By Lisa Grimm, Superfectablog.com
It's typically an extremely rare occurrence when my worlds
collide - oddly, this is the second
time it has happened this year.
As many in the archival world know, I write about horse racing. And some in the horse
racing world have a vague idea that I'm an archivist, but people in
both spheres are probably a little unclear about what happens in the other one.
Here's the short version for each group - first, for the archivists: horses run
around a track and I comment on it. American horse racing has a long and
storied history that could be more (and here I'm dropping in a professional
buzzword) accessible - but more on that later. For the racing folk: archivists
preserve documents, photographs, ephemera, etc. from the past so that people
(and not just historians) can learn about (and from) that shared past. We also
do a lot of complicated things with digitization and metadata - while the usual
adjectives employed to describe our profession are 'dusty' or 'musty,' that's
only a small part of what we do.
Quite often, the archives (and the archivists who work there) are located in
the basement - and that becomes a major issue in, say, a flood. The Kentucky Derby Museum
at Churchill Downs just completed a renovation to their basement (where the
storage and, as ever, archives are), including new shelving, when they were hit
by a
flash flood yesterday.
New shelving to an archivist is a precious commodity - we are rarely lucky
enough to get shelving that is truly designed for archival use and it is
difficult to raise money for it (as we have been doing in our archives for many
a long day) because it's not immediately apparent to someone outside the
profession how much the right shelves help protect and maintain the collection.
But of course, even the best compact shelving cannot save the collections from
the archivist's second-greatest fear - water. At least one of the comments on the
Courier-Journal article by Jennie Rees is wondering why the historical
collections were stored in the basement, where they would be subject to
flooding - and while that may seem unusual to the public, that's essentially
standard practice; except for the few institutions that have successfully
implemented a visible storage project, cultural institutions cannot take up
exhibit space with shelves and processing space - and you need a large open
space for most useful shelving systems. Best practices may seek to get the
archives and artifact storage above the flood line, but it rarely happens -
indeed, when our archives moves into our new building,
we will again be in the basement. (It may come as something of a surprise to
some to discover that water damage happens even when collections are stored on
higher levels - leaky pipes are a constant source of worry in the archival
world).
Regardless of how the water gets in, archivists usually respond in just the way
the Derby Museum staff did - by creating a human
chain to get the materials and artifacts to higher ground. To add insult to
injury, several museum employees lost their cars to the floodwaters while
working to save the collections - but the good news is that it seems nothing
was lost - just made very wet. Conserving wet materials is not as easy as just
letting them dry off - the most effective approach is to have them freeze-dried
and dealt with by a disaster mitigation firm. Obviously, that's not cheap, but
some organizations are lucky enough to have insurance to cover those costs - I
don't know whether that's true of the Museum, but I hope they are able to get
their collections back to the pre-flood state I enjoyed when visiting the
Museum only last month.
Public libraries are rarely that fortunate - and the Louisville Public Library
sustained very serious damage to both
the physical plant and the books and computers (as did several of the branch
libraries). In their case, a
fund has been set up and donations are being accepted; keeping libraries
running can be a challenge under the best circumstances, but the combination of
a down economy and a major disaster is one that no library director wants to
face - it's a worthy cause.
I mentioned accessibility above and the lack of accessibility to horse racing
history was, rather serendipitously, the topic of Teresa
Genaro's article in The Saratogian today (a note to the archivists
reading - Teresa writes the rather wonderful Brooklyn Backstrech blog and was
one of my co-bloggers for BelmontStakes.com
this year). She noted how difficult it was to authoritatively establish basic
facts not only from the more distant past, but even statistics from recent
years - and as someone on both sides of that fence, I couldn't agree more with
her conclusions. American racing history is fairly widely dispersed - there's
the Keeneland
Library, the currently-damp Kentucky
Derby Museum, the International
Museum of the Horse, the National
Museum of Racing and the National Sporting
Library and while there is some crossover, for the most part, each has a
different collection policy and research goals.
That list does not even begin to take into account an individual racetrack's
holdings (and who knows what happens when they close - where are the records of
Ak-Sar-Ben? Who will take
on those of Hollywood
Park?) including their
film and video storage. Other sources of racing history, like the Daily
Racing Form or Equibase, tend to be considerably more proprietary about
their information. Unlike the aforementioned libraries and museums, making
their information accessible is not the goal - and while that makes a certain
amount of sense in their business models, it would be nice if they turned their
data over to one of the aforementioned institutions or had a records management
policy that involved making that data available online (with a preservation
copy elsewhere) after a certain time period - I'd be happy to recommend a
number of Kentucky-based archivists for the job.
It's difficult enough for researchers to find the information they are looking
for under normal conditions; dealing with a disaster like the flooding in Kentucky makes the
archivist's goal of preserving the past and providing access that much more
difficult. The only potential upside is that the spotlight these cultural
institutions unwittingly find themselves in brings in some much-needed funds
for repairs and, hopefully, future improvements that serve both the collections
and the public.