There are also the very important issues of artifactual value and
provenance. An artifact (physical object) may have importance for other
reasons then the content in and of itself. For example a copy of the King
James Bible may in and of itself might not be a unique artifact, but the
one owned by Ho Chi Minh (no kidding) has artifactual value even if the
content is not unique. Context is an important aspect of artifactual value.
There are many examples of this.
Similarly provenance frequently relies on the artifact. There are many
examples of this both in the tax code (the original is almost worth MUCH
more than a copy) and just in understanding and deeper understanding
perhaps from a different perspective. A few examples.
Which would you rather own - the Mona Lisa or a file (digitally accurate to
the pixel) of the Mona Lisa? Easy answer.
Many years ago I was at Yale when they were in the middle of scanning an
illustrated manuscript. I commented on how accurate a job they were doing,
but a scholar remarked "yes but it doesn't matter if you are doing research
on Iron Gall Ink - it is worthless". Inks had a direct impact on the
history of printing..... We need to recognize that digitization has
limitations depending on what one is doing and the application. One might
find that a digitized audio file may be adeq
Further proving that THIS document is in fact the original "and not THAT
one" is all about provenance
On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 2:31 PM Steven Smolian <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steven Smolian
> Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2020 2:18 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Question for Archivists and Preservationists
>
> There are audio-focused archives and those where the object is also of
> importance. The ability of scholars to examine a record is important when
> they are being scholarly. Clues about a recordings history are embedded in
> shellac rather than amber. One example that comes to mind is if the matrix
> number of a pressing is in the same typeface as its earliest issue. If
> not, it may indicate a later stamper, a reworked groove or a dubbing.
> Labels often change when repressings are made. Electrical records made by
> the Western Electric method are coded differently from those using other
> systems, information helpful when making equalization choices.
>
> Speaking of dubbing, are we commiting hubris by assuming that a copying
> job can never be done better in the future?
>
> Steve Smolian
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen M.H. Braitman
> Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2020 2:03 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Question for Archivists and Preservationists
>
> Hello, one and all:
>
> We almost made it through this mad year. Glad you’re all still around.
>
> I’d appreciate some feedback to this issue directed to those of you who
> manage collections and archives and are tasked with preservation,
> acquisition, and/or “refinement” :
>
> Is the importance of physical material in libraries and archives
> decreasing due to the surge in usage of digital files?
>
> Do you see a future when physical artifacts are no longer collected,
> archived, preserved, once they have been effectively digitized or otherwise
> electronically manifested?
>
> And, finally, is this situation causing institutions to, at least, look
> more seriously at their archives and collections for their pertinence and
> relevance, thus causing a paring down or refocusing of their priorities?
>
> Sorry to be long-winded, but thanks for any thoughts you might have.
>
> Happy new year!
>
>
> Stephen
>
>
>
>
> Stephen M.H. Braitman, ASA
> Accredited Senior Appraiser of Music
> Archives & Memorabilia
> American Society of Appraisers
>
> www.MusicAppraisals.com
>
> 415-897-6999
>
|