Barry, I have two questions for you, one centering on the U.S. Archivist nomination, the other on breaking through stereotypes.

(1)  The Archivist nomination:

You wrote, "I guess the defining moment for me came during the confirmation of the new Archivist of the U.S.  Instead of acting in what I consider a professional
manner and discussing what the qualifications of the position should entail,
a number of their so called leaders went on a crusade to publicly
assassinate the charactor of the nominee. "

I mostly followed the nomination of the U.S. Archivist on the Archives List.  I didn't see any "character assassination" by leaders of professional organizations who posted there.  The issue mostly was handled in a professional manner.   In fact, it didn't sound as if most of the Archives List subscribers knew the nominee, so they couldn't offer an opinion one way or another on his character.  Of course, there was plenty of debate about the qualities a U.S. Archivist should have, what NARA's vulnerabilities were as a subodinate agency, etc.  Most of what I remember was related to issues such as, "how do you handle controversial records from a subordinate position in an executive branch agency when the American public - people of all political persuasions -- depend on you to act in an objective, nonpartisan, nonpolitical manner, etc?  What are the pitfalls?"  Those are the areas I focused on.

Several people from various professions sent me private messages about the nominee during 2004,  offering impressions from knowing him.  I suppose they approached me because I once had worked in a high profile position with the Nixon tapes at NARA.  The private e-mails I received represented opinions and I took them as such, no more, no less.  I never passed those impressions on to the Archives List.  I didn't see anyone else doing that, either.

People did pass on links to the List from various writers such as Jon Wiener and Jacob Heilbrun, but I don't remember List members or organizational leaders saying affirmatively or categorically, "he's this" or "he's that."  So the "character" issue largely was nonexistent on the List.  It was all process, institutional placement, characterizations of the agency mandate, blah blah blah.  Actually, those same questions did crop up with Carlin's nomination ten years ago, which points to a focus on NARA as an institution, how best to protect it and the records it holds in trust for all of us, the issue of Presidential appointees, etc., --  rather than a particular nominee and his character.

Since I mostly followed the Archives List, I'm curious as to where you saw or heard "character assassination?"  I'm surprised any leaders would have resorted to that.

(2)  Stereotypes

After reading your assessment of the Archives List, I doubt anyone subscribing to Recmgmt-L would want to look at it :-)  I subscribe to both and don't find one to be better or worse than the other.  But hey, that's just my opinion, you obviously see it differently.  Neither List fully meets my needs as a Historian.  I once asked Peter K. if many people subscribed to both Lists and he said very few did.  If not the two Lists, where do you think would be the best place for archivists to learn more about the records management perspective and records managers to learn about the archival environment?  How can practioners in the two fields help to break through the stereotypes the List members have been discussing here during the last day or two?

Maarja

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance