Journal of Archival Organization

Citation

(2004), "Journal of Archival Organization", Library Review, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 123-124. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242530410522659

If ever the maxim, “do not judge a book by its title”, should be adhered to, it is with this new journal published by Haworth. The initial prospect of reviewing a new journal on “archival organization” did not appeal. It was, however, a very pleasant surprise to discover that the articles did not cover the niceties of archival cataloguing, buildings and technological systems, but provided thought provoking ideas, insights, and questions on whether archivists approaches and methodologies are adequate to the new information age. “Archival organization” is a description chosen by the editors to characterise “those functions and activities that set archivists, curators and historical records administrators apart from other information professionals”.

The editors of the Journal of Archival Organization aim to make JAO an important contribution to the archival, library, and information science literature on a global level, having gathered together an international editorial board. All the initial articles, however, have been written by archival practitioners from the USA.

In the first issue, the articles look at a wide range of issues, many of which have value to a non‐US audience. The impact of David Bearman on archival thinking is revisited by James Gehrlich, who in particular reassesses his Archival Methods and Archival Strategies. Matthew Lyons's article, examining archival Web sites aimed at “K‐12 instruction”, demonstrates how online historical records can be presented in ways that either reinforce or challenge dominant views of the past and ways of engaging with history. Jennifer Marshall explores the initial and enduring impact of the implementation of Encoded Archival Description (EAD) on archival institutions. James Quigel examines outreach programmes within the American trade union movement and argues that labour archivists must become relevant to unions if they are to succeed with their archive mission.

Finally, there are three articles dealing with issues surrounding “virtual collections”. Bradley Westbrook provokingly argues that archivists enable, while end users construct, virtual collections. William Landis demonstrates the value of the use of ISAD(G) (General International Standard Archival Description) to enable archival information systems to cope with the demands of end users in unmediated settings such as the Web. Finally, Robin Chandler explores the current strategies for the creation of virtual collections, through the example of the Online Archives of California, with a view to future uses by the end‐user.

Although all the case studies and examples are USA‐based or related, the issues and questions raised within JOA are certainly of value to archival practitioners throughout the world. Although technology is seen as the major factor in the development of “archival organization” over the last 25 years, this journal is not dominated by technological articles as the editors and contributors have kept their focus on the basics of archival function – arrangement, description, reference and access.

The time is right, as Haworth Press and the editors of Journal of Archival Organization have rightly perceived, for a journal on “archival organization”. The aim of JOA to disseminate information on both theoretical and practical aspects of archival organisation has been achieved in this first issue. This new journal should be added to the reading lists of all students in Archive Schools and to all others who take continuing professional development seriously.