhelm, Henry. "Colour Print Instability." Modern  Photography. 43 (February 1979 ): 92 ff. _. "Storing Color Materials." Industrial Photography 27 (October 1978): 32-35. Wolheim, Peter. "Documentary Photography in Canada 1850-1920." Vanguard (June/July 1979): 27-28. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 6 0
Portugal 4 0
Canada 3 0
Germany 3 36
China 2 10
City Views Downloads
Unknown 10 36
Ashburn 6 0
Shenzhen 1 10
Beijing 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0097347/manifest

Comment

Related Items