L_Evidence_3

Melissa Townsend-Crow

February 24, 2013

LIBR 285-16

Critical Review

Cloonan's article, "W(H)ITHER PRESERVATION?" is a discussion of the preservation of rare books and materials. The title is cleverly written. Her play on words at first seems a bit unpolished, however it serves to make her point and her research is solid. Not only that, it illustrates that the two factions in her paradox of preservation equation are parts of the same whole. Cloonan explores not only what, if, and how to preserve materials, but also the question of whether the need to preserve and protect rare materials supersedes the need to provide access to the same. This is an important topic and one of immense interest to this scholar.

In her introduction, Cloonan outlines the problem she is studying and presenting in the article:  that of the disproportionate focus on technical problems (as in the digitization of materials) to other, equally important concerns (p. 232).  The question posed, "Would preserving everything heighten our collective 'nervousness,' a condition brought about by 'information overload'?" (p. 233) raises the issue of the paradox. Cloonan's discussion of the paradox of preservation hits the heart of the problem she is presenting in this article. She brings up an excellent consideration in the question surrounding preservation or conservation and that is that nothing stays the same forever, and indeed, most objects were never intended to do so (p. 235). Yet, she does state, "Preservation allows for the continuity of the past with the present and the future" (p. 235) and "There is always an impulse to preserve things that are meaningful or useful to us (p. 238). In fact, she seems to stress the point of the impermanence of objects while remaining sympathetically objective to the perspective of those who see the materials of the object itself worth preserving as well as the content:  " … the public believes that a key function of these institutions is to preserve cultural heritage rather than merely to make it available" (p. 234).  This holistic approach to the paradox is also applied to the concept of the planning and creation of objects.

Before engaging in discussing this paradox, however, Cloonan includes a basic set of definitions of the terms she uses in the article, definitions in which she cites credit to Pamela Darling (1980), a preservation specialist who has written seminal works on library materials preservation. Citing Darling with respect to defining her terms lends even more credibility to Cloonan's article. Her clarification of the definitions originally devised by Darling in terms of more current preservation practices, including digitalization, makes Cloonan's approach to the problem more contemporary and creates her own authority on the subject. By reading this article, one learns the important differentiation between "preservation" and "conservation" and this is where, too, the discussion of access to materials versus access  to content only comes into play. There is a valid point raised about the veracity of digital copies which are able to be altered (and those alterations undetectable) relative to the original (Cloonan, p. 237).  One seeming inconsistency in the article that this reader found is that, although Cloonan points out that one value of an original piece versus a digital copy is that the digital copy can be altered and that alteration imperceptible, the act of preservation of the original material is alteration as is the fact of the material aging. In other words, time itself causes changes from the original piece (p. 235).

Time is also one reason Cloonan gives that preservation may not keep an object, "the preservationist can never faithfully re-create the past because she or he has never been fully a part of that past" (p. 237). She also states,

Scully astutely remarks that "perhaps for things to last one has to love their physicality in old, premodern ways. But can we ever love an individual building again as the people of the 11th century loved their churches?" [17, p. 46]. Probably not, for a host of complex historical reasons (Cloonan, p. 238).

The most important reason is stated above, that preservationists, and no one, really, has ever been a part of the time and place he or she tries to recreate through preserving or conserving materials from the distant past. While this reader does not argue this particular point with Clooney, the ideas she raises here might lead one to think that there may be some desire to experience vicariously through the handling and attempt to conserve or preserve these materials that time or at least to try and imagine it accurately.

Cloonan brings up the question of access as a means of preservation. Much like Traister (2003), Cloonan mentions that access to or promotion of rare materials, for example a digitalized copy of a manuscript, may pique interest in the item (Cloonan, p. 240) although she does state that Battin's "preservation equals access" is inaccurate, even in the context suggested by Traister. She also addresses the potential for further research on the subject of whether to, and if so, how to preserve collection material, "The library and archival literature is replete with writings about the technical aspects of preservation. But where are the articles that address preservation issues from a public policy, economic, political, social, or educational perspective?" (p. 238). 

Cloonan reaches the conclusion that further research is necessary, but in the meantime, teams of "cultural heritage managers" (library preservation administrator, the digital asset manager, the historic preservationist, the moving image archivist, and the paintings conservator, etc) (pp. 231-232) must collaborate to decide what needs to be preserved and in what manner.

References

Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., and Williams, J. M. (2008).  The craft of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cloonan, M. V. (2001).  W(h)ither preservation?  The Library Quarterly, 71(2).  pp. 231-242.  University of Chicago Press.  http://www.jstor.org/stable/4309507 .

Darling, P. W.  (1981).   Preservation:  Today on a shoestring, tomorrow …?  Library Journal, 105(7).  p. 781.  

Traister, D. (2003). Public services and outreach in rare   book, manuscript, and special collections libraries.  Library Trends, Volume 52, Issue 1, 2003, pages 87-108.  http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/library_trends/