Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A call to rethink archival creation: exploring types of creation in personal archives

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archival Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concept of creatorship is central to archival theory, as evidenced in archival description, which focuses on the relation of the material described to a single, named creator. Despite its centrality to the discipline and profession, the concept of archival creation is under-theorized and oversimplified. This article builds on recent discussion in the archival discipline regarding the need to expand the principle of provenance by exploring methods of archival creation in the archives of Canadian and American writers. It argues for a broader understanding of the types of agents and processes that create an archive over time and suggests that despite being centered on the concept of creation, the archival discipline has only begun to scratch the surface of the possibilities contained in it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. [David Weir], note to Rare Books and Special Collections staff. This note is in the accession file for the Douglas Coupland fonds and is made available to researchers upon request.

  2. For example, the Canadian descriptive standard Rules for Archival Description (RAD) instructs archivists to record in the custodial history field “the successive transfers of ownership and custody or control of the material, along with the dates, thereof, insofar as it can be ascertained,” and includes a footnote advising archivists not to “confuse information given in the Administrative history/Biographical sketch of the creator of the unit with the history of its custody.” Rules for Archival Description, Rule 1.7C.

References

  • Archival and Special Collections. University of Guelph. L.M. Montgomery Collection. • XZ1 MS A098, Carol Goodwin, “Lucy’s story,” Kitchener Waterloo Record, 22 November 1985. • XZ1 MS A098, Stuart Macdonald, draft letter to Editor of Globe & Mail, 1 August 1974. • Archives and Special Collections. University of Manitoba. Dorothy Livesay Fonds. • MSS 37 Box 50 Folder 37, Dorothy Livesay, letter to Alan Crawley, 19 September 1970

  • Ardern C (2015) Record creation. In: Duranti L, Franks P (eds) Encyclopedia of archival science. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, pp 305–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Barr D (1987–1988) The fonds concept in the Working Group on Archival Descriptive Standards report. Archivaria 25:163–170

  • Barr D (1989) Protecting provenance: response to the report of the Working Group on Description at the Fonds Level. Archivaria 28:141–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastian JA (2001) A question of custody: the colonial archives of the United States Virgin Islands. Am Arch 64:96–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastian JA (2003) Owning memory: how a Caribbean community lost its archives and found its history. Libraries Unlimited, Westport

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastian JA (2006) Reading colonial records through an archival lens: the provenance of place, space and creation. Arch Sci 6:267–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bearman DA, Lytle RH (1985–6) The power of the principle of provenance. Archivaria 21:14–27

  • Brain T (2006) Sylvia Plath’s letters and journals. In: Gill J (ed) The Cambridge companion to Sylvia Plath. Cambridge UP, Cambridge, pp 139–155

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brain T (2007) Unstable manuscripts: the indeterminacy of the Plath canon. In: Helle A (ed) The unraveling archive: essays on Sylvia Plath. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, pp 17–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Brothman B (1991) Orders of value: probing the terms of archival value. Archivaria 32:78–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Bundtzen LK (2001) The other Ariel. Univ of Massachusetts Press, Amherst

    Google Scholar 

  • Canadian Committee on Archival Description. Rules for archival description. http://www.cdncouncilarchives.ca/archdesrules.html. Accessed 4 Dec 2017

  • Caswell M (2014a) Rethinking inalienability: trusting nongovernmental archives in transitional societies. Am Arch 76:113–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Caswell M (2014b) Toward a survivor-centered approach to records documenting human rights abuses: lessons from community archives. Arch Sci 14:307–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham A (1996) The mysterious outside reader. Arch Mss 24:130–144

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham A (2008) Harnessing the power of provenance in archival description: an Australian perspective on the development of the second edition of ISAAR (CPF). J Arch Org 5(1–2):15–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Archives and Special Collections University of Manitoba Libraries (1986) The papers of Dorothy Livesay: a reference tool. http://www.umanitoba.ca/libraries/units/archives/collections/complete_holdings/ead/html/Livesay.shtml. Accessed 4 Dec 2017

  • Describing archives: a content standard (2015) Second edition (DACS). https://www2.archivists.org/groups/technical-subcommittee-on-describing-archives-a-content-standard-dacs/dacs. Accessed 4 Dec 2017

  • Douglas J (2013) Archiving authors: rethinking the analysis and representation of personal archives. PhD Diss. University of Toronto

  • Douglas J (2015) The archiving I: a closer look in the archives of writers. Archivaria 79:53–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas J (2016) Toward more honest description. Am Arch 79(1):26–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas J (2017) Origins and beyond: the ongoing evolution of archival ideas about provenance. In: MacNeil H, Eastwood T (eds) Currents of archival thinking, 2nd edn. Libraries Unlimited, Santa Barbara, pp 25–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas J, MacNeil H (2009) Arranging the self: literary and archival perspectives on writers’ archives. Archivaria 67:25–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Duchein M (1983) Theoretical principles and practical problems of respect des fonds in archival science. Archivaria 16:68–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Duff W, Harris V (2002) Stories and names: archival description as narrating records and constructing meanings. Arch Sci 2(3–4):236–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Duff W, Monks-Leeson E, Galey A (2012) Contexts built and found: a pilot study on the process of archival meaning-making. Arch Sci 2(3–4):236–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastwood T (2017) A contested realm: the nature of archives and the orientation of archival science. In: MacNeil H, Eastwood T (eds) Currents of archival thinking, 2nd edn. Libraries Unlimited, Santa Barbara, pp 3–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Experts Group on Archival Description (2016) Records in contexts: a conceptual model for archival description. International Council on Archives. https://www.ica.org/en/egad-ric-conceptual-model. Accessed 4 Dec 2018

  • Faunch C (2010) Archives of written lives: a case study of Daphne Du Maurier and her biographer, Margaret Forster. Archives 35:28–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton I (1994) Keepers of the flame: literary estates and the rise of biography from Shakespeare to Plath. Faber and Faber, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Helle A (2007) Introduction: archival matters. In: Helle A (ed) The unraveling archive: essays on Sylvia Plath. Ann Arbour, University of Michigan Press, pp 1–13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Horsman P (2002) The last dance of phoenix, or the de-discovery of the archival fonds. Archivaria 54:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes T (1982) Foreword. In: Hughes T, McCullough F (eds) The journals of Sylvia Plath. Ballantine, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes T (1985) Sylvia Plath and her journals. In: Alexander P (ed) Ariel ascending: writings about Sylvia Plath. Harper & Row, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley C (1994) The Australian (‘series’) system: an exposition. In: McKemmish S, Piggott M (eds) The records continuum: Ian Maclean and Australian Archives first fifty years. Ancora Press, Clayton, pp 150–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley C (1995) Problems with provenance. Arch Manu 23(2):234–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley C (2005a) Parallel provenance: part 1: what, if anything, is archival description? Arch Manu 33(1):110–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley C (2005b) Parallel provenance: part 2: when something is not related to everything else. Arch Manu 33 (2):52–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Iacovino L (2010) Rethinking archival, ethical and legal frameworks for records of Indigenous Australian communities: a participant relationship model of rights and responsibilities. Arch Sci 10:353–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISAAR (CPF): International Standard Archival Authority Record for Corporate Bodies, Persons and Families (2004) 2nd edn. International Council on Archives Committee on Descriptive Standards. https://www.ica.org/en/isaar-cpf-international-standard-archival-authority-record-corporate-bodies-persons-and-families-2nd. Accessed 4 Dec 2017

  • ISAD(G): General International Standard Archival Description: adopted by the Committee on Descriptive Standards, Stockholm, Sweden, 19–22 September 1999 (2000) 2nd edn. ICA, Ottawa. ISBN 0-9696035-5-X. https://www.ica.org/en/isadg-general-international-standard-archival-description-second-edition. Accessed 4 Dec 2017

  • ISDF: International Standard for Describing Functions (2007). Developed by the International Council on Archives Committee on Best Practices and Standards Dresden, Germany, 2–4 May 2007. https://www.ica.org/en/isdf-international-standard-describing-functions. Accessed 4 Dec 2017

  • ISDIAH: International Standard for Describing Institutions with Archival Holdings (2008) Developed by the International Council on Archives Committee on Best Practices and Standards London, United Kingdom, 10–11 March 2008. https://www.ica.org/en/isdiah-international-standard-describing-institutions-archival-holdings. Accessed 4 Dec 2017

  • Jenkinson H (1937) A manual of archive administration. Percy Lund, Humphries & Co., London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ketelaar E (2001) Tacit narratives: the meanings of archives. Arch Sci 1:131–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krawczyk B (1999) Cross reference heaven: the abandonment of the fonds as the primary level of arrangement for Ontario government records. Archivaria 48:131–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Library and Archives Canada (2016) National meeting 2016 on the future of RAD. www.archivescanada.ca/FutureofRAD. Accessed 4 Dec 2017

  • Light M, Hyry T (2002) Colophons and annotations: new directions for the finding aid. Am Arch 65:216–230

    Google Scholar 

  • MacNeil H (2005) Picking our text: archival description, authenticity, and the archivist as editor. Am Arch 64:264–278

    Google Scholar 

  • MacNeil H (2008) Archivalterity: rethinking original order. Archivaria 66:1–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Malcolm J (1994) The silent woman: Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes. Vintage Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • McCaig J (2002) Reading in: Alice Munro’s archives. Wilfrid Laurier UP, Waterloo

    Google Scholar 

  • McGill R (2006) Negotiations with the living archive. In: Moss J, Kozakewich T (eds) Margaret Atwood: the open eye. Ottawa, University of Ottawa Press, pp 95–106

    Google Scholar 

  • McGill R (2009) Biographical desire and the archives of living authors. a/b: Auto/Biography Studies 24:129–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millar L (2002) The death of the fonds and the resurrection of provenance: archival context in space and time. Archivaria 53:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore C (2007) The Writers’ Union of Canada 1973–2007. www.writersunion.ca/content/history. Accessed 4 Dec 2017

  • Nesmith T (ed) (1993) Canadian archival studies and the rediscovery of provenance. Scarecrow Press, Metuchen

    Google Scholar 

  • Nesmith T (1999) Still fuzzy, but more accurate: some thoughts on the ‘ghosts’ of archival theory. Archivaria 47:136–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Nesmith T (2002) Seeing archives: postmodernism and the changing intellectual place of archives. Am Arch 65:24–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Nesmith T (2005) Reopening archives: bringing new contextualities into archival theory and practice. Archivaria 60:259–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Nesmith T (2006) The concept of societal provenance and records of nineteenth-century Aboriginal-European relations in Western Canada: implications for archival theory and practice. Arch Sci 6:351–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nesmith T (2015) The principle of provenance. In: Duranti L, Franks P (eds) Encyclopedia of archival science. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, pp 284–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Purdy A (2004) Yours, Al: the collected letters of Al Purdy. Solecki S (ed). Harbour Publishing, Madeira Park

  • Rose J (1991) The haunting of Sylvia Plath. Virago, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Savoja M, Vitali S (2008) Authority control for creators in Italy: theory and practice. JAO 5:121–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott PJ (1966) The record group concept: a case for abandonment. Am Arch 29:493–504

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith S, Watson J (2001) Reading autobiography: a guide for interpreting life narratives. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • William Ready Division of Archives and Research Collections. McMaster University. Marian Engel Fonds. • Second Accrual Box 32 File 2, Robin Skelton, “The experience of authors with regard to the disposal of their archival materials,” [1978]. • Second Accrual Box 32 File 2, Robin Skelton, “Authors and archives: A short guide,” [1978]

  • Yakel E (2003) Archival representation. Arch Sci 3(1):1–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeo G (2009) Custodial history, provenance, and the description of personal records. Lib Cult Rec 44:50–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeo G (2010) Debates about description. In: Eastwood T, MacNeil M (eds) Currents of archival thinking. Libraries Unlimited, Santa Barbara, pp 89–114

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is a revised version of a chapter of my doctoral dissertation (Douglas 2012). I wish to thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) and York University (through the Kent Haworth Archival Research Fellowship) for their financial support. I also wish to gratefully acknowledge the expertise and graciousness of the 13 archivists and librarians who consented to share their expertise with me: Kathy Garay (McMaster University), Catherine Hobbs (Library and Archives Canada), Heather Home (Queen’s University Archives), Richard Landon (Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, University of Toronto), Michael Moosberger (University Archives, Dalhousie University), Monique Ostiguy (Library and Archives Canada), Tony Power (Special Collections and Rare Books, Simon Fraser University), John Shoesmith (Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, University of Toronto), Carl Spadoni (William Ready Division of Archives and Research Collections, McMaster University), Appollonia Steele (Archives and Special Collections, University of Calgary), Shelley Sweeney (Archives and Special Collections, University of Manitoba), Jean Tener (Archives and Special Collections, University of Calgary) and Jennifer Toews (Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, University of Toronto). Finally, I am grateful to the peer reviewers whose comments helped me to strengthen my arguments and write a better paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Library, Archival and Information Studies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

    Jennifer Douglas

Authors
  1. Jennifer Douglas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer Douglas.

Appendix: List of archives consulted

Appendix: List of archives consulted

Margaret Atwood fonds. Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library. University of Toronto Libraries. Toronto, Ontario.

Douglas Coupland fonds. Rare Books and Special Collections. University of British Columbia Libraries. Vancouver, British Columbia.

Marian Engel fonds. The William Ready Division of Archives and Research Collections. McMaster University Libraries. Hamilton, Ontario.

Margaret Laurence fonds. Clara Thomas Archives and Special Collections. York University Libraries. Toronto, Ontario.

Dorothy Livesay fonds. Archives and Special Collections. University of Manitoba Libraries. Winnipeg, Manitoba.

L.M. Montgomery collection. Archival and Special Collections. University of Guelph Libraries. Guelph, Ontario.

Alice Munro fonds. Archives and Special Collections. University of Calgary Libraries. Calgary, Alberta.

Sylvia Plath collection. Mortimer Rare Book Room. Smith College Libraries. Northampton, Massachusetts.

Sylvia Plath collection MSS II. Lilly Library. Indiana University Libraries. Bloomington, Indiana.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Douglas, J. A call to rethink archival creation: exploring types of creation in personal archives. Arch Sci 18, 29–49 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-018-9285-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-018-9285-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation