Janet Gatz

LIS 881
08/20/2017

I attended the American Library Association conference in Chicago from June 22-27, 2017. My
goals when attending the conference were to look at the different technologies and discussions being
held that concerned archives and archiving. While I know that the ALA’s primary focus would be
products, panels, and speakers focusing primarily on things related to libraries, I hoped that there would
be a few that would be geared specifically towards the archiving field. If nothing else, perhaps one or
two vendors were solely used for preservation and archival storage. Over the course of the weekend, I
attended a discussion panel on diversity in libraries, museums, and archives, as well as look through an
extensive number of booths in the dealer’s hall. While I left the event with a great deal more knowledge
about archival products and issues concerning archives, I felt that the profession was almost an
afterthought.

On the Saturday during the conference, I was fortunate enough to attend the panel titled
Examining the State of Inclusivity Across Libraries, Archives, and Museums. Speaking at this event were
Richard Ashby; Director of the Yeardon Public Library, Athena Jackson; Dorothy Foehr Huck Chair and
Head of the Eberly Family Special Collections Library at Pennsylvania State University, Alvin Dantes;
Digital Initiatives and technologies Librarian at the Art Institute of Chicago, Margaret Frasier; Collections
Manager at the National Hellenic Museum, and Dana Lamparello; Senior Archivist for Architecture and
Visual Materials at the Chicago History Museum. The discussion lasted just over an hour, with each
panelist focusing on their own areas of expertise and experiences.

Overall, many of the speaker’s points made a lot of sense but seemed a bit obvious. However,
this could be due to their points being similar to many of the points in Dominican’s Cultural Heritage
class. It was brought up that historically, each organization has been generally exclusive in the past, but
must learn to be inclusive in the future. This is seen by many decisions about what is included in an
archive, Library, or Museum collection being decided by one person. The speakers did have a point
about this exclusiveness. With most decisions about what to include being decided by one person, they
are often holes in a collection. These are not necessarily due to purposeful exclusionary ideas or
practices, but instead due to holes in their own personal knowledge and experiences. Without others
bringing their own perspectives to the collection or organization, those holes may exist indefinitely. As
the discussion explained, this is true for both collections and the organizations that house those
collections.
 One of the most important points that were brought up in the discussion was the lack of
diversity in upper management overall. As was brought up during the discussion, even in library and
museums that have a diverse staff, most people of color are found at the lower level positions. This can
make younger individuals look at the library, archiving and museum professions and believe that they
can be a shelve or general employee, but never a director, collections manager, or run an archive. This
can also make people of color who are thinking of entering the field question the need for the Library
and Information Science degree. After all, why spend the money if upward mobility in the field is
unlikely. I do believe that this point has a great deal of merit. If we as a profession wish to claim to be
diverse, it should be in all levels of the profession and not just the lower tiers. This also connects with
the previous point about needing multiple viewpoints to crated the most well-rounded version of a
collection or organization. As was brought up in the discussion, change must begin at the top. A more
diverse group leading will result in an increasingly diverse organization.

One of the points that I hadn’t thought of before this discussion was the need to look at the area
and culture outside of a library, archive, or museum when choosing to hire someone inside the
organization. This is not to see if there will be any problems locally from hiring a more diverse staff, but
to ensure that those staff hired will be comfortable enough in the neighborhood to stay long term. One
of the panelists brought up a story about a library in a medium-sized town who had hired several Asian
employees who had stayed for several months before getting a new job at a library in the larger city
near them. After this occurred multiple times, the head of the library looked into why it was occurring.
It was discovered that many of the employees were leaving because the city had more amenities that
felt like home to them. They could find those physical things that gave them an emotional connection to
their family and home in a more diverse city than living where they worked. While I understand what
the speaker’s anecdote and the point were, I do wonder what the best method would be for using this
information. The neighborhood an archive, library, or museum is in needs to have a symbiotic
relationship with the organization that is there. Do you forsake diversity because the neighborhood is
only one demographic, or attempt to make your staff more diverse and worry they will leave because
they are uncomfortable with the area? This is one of those questions that can only be answered on a
case by case basis.

The latter half of the discussion focused on creating a more diverse collection for museums and
archives, as well as the best advice if you are in charge of an already established library, archive or
museum, or head of one newly established in the neighborhood. There was an emphasis as an archivist
as a custodian, and that museums and archives specifically should work with the communities they are
part of to create a diverse collection. This yet again touches back to the idea of multiple viewpoints will
help create a diverse perspective within the collection. MPLP was also emphasized for its ability to help
cut the time between acquisition of a collection to access of that collection to the public, and it is access
to the public that is most important to allow an archive to flourish in a neighborhood. It is difficult for
an archive to flourish after all of those who would patronize it are unable to access many of the
collections due to a backlog.

Many of the suggestions given by the panel were informative, but those suggestions concerning
collections at archives and museums were items that I had heard before in previous readings and
discussions. Considering the generalized nature of the panel, focusing on multiple organizational issues,
this is unsurprising. There was also some contradiction when discussing the importance of making sure
people of color could access practicums and internships, especially paid internships. The importance of
paid internship access to those who would not otherwise be able to afford a master’s degree is
important and will allow more people of color to obtain those higher-level positions. However, no
discussion was brought up about the contradiction between paid internships and school requirements
for practicums. Many schools require a student to work an unpaid internship for their practicum, and
will not give the school credit for one that is paid. This is something that a lower income student might
not be able to afford, and the scenario was not even mentioned during the entire panel. Perhaps, if
they had more time it would have been, but I found it to be the biggest unanswered question I had
when the event was over. There was also no discussion on diversity in a collection for very small
archives or museums that may not have the money for a staff more than one or two. No suggestions on
how to ensure the collections and collaborations continue when both time and money are short.

The dealer room at the conference is almost overwhelming in its scope. With publishers, artists,
furniture companies, and technology companies it is almost impossible to find information concerning
archiving. However, with a little determination, they can be found. Many of the premier companies
handling preservation and archival materials such as Hollinger and Gaylord, were not at the conference.
As far as I could tell, there were no companies that focused on physical preservation. It was digital
preservation and digitization where products for archivists could be found. There were companies like
Accessible Archives, a company that for a fee allows organizations access to their collection of 18th and
19th-century publications. There were also business consultants available to help create a system plan
for organizing and growing your archive or library. In fact, all the products that were in the vendor’s
room that could be used in an archive were cross used for archive and library. Many seemed designed
to be used for a library’s genealogy section more than a dedicated archive. These included multiple
suppliers of digital newspaper and general primary sources. Those consultants also seemed geared
toward building a medium or large archive or library and not the very small or poorly funded ones.
Several vendors, like the game manufacturer Piazo, did attempt to try and sway me towards the
usefulness of their product in the archive setting. Suggesting that setting up a game day at the archive
would bring in more patrons, and as such bring in people who will look at the collections. While this is
creative in theory, it would probably be disastrous in execution.

Overall, I found the American Library Association conference to be enjoyable. The number of
panels and discussions focusing on archive issues was not extensive, and many focused-on topics that
touched on issues that were concerning for all libraries and archives. I did learn some new information
from the panel about the needs of diversity in libraries, museums, and archives, but there seemed to be
few suggestions on how to incorporate these some suggestions in very small archives. The vendor's
room was enjoyable to explore, but finding archive focused dealers was difficult at times. Most dealer
products that were useful for archives were often items that would be just as useful, or perhaps more
useful at a library with a genealogy section. This is not surprising overall. The American Library
Association’s primary focus is libraries, and any vendors whose products would be benefit archives or
museums solely are more likely to be found at a conference for the Society of American Archivists than
here.