After all the crazy last week surrounding The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), I am interested to see what others think about the subject. (If you haven't read or heard, here is a NY Times article, one of many on the subject.) There are so many facets to this, I am unsure where to even begin.
The decision of NARA to alter a photograph within a promotional display for an upcoming exhibit has led to many on social media (particularly Twitter) calling for the removal of Archivist of the United States David Ferriero.
The National Archives altered a photo it bought the copyrights to use in advertising to promote an upcoming exhibit. On the surface, this seems like nothing out of the ordinary. Most advertising photos are altered in some way, shape, or form. This is a well-known and common tactic. No archival photos or items were altered in any way, nor was anything in the exhibit.
This is not so cut and dry, however, for an institution such as NARA. Their acting job description is to be the nation's record keeper. An incident such as this damages the archive’s reputation, creating a lack of faith in the institution by the people it strives to serve.
NARA claims the choice to remove President Trump’s name from protest signs in the picture was done in an effort to avoid politicizing the exhibit and to keep the focus on the records on display. “As a non-partisan, non-political federal agency, we blurred references to the President’s name on some posters, so as not to engage in current political controversy,” Archives spokeswoman Miriam Kleiman said in an emailed statement. “Our mission is to safeguard and provide access to the nation’s most important federal records, and our exhibits are one way in which we connect the American people to those records. Modifying the image was an attempt on our part to keep the focus on the records.” (Joe Heim, Washington Post, Jan. 17, 2020)
This was truly misguided logic. Kleiman says “the images from the 2017 and 1913 marches were presented together ‘to illustrate the ongoing struggles of women fighting for their interests’.” (Heim, 2020) However, removing the subject of the women’s protest meant silencing those struggles they were trying to highlight. This allows the picture to be used out of context and removes historical accuracy.
Then there was the choice to censor words that represent women’s body parts since so many school children visit on field trips. As a mom, I know there are certain things I do not want my kids to see. However, I cannot protect them from ever seeing anything I do not like. Their questions when they do encounter such things often leads to very positive and open conversations about our personal beliefs, the words we choose to use/not use, and why the people they encountered may have chosen to do/say such things. I would have cringed to read such words while standing awkwardly by my middle school (or even high school) son, but it would have been a great time for open dialogue about a variety of subject. Should the Archives feel uncomfortable presenting something to school children, a different picture should have been chosen all together.
Were this picture to have been used in the same manner as part of an art installation, there would be a lot more leniency to the subject. The public viewing the art would see this as a commentary of history or the artist's own interpretation. However, this alteration was done by an institution that the American people need to be able to trust to be accurate. The archives do not represent one person’s view of the past. Instead it should be as accurate and complete a representation as possible.
There is no place for censorship in archives, libraries, museums or any other cultural heritage institution.
Comments