Invitation to a Bonfire: Reappraisal and Deaccessioning of Records as Collection

Management Tools in an Archives—A Reply to Leonard Rapport

Author(s): Karen Benedict
Source: The American Archivist, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Winter, 1984), pp. 43-49
Published by: Society of American Archivists
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40292635
Accessed: 23-12-2016 18:41 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40292635?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Society of American Archivists is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The American Archivist

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:41:41 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
American Archivist / Vol. 47, No. 1 / Winter 1984 43

Invitation to a Bonfire:
Reappraisal and Deaccessioning of Records as Collection
Management Tools in an Archives - A Reply to Leonard
Rapport

KAREN BENEDICT

Abstract: Despite Leonard Rapport's articulate argument for it, reapprais

deaccessioning of archival records is an inappropriate tool for collection
ment. Such broad-scale review is warranted only when the generally applied sta
of appraisal at an institution are erroneous, when there is systematic error rath
possible misjudgment in applying those standards in specific cases. The pro
for reappraising and possibly deaccessioning records is during the processing of
accessioned records, which may render old ones redundant or irrelevant to the
ing nature of the holdings.

About the author: Karen Benedict has been archivist for the Nationwide Insurance Com
Columbus, Ohio, since 1975. She holds a B.A. from the University of Illinois and
from the University of Maryland. She was selected for Beta Phi Mu (1979). She is a m
the Society of American Archivists, the Midwest Archives Conference, the Society of
chivists, the American Library Association, and the Association of College and R
Libraries. Her publications include A Select Bibliography on Business Archives and
Management published by SA A. She served on the Task Force for the 1982 revision of
Forms Manual and has published articles in both library and archives journals.
This article is an expanded version of a presentation at the Midwest Archives Co
Meeting, 5-7 May 1983, in Chicago, Illinois.
The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of her husband, Professor M
Benedict, Department of History, Ohio State University, in the preparation of this ar

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:41:41 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
44 American Archivist / Winter 1984

tically, I previously
Little has been written think there can be little
ondoubt
the
subject of collection management. that the main savings Rapport envisages
Although the archival literature abounds would come in space, the shortage of
with articles on appraisal, arrangement,which is a constant concern to us.
and description principles, it is deficient Rapport's assumption is that every
in addressing problems of administra- public, and probably every private, in-
tion. Leonard Rapport has recently pub-stitution's archives contains some
lished a provocative article advocating records that should not have been acces-
reappraisal and deaccessioning as tools sioned and processed in the first place,
for archival management. Rapport's ar-and consequently should not be kept.
ticle is the only one on the subject.1 This is probably true. Not every institu-
Library literature, on the other hand, is tion has sound collection policies and
filled with articles on collection manage- appraisal criteria. Records appraisal re-
ment techniques such as reappraisal, quires subjective judgment on the archi-
weeding or withdrawal, and the con- vist's part, and mistakes in judgment
troversial "zero growth" library con- can be made. The problem, as I will
cept.2 While this literature is instructive, argue below, is how to identify them.
and every archivist should be familiar Rapport is also correct in stating that ar-
with it, library solutions to collection chivists sometimes accept records of
management problems do not offer dubious value in exchange for the op-
much guidance in dealing with unique portunity to accession valuable records
documents. When a document is from the same source. It is not so cer-
tain,
destroyed, it is gone forever. There is however,
no that Rapport's proposal
other repository where a copy to
ofreappraise
the and to deaccession records
on a regular basis is the best solution to
same item, or even another item contain-
ing the same information, willthe problem. Rather, broad-scale reap-
repose.
praisal and deaccessioning of records
Therefore, an archivist must approach
reappraisal and deaccessioning as should be viewed as crisis management
management tools with extreme caution.techniques that may seriously undermine
Rapport argues that deaccessioningan archival program if they are applied.
improperly accessioned records would Rapport ascribes shallow motives to
save space, material, energy, and per- those archivists who do not approve of
sonnel costs. Of course, a program ofor practice reappraisal: propinquity - or
reappraisal would entail personnel coststhe "Records are on the shelves and they
should remain there" syndrome; ego -
of its own. Material and energy cost sav-
ings would be marginal at best. Realis- or the "Since I determined these records

'Leonard Rapport, "No Grandfather Clause: Reappraising Accessioned Records," American Archivist
44 (Spring 1981): 143-150.
2For recent discussions of collection development, weeding or withdrawal, and "zero growth" libraries
see, for example: J. Gormly Miller, Collection Development and Management at Cornell (Ithaca, N.Y.:
Cornell University Libraries, 1981); Barbara Lehocky, Academic Reference Collection Development:
Policy Statements (Arlington, Va.: Educational Resources Information Center, 1979); Peter Model,
"Books at Auction: The Art of Deaccessioning," Wilson Library Bulletin 56 (September 1981): 33-38;
David Ernest Clarke, A Survey of the Weeding of Library Books in the U.S.A. and the U.K., 1902 to Date
(Loughborough, England: Loughborough University of Technology, 1981); Daniel Iorrumun Tsahembra,
"Weeding: The Professional Practice of Getting Rid of Dead Wood in the Library Collection," Library
Scientist 8 (May 1981): 49-64; Gary S. Lawrence, "A Cost Model for Storage and Weeding Programs,"
College and Research Libraries 42 (March 1981): 139-147; "Zero Growth: When Is NOT-enough Enough?
A Symposium," Journal of Academic Librarianship 5 (November 1975): 4-11; and Wilfred Ashworth,
"Self-renewing Libraries," New Library World 78 (March 1977): 47-48.

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:41:41 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Invitation to a Bonfire 45

were worth serious,

keeping they
an archivist cannot be totally sh
disposed of" confident
syndrome;
that he has found material and
or the "I don't understand
that was wrongly accessioned; he can the
I am unsure of their
only identify that which value,
he now believes so
ter keep them"
to have beensyndrome.
wrongly accessioned. This
In fact, it isis more
a disagreement inlikely that
judgment about ar-
chivists do not regularly
chival value. There is some hubris in- reapp
holdings as
a
volvedstandard collec
in substituting one's own judg-
agement practice ment for that of an earlier appraiser,
because it is
sive to be effective. Most of us do not based purely on subjective grounds. The
have sufficient staff and budget to go very definition of the archival value of
through a regular and systematic records is "the determination in ap-
réévaluation of the records that have praisal that records are worthy of in-
been processed, shelved, and entered definite
in- or permanent preservation by an
archival agency" because of their "his-
to the finding aids. The average institu-
tion struggles to process those records torical, continuing, or enduring value."3
that have not yet been made available Thus, unless an institution's collection
for users. That step should take policies and appraisal criteria were
precedence over removing records which generally unsound, their accessioning
already have been made available. There defines their archival value; and their
are other more compelling reasons to re-
policies should be maintained despite the
ject Rapport's invitation to a bonfire, opinion of later evaluators that a
however. mistake was made in a specific case.
Rapport's argument is most per- Since our view of what is of enduring
suasive when he speaks of scheduling value changes constantly, to permit
reappraisal in order to find those regular reappraisal (actually rejudg-
materials that were wrongly accessioned ment) is to sanction the destruction of
in the first place - those without archival records according to transitory criteria.4
value. This argument should be con- To argue otherwise requires the convic-
sidered with extreme caution. First, it is tion that there is some scientific method
a serious strategic mistake for the head of appraisal, which would compel archi-
of an archives to suggest that, to con- vists to agree with the results of its ap-
serve space, the staff should search the plication. Yet Rapport himself admits,
holdings for records that can be discard- "Appraising is at best an inexact
ed. An archivist should not voluntarily science, perhaps more an art," and that
participate in the dismantling of archival his proposal would "make the survival
holdings, as to do so would give non- of accessioned records subject to chang-
professionals, who usually control the ing standards."5
institutions and administer the budgets, Since a sound system of appraisal
the notion that they can legitimately itself defines what records are of ar-
resort to piecemeal dismemberment of chival value for future archivists, it is
holdings whenever there is a need to totally destructive to an archival pro-
economize. Second, and even more gram to make reappraisal, collection
3The definition of archival value is taken from Frank B. Evans et al., "A Basic Glossary for Archivists,
Manuscript Curators, and Records Managers," American Archivist 37 (July 1974): 417. The emphasis is
mine.
4This view is based on the idea of "historical relativism." For the clearest discussion of that idea, see
Carl Becker, "Everyman His Own Historian," American Historical Review 37 (January 1932): 221-236;
and Charles A. Beard, "Written History As an Act of Faith," Ibid. 39 (January 1934): 219-227.
'Rapport, "No Grandfather Clause," pp. 149, 146.

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:41:41 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
46 American Archivist / Winter 1984

transfer, or destruction the appropriate procedures and

of records thestan-
accepted professional approach to dards to follow are outlined. The
handling space or budgetary constraints. literature substantiates the claim that the
If the archivist believes that the collec- long-range, overall savings in space
tion policies and appraisal criteria have justifies the expense incurred.6
been unsound and have led to the acces- If, on the other hand, hard copy
sioning of records of dubious value, storage is not the main problem, or if
then it should be the administrator's microfilming is impossible for lack of
sufficient resources, then the archivist
highest priority to reevaluate the criteria
for accessioning records in the institu- may need to resort to crisis management
tion. All of the staff should be educated solutions, such as reappraisal and deac-
about the importance of carefully cessioning of records or severely limiting
evaluating the historical and evidential new accessions to the collection. Once
significance of records and of determin- again, it should be emphasized that crisis
ing how records being appraised relate management techniques are usually un-
to the overall mission of the institution satisfactory when scrutinized in relation
and fit with the current holdings. to overall objectives. They are short-
Reappraisal does have a place in col- sighted, short-range, and meant to pro-
lection management, however. Space vide immediate results regardless of the
and budget crises do occur under cir- long-term consequences of the action.
cumstances out of the control of the ar- If one must reappraise holdings in
chivist. The need to reappraise holdings,order to alleviate overcrowding, what
in the hope that records will be foundcriteria should be applied in the reap-
that may be eliminated, usually arises praisal? Rapport suggests several, but he
when an institution experiences severemakes clear that it is not reappraised
space or budget problems. If, as is fre- value alone that should determine
quently the case, the archives is short of whether a group of records will be kept.
stack space and the bulk of holdings areThe main goal should be to balance
in hard copy format, then microfilming value against the cost of maintenance,
of the records is a desirable solution. he states; and he quotes with approval
While it is true that undertaking an G. ar-Philip Bauer's comment, regarding
chival quality microfilming program in- the records of the National Archives,
volves a substantial commitment of per- that "the question of what absolute
sonnel and funds, for most institutions quantity should be retained depends in
the benefits outweigh the costs. To aid the last analysis upon how much the Na-
the archivist in deciding whether or not tion is willing to pay for the purpose."7
to microfilm and to assist in the estab- This seems inconsistent with Rapport's
lishment of a microfilming program,basic argument, however, for it converts
there is a considerable literature in which a search for those records without ar-

6Some recent articles regarding the advantages of micrographics programs are "Conversion to Microfilm
Proves a Wise Investment," Office (December 1981): 92; L.S. Lee, "Converting Paper Records to Micro-
media," Journal of Systems Management 32 (August 1981): 32-35; (September 1981): 35-41; and (October
1981): 39-42; B. Burnett, "Our Converting to Micrographics Proved a Real Success Story," Office (Oc-
tober 1980): 159-160; A. Niles, "Conversion of Serials From Paper to Microform," Microform Review 9
(Spring 1980): 90-95; D.D. Thompson, "Comparing Costs: An Examination of the Real and Hidden Costs
of Different Methods of Storage," ASIS Bulletin 7 (October 1980): 14-15; "Micrographics: The Cost Ef-
fective Office Partner," Office (January 1983): 151; and "Microfilm Retrieval is Money in the Bank,"
Modern Office Procedures (September 1980): 182.
7Rapport, "No Grandfather Clause," p. 143.

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:41:41 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Invitation to a Bonfire 47

chival value into one for those whose counting controls are tightened, the cita-
value is, in the opinion of the reap- tion of research use becomes increasing-
praiser, not worth the cost of storage. ly important."10
This makes mincemeat of the search for Rapport's description of this criterion
valueless collections. Moreover, by this is somewhat ambiguous. He suggests
criterion a large, space-consuming col- that during the intervals between reap-
lection very well might be deaccessioned praisal - perhaps twenty, twenty-five, or
before a smaller one of less value. There thirty years - the archivist could
is no escaping the fact that such an out-"analyze what uses, if any, are made of
come damages the integrity of the pro- the records."11 This suggests that past
gram. Rapport argues eloquently that use may be the criterion. Rapport also
archivists have a responsibility to make suggests asking, however, "is there a
sure that those who provide the funds do reasonable expectation that anybody,
not "pay for preserving what isn't worth with a serious purpose, will ever ask for
the cost of preserving,"8 but it is circular these records?"12
reasoning to argue that "it costs too The problem with the first version is
much, therefore it is not worth the that frequency of past use is not a valid
cost." Something other than cost itself determinant of the archival or research
must determine whether records should value of records. This is particularly true
be deaccessioned. when we use a limited time period of
In determining the archival value of twenty or thirty years as the basis for
material upon reappraisal, Rapport re-judgment. It is, to say the least, inconsis-
jects most of the criteria presently ac-tent to speak of the enduring value of
cepted by the profession. Use of the records and then to suggest that endur-
records, he believes, should be the maining value is for only a small portion of
criterion in determining value.9 one man's lifetime. There are records
Maynard Brichford shares some of histhat will be of great value to future
enthusiasm for frequency of use as agenerations, regardless of how much
measure for the value of records. Brich-current use we make of them. Look, for
example, at Emmanuel LeRoy Ladurie's
ford says, "The value of archives is
wholly dependent upon the existence of masterpiece of the Annales school,
persons attaching value to them. Rates Montaillou." If the records on which he
of activity may vary depending on the based his work had been evaluated by
clientele of the archives, the researchearlier generations of archivists on the
popularity of the subject matter, trendsbasis of their use, as Rapport has sug-
gested, they would have been destroyed
in methodology, and the availability of
other sources, but one of the best in-centuries ago. It is a-historical and anti-
dicators of research value is use intellectual to determine that, because a
group of records has not been used
statistics. As archival resources increase
and budgeting, appropriation, and within
ac- a limited period of time, those

•Ibid., p. 144.
9Ibid., pp. 145-149.
l0Maynard J. Brichford, Archives & Manuscripts: Appraisal & Accessioning (Chicago: Society of
American Archivists, 1979), p. 9.
"Rapport, "No Grandfather Clause, " p. 145.
"Ibid., p. 149.
"Emmanuel LeRoy Ladurie, Montaillou: The Land of Promised Error, trans. Barbara Bray (New York:
George Braziller, 1978).

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:41:41 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
48 American Archivist / Winter 1984

records are valueless and should be dis- have not yet been accessioned, a process
posed of by the institution holding them. which can provide guidelines for the
The lack of use by researchers may be reappraisal of previously accessioned
due to poor finding aids or a lack of records. When a record group or series
knowledge of the records on the part of of records is being evaluated for inclu-
the reference staff rather than the intrin- sion in the holdings, one appraisal
sic value of the records themselves. criterion that should be applied is an
assessment
Keeping statistics on the use of records is of the relationship of these
important. The importance is not indocuments
the to others that are already
evaluation of the records but in the held. It is at this stage that the archivist
evaluation of the quality of the institu- should have a thorough knowledge of
tion's guides to its holdings and the what other records among the holdings
quality of the finding aids for the in- pertain to the records being appraised.
dividual record groups or manuscript The archivist can then select for reten-
collections, as well as the familiarity of tion those series of records that have the
the reference staff with the holdings. If a greatest research value and perhaps
researcher is unaware of the existence of eliminate those that are of more limited
a group of records or is not informed value and are no longer necessary as
that the records contain information documentation. If this sort of reap-
that will contribute to his research, thenpraisal in terms of the complementary
those records will remain unused despite value of records for research is a regular
their significance and value. and systematic part of the appraisal pro-
If it is reasonable expectation of usecess, then the bulk of nonarchival
materials that, over the years, have crept
that is to be the criterion, one is faced
with the same problem discussed aboveinto collections can be identified and
- simply substituting the judgment of eliminated.
a In a crisis, the same criterion
later appraiser for an earlier one. Onceshould be used; but the search for
again, changing notions of significance duplication must be inaugurated
guarantee deaccessioning based on tran- separately from the appraisal of new
sitory standards. records; and a large staff must be com-
Initial sound appraisal standards willmitted to the crash program. Only after
eliminate the need for a large-scale pro-that, and with full recognition of the
gram of reappraisal and deaccessioning violence done to archival principles,
should an archives undertake a true
in an institution. All repositories should
periodically review their appraisal reappraisal - the réévaluation of the
criteria to assess their validity. Also, to judgment of the original appraiser.
avoid the processing of records of Concluding his article, Rapport sur-
doubtful value, there should be periodic mises that "there wouldn't be all that
internal reviews of how the appraisal much difference" between a world in
standards are being applied by staff which all documents had been saved and
members. were available and one in which all
Although the large-scale reappraisal records had been destroyed a century
and deaccessioning of records already earlier. Of course, if he really believes
among an archives' holdings should be that, then by his value-compared-to-cost
used only as a last resort, in a crisis, criterion, all records more than 100
there is a limited but important role for years old should be deaccessioned. As
them as an integrated part of the process Brichford says, "The value of archives is
of initially appraising records which wholly dependent upon the existence of

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:41:41 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Invitation to a Bonfire 49

persons attaching value to them." ducted in archival records that deter-

Evidently Rapport agrees, but he seemsmines their value but rather the con-
to think that only those who use the ar- tribution to human knowledge and to
chives attach that value to them. What the public good that result. We need to
they do with the information does notkeep this uppermost in our minds. We
"make all that much difference." Our have a responsibility to identify and to
society does place a value upon the preserve the records that will afford
maintenance of the records of its institu- researchers, not only in our lifetimes but
tions, and that is what makes the ar- in the future, the widest opportunity to
chivist's job significant. Society feels conduct the studies that will enrich and
that it is not the amount of research con- benefit society.

The Fellows' Posner Prize

For the past several years, the Society has had but one award for writing, the
Waldo Gifford Leland Prize, given for the outstanding separate publication of
the preceding year. Article-length contributions to archival scholarship, however
outstanding, received no special recognition or incentive. Consequently, the
Fellows of the Society have offered, and the Council has accepted, the establish-
ment of a new award: The Fellows' Posner Prize. Honoring one of the most out-
standing archival scholars and teachers of the 20th century - Ernst Posner - it
will reward the best article published in the preceding year's volume of the
American Archivist The winning article will be selected by a subcommittee of
SAA's Awards Committee. The cash prize will be awarded at the annual meeting.
The first award, for an article published in volume 45, will be presented at the
annual meeting in Minnesota in October.

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:41:41 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms