When I was reading, “Book Histoy from the Archival Record,” by Katherine Bode and Robert Osborne, I was intrigued by how much information can be gleaned from archives. Within Bode and Osborne’s chapter they are adamant about conveying how archvies are able to tell so many stories beyond the content of the collection. For example neart the start of the chapter, they write, “Quite simply, achival research provides the principal way for book historialns to explore and understand the history and nature of authorship, publication, distribution, and reception of print culture.” They discuss the corresondence that happens between the people who are involved in bookmaking and how it can reveal so much about the context of the product or the book’s market. The letters can offer a lot of insight into the industry. Although archvies seem simple, merely collections of media used for remembrance or preservation, the can reveal so much more than that. The act of creating the archive is one of its most crucial aspects. Bode and Osborne write, “Most records have already undergone a process of ‘archiving’. Individuals make decisions about what documents they want to keep or discard… All archives are formed in relation the methods, rules and spacial limitations of their managers, whether the archivist is professional or ameteur.” This quote brought to mind the act of reading that we have discussed in class. Just as no two people can read the same way, there are no two archives that are identical. The thought and intention that goes into the archives are what makes them crucial to society. The archives provoke questions such as “who determines what is kept in or out of the archives?” or “why is the media worth preserving?” So many factors can be at play for this, including accessibility, time, space, and money. The items stored in an archive can say a million things about the owner or curator. Studying all aspects of the archive can reveal a lot about the archivist, society, and the content. After detailing these archival studies, Bode and Osborne write, “such studies as these draw attention to the content of archives by compiling rich and compelling narratives that make the archives ‘talk’.” The ‘talking’ archive was extremely fascinating to me because the media stored within the archives have a conversation with the ones who are studying it which leads to questions and ideas flowing back and forth between them.
BOOKS!!
ECL 596. Fall 2025. Professor Jessica Pressman with Anna Culbertson
Great point here: “Studying all aspects of the archive can reveal a lot about the archivist, society, and the content.” We can– and should– read and close read archives… at least think critically about them!
Hi Dakota, I like how you pointed out the specific example from the reading of letters and correspondence held in archives providing insight into the industry of book writing, publication, and information storage. After our visit to Special Collections I focused mostly on the letters that were in the folders and cases which I felt created a paper trail and story to how work and ideas traveled between friends and colleagues. I found it so interesting to be able to find the exact date of when an idea or draft was sent/completed, it informs how the final product was shaped from a unique and very intimate perspective.
Hi Dakota,
I like what you bring up when you say “Just as no two people can read the same way, there are no two archives that are identical.” It really made me start thinking about the curation of archives, because they’re often created to achieve some certain goal or adhere to a particular interest. There’s a lot that is intentionally left out or accidentally overlooked. In many ways, I think the formation of an archive is similar to the writing and creation of a book. It takes a lot of hands, and all we truly see is the end result, not much of the labor that goes into its creation.