ArchivesBlogs

Susan Scott Parrish, in her American Curiosity: Cultures of Natural History in the Colonial British Atlantic World (Chapel Hill: Published for the Omohundro Institute of Early American and Culture by University of North Carolina Press, 2006)”argues that, because America was a great material curiosity for the Old World and its immigrants to the New, America’s unique matrix of contested knowledge making – its polycentric curiosity – was crucially formative of modern European ways of knowing” (p. 7). Parrish depicts the gathering of natural history specimens and the exchange of information about natural history, primarily through the creation of an elaborate correspondence network (the reason why this book ought to be of interest to archivists; in addition to letters, travel narratives, publications, reports, and other documents are circulated in this network). “Colonial subjects in America were not mere collectors for the knowledge makers of the metropole. European correspondents depended upon locals for their kinds of expertise: identifying a novel specimen, understanding its properties or behavior, reporting on or depicting the specimen in its live and natural context, or seeing the interdependence of plants and animals” (p. 8). Parrish provides descriptions of the nature and content of letters: “These were likely to be one-to-three page hodgepodge descriptions of whatever the American correspondent had observed since his or her last letter. They often accompanied or gave notice of shipped specimens. The metropolitan correspondents wrote back with the latest scientific news, with effusive thanks for the specimen gift, with more requests, and often sent back English flora or exotic flora recently arrive in London” (p. 18), And so forth.

The use of correspondence as a main pillar of the natural history network is another reminder about how earlier information societies functioned long before the advent of the computer and what we now consider to be THE information society. While Parrish’s book is not just a study of the correspondence, read by archivists it can provide another means that they understand something more about why and how such correspondence was created and often maintained (and in some instances even published in scientific and other journals). It is a book similar to others by scholars such as David Cressy and Robert Darnton demonstrating how information and communication networks were created and sustained, leaving behind heaps of archival documentation. As time wore on, the use of correspondence became more sophisticated. As Parrish examines the development of transatlantic friendships, often between people who never met face-to-face, she observes, “Letters possessed not only evidentiary but also diagnostic force. They would not only reflect but reveal what otherwise remained hidden. Letters were to be the proper modern instrument for probing human nature” (p. 137).

Dice el spot de la invitación: ¿Qué tiene que ver el derecho a la información con la justicia, la salud o la educación?; ¿cómo afecta la transparencia en la gestión pública o en la democracia?; ¿cómo ayuda la rendición de cuentas a mejorar el sistema educativo?. Entre otros asuntos que autoridades y sociedad analizarán en el encuentro de la semana de la transparencia convocado por ese Instituto.

SEMINARIOS DE DIAGNOSTICO LOCALES (UNAM) Por: Torres Monroy LuisAcadémico Centro de Estudios sobre la Universidad Fecha de registro: 21 / 04 / 2003 He creído siempre que la forma adecuada de hacer trascender una actividad, cualquiera que esta sea, parte necesariamente de una apropiación cabal de la disciplina que la circunscribe y arropa. Por ello, en esta ponencia se expondrán en primer lugar

Flickr: There were some interesting comments on the “Why Post images on Flickr?” post, raising questions about whether our archival images actually fall within Flickr’s policy for acceptable content. Elizabeth wrote:

“Right up top in Flickr’s Community Guidelines, it says ‘Flickr accounts are intended for personal use, for our members to share photos and video that they themselves have created.’ Archival collections really don’t fit this definition, unless perhaps you consider digitizing an archival image or document ‘creating’ it, which seems like a stretch. . . .”

I think the intent of this is supposed to be to stop people from posting things that they don’t have the copyright to. Under the “What To Do” section they say:

Respect the copyright of others. This means don’t steal photos or videos that other people have shared and pass them off as your own. (That’s what favorites are for.)

And under “What Not To Do” they say:

Don’t upload anything that isn’t yours. This includes other people’s photos, video and/or stuff you’ve collected from around the Internet. Accounts that consist primarily of such collections may be terminated at any time.

I think based on these guidelines if you scan images that your archives owns and that you believe you have the copyright for (or that you believe is out of copyright), you should be fine. I hadn’t heard previously about any archives getting kicked off Flickr for posting images they didn’t create–does anyone have any more examples or insight on this?

Facebook: Well,  thanks to your support the “Get Tom Hyry on Facebook!” group (on Facebook, of course) now has 74 members. It hasn’t grown quite as quickly as I hoped–I think all the regular archivist Facebook users have joined, but I also think some people need to come back from vacation and check their accounts. If you’ve got an account but haven’t checked in lately or you haven’t joined yet, now’s the time! You’d be amazed at what archival celebrities have rallied to the cause. Rumor has it Tom is buying drinks in San Francisco for all the members of the group (although I don’t think he’s heard that rumor yet . . .).

Bloggers: How about Saturday for the Blogger (and Friends of Bloggers) Happy Hour? There’s nothing going on after the closing plenary, and by that time maybe we can have scoped out a good location. An alternative would be to suggest that maybe people skip the Awards Ceremony or that maybe we just all try to meet up at one of the other two receptions. Any thoughts? Who wants to meet up?

And, keep checking back on the “Searching for 2.0-related sessions at the SAA Annual Meeting ” post–people are still contributing their thoughts on what sessions (and events) you might want to attend at the Annual Meeting.

Nou, het ging met veel trompetgeschal.. de lancering van Google Knol. Maar inmiddels denk ik dat ik Knol maar even links ga laten liggen.

Dit zou dan de Google-tegenhanger van Wikipedia moeten zijn, lijkt het, maar dan eentje waarin autoriteit weer meespeelt. Da's op zich geen verkeerde gedachte. Ware het niet dat hij in Knol niet werkt.. want letterlijk iedereen kan een autoriteit zijn! Tja..

Een eigen knol voor het BHIC
Al heel snel had ik voor het BHIC een eigen knol aangemaakt, die je hier kunt vinden.

Maar ach, wat zeg ik nou toch voor domme dingen? Je vindt namelijk helemaal niets! Zelfs niet als je specifiek zoekt met 'bhic', wat om iets over het BHIC te vinden toch een logische zoekterm is. Nee, je moet echt speciaal aanklikken dat je nóg meer resultaten wilt zien, pas dan zie je onze knol.

Ik denk dat-ie te weinig tekst bevat, een te lage rating heeft of zo. Ach ja..

Allerlei knollen voor Nederland
Als encyclopedische tegenhanger van Wikipedia valt Knol door de mand. Eigenlijk staat Knol ook niet eens vol met lemma's, maar met artikelen, zoals deze over de verspreiding van de Robiniagalmug in Nederland. Wel interessant - over een niche gesproken - maar niet iets voor een encyclopedie..

En als je dan enkele lemma's bekijkt, zoals hier en (!) hier voor het lemma Netherlands, dan merk je dat je net zo goed gelijk naar het gelijknamige lemma in Wikipedia had kunnen gaan. Daar zijn de teksten namelijk vandaan geplukt. Sommige 'autoriteiten' heten zelfs Wiki Pedia!

Is kennis dus al gejat en versnipperd, andere lemma's zijn dan weer gewoon leeg. Kwalitatief gezien staat het dus 1-0 voor de encyclopedie zónder autoriteit.. ;-)

Knollen voor archieven
Hmm.. Het Archief Eemland heeft blijkbaar ook al een eigen knol, zie ik nu.

Zelfs de naam 'knol' vind ik trouwens maar niks.. ;-)

Maar goed, ik ben zo flauw niet.. dus als ik dit weekend of zo ergens een gaatje vind, dan ga ik mijn knol eens naar het Engels vertalen en zal ik ook wel een berg tags toevoegen. Die laatste zal ik bij gebrek aan een echte mogelijkheid daartoe maar gewoon ergens onderaan intypen.

Je moet toch wat met zo'n onwille knol!

Plaatje

I just noticed this month-old article from the Wall Street Journal: So much for the ‘looted sites’. It says that many sites of purported looting of antiquities in Southern Iraq were actually not looted, although they are in danger. I can’t claim to know what’s really going on here; this issue has a lot of layers to it that I haven’t peeled back. I have covered it here. (Iraq’s archives are another issue.)

I wonder how many copyright violations we’ll see at this service, a social publishing site that’s in beta called Issuu. Here’s what it says at one spot on the Issuu site: Issuu is the place for online publications: Magazines, catalogs, documents, and stuff you’d normally find on print. It’s the place where YOU become the publisher: [...]

The Science Dissemination Unit (SDU) of the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP) in Trieste, Italy, has published for electronic download as a PDF file or viewing online using the Issuu Inc. social publishing service and viewer Science Dissemination using Open Access: A Compendium of Selected Literature on Open Access, edited by E. [...]