RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Stephen Cohen <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 4 Dec 2009 10:53:08 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (57 lines)
I'm not sure how what I'm about to write will be received, but as the 
archivist and UT professor (and my college advisor)  David B Gracy says, 
"And now...into the breach!"

Titles and job designations cause much trouble. People get hung up on the 
title, and I'm no exception - but my wife is. She dislikes titles and 
rarely ever passes out business card for she does not want to be 
classified at this or that. But I digress. back in the day, back when FDR 
was president, the archivist cared for all records, and not just archival 
records. The archivist was in today's terms the archivist and the records 
manager. Thanks to the New Deal and WWII, production of records increased 
exponentially and beyond what the then National Archives could handle. 
Thanks to Wayne Grover and a handful of other archivists at the Nat'l 
Archives, they developed what came to be records management...a solution 
for archivists to be able to manage large volumes of records responsibly. 
And then cam the split in the profession where archivists dealt primarily 
with permanent/historical records, and records managers dealt with 
everything else. Outside of USA, UK and Australia, the title of records 
manager is virtually unknown...they're all archivists and they do the job 
of both archivists and records managers.

Having said that, I would like to see a reconciliation between the two 
halves of the profession, though realistically I don't think it will ever 
happen. In my own small way, I consider myself both archivist and records 
manager, but if I had to pick one title to describe what I do, I would 
prefer archivist as defined/used from the beginning of recorded time up 
until the post WWII split. It seems a little academic to split the 
profession in two. It would be like my wife's surgeon saying "I'm not a 
doctor, I'm a surgeon." The split has certainly hurt both archivists and 
records managers. Our thread is proof of that. And I've seen the same 
types of  threads and chipped shoulders when I subscribed to the 
archivists' listserv and when I worked among the archivists and librarians 
at Yale. Reverting back to my wife and her infinite wisdom, it's not the 
title that makes you, it's the quality of your work and how you interact 
with those around you.

I'll step off my soapbox now.


Stephen Cohen, Records Manager
MetLife \ Legal Affairs
1095 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY  10036-6796
212-578-2373
[log in to unmask]

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail 



The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is for the intended addressee only.  Any unauthorized use, dissemination of the information, or copying of this message is prohibited.  If you are not the intended addressee, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message.

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2