After reading Timothy D.
Pyatt’s article The Harding Affair Letters: How One Archivist Took Every
Measure Possible To Ensure Their Preservation, I pondered upon the way that
the letters were handled by archivist Ken Duckett and also how letters disclosing
an affair of someone out of the public eye may have been treated during Duckett’s
lifetime. For instance, if Duckett received a box which included documents about
the life of someone who was a well-respected figure in their hometown, but not
so much on a national or universal scale, would the same measures to preserve
the Harding letters be illustrated in the case of this hypothetical figure? Would
these measures have been different in Duckett’s time vs. what would occur
today? Pyatt discloses that Duckett believed in preserving the letters to allow
a fuller understanding of Harding’s narrative.[1] In contrast to the Harding
letters, it can be argued that the letters of people who are not affiliated
with political or public-related careers might not hold information valuable to a wider array of people and or contexts such as politics and presidential policies.
However, if archivist like Duckett wish to preserve and allow a more holistic
understanding of a person’s life, then it may be fair to use the same zeal of
preserving documents about all narratives that are kept within an archive.
[1] Timothy
D. Pyatt Qtd. John W. Dean, foreword to The Harding Affairs: Love and Espionage
During the Great War, by James D. Robenalt (New York: Palgrave Macmillian,
2009), xi.
Comments
Post a Comment