![Sample our Information Science journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5940/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Communication-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Managing architectural records presents a number of challenges, especially in museums and historic sites where a number of disciplines tend to converge. This case study will chronicle the architectural drawings project at Stan Hywet Hall & Gardens in Akron, Ohio that occurred in two phases over a fifteen-year period. It will present the situations that arose and the multi-disciplinary approaches devised to solve them. It also will illustrate how collaboration across several inherently different yet related professions—including archivists, objects curators, and restoration architects—produced the best outcome and how others can apply these methods to address similar projects.
Notes
1. Cheryl Klimaszewski, “Lumping (and Splitting) LAMS: The Story of Grouping Libraries, Archives, and Museums,” The Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 39, no. 3–4 (Citation2015): 350–351.
2. For a description of the differences between museum and other archives see Deborah Wythe, “The Museum Context,” in Museum Archives: An Introduction (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2004): 9.
3. Robert S. Martin, “Cooperation and Change: Archives, Libraries, and Museums in the United States,” paper presented at the World Library and Information Congress, Berlin, 2003.
4. William A. Deiss, Museum Archives: An Introduction (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1984), 17.
5. Ibid, 16.
6. See Sherry Butcher-Younghans, Historic House Museums: A Practical Handbook for Their Care, Preservation, and Management (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 88–91.
7. Wendy M. Duff, Jennifer Carter, and Joan M. Cherry, “From Coexistence to Convergence: Studying Partnerships and Collaboration among Libraries, Archives and Museums,” Information Research 18, no. 3 (2013): 585.
8. Stan Hywet is Old English for “stone hewn” or “stone quarry.”
9. Steve Love, Stan Hywet Hall & Gardens (Akron, Ohio: The University of Akron Press, 1999), 1–6.
10. See Heritage Preservation, “Conversation Assessment Program: Spotlight Article Archives: Stan Hywet Hall and Gardens, Akron, Ohio,” Heritage Preservation, http://www.heritagepreservation.org/CAP/StanHywetHall.html (accessed April 1, 2012).
11. This system included a series of Roman numerals and upper-case letters used to designate certain buildings, areas, and gardens on the property. Natural numbers and lower-case letters designated rooms within a building or a section within a garden. The catalog numbers appeared as IIB1c for example.
12. Ralph E. Ehrenberg recommends this arrangement scheme in Archives & Manuscripts: Maps and Architectural Drawings (Chicago, IL: Society of American Archivists, 1982), 22.
13. For an explanation of the differences of opinion regarding organization and classification of materials between librarians, archivists, and museum curators see Antje B. Lemke, “Art Archives: A Common Concern of Archivists, Librarians, and Museum Professionals,” Art Libraries Journal 14, no. 2 (1989): 7.
14. Wythe, 49–50; and Marisa Bourgoin, “Research Use: Outreach” in Museum Archives: An Introduction, 65 describe how museum archivists must balance the needs of the institutional staff and outside researchers.
15. Matthew Jones, “Archives and Museums—Threat or Opportunity?,” Journal of the Society of Archivists 18, no. 1 (1997): 31.
16. For an explanation of why archivists should not disregard provenance and original order when arranging architectural drawings see Ehrenberg, 20. See also Waverly Lowell and Tawny Ryan Nelb, Architectural Records: Managing Design and Construction Records (Chicago, IL: The Society of American Archivists, 2006), 89; and Deiss, 20.
17. Tamara J. Lavrencic recommends this practice in “Duplicate Plans, Their Manufacture and Treatment,” ICCM Bulletin 13, no. 3–4 (1978): 139–147.
18. See National Archives and Records Administration, Managing Cartographic and Architectural Records (Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Administration, Citation1989), 15. See also Lowell and Nelb, 98.
19. To emphasize this point the author recently received a phone call from a colleague who is an objects curator asking his opinion about whether he should keep the original hanging file folders of a collection of papers from a prominent individual and preserve them as artifacts. This inquiry highlights the differences in thinking and operating between archivists and curators.
20. Stan Hywet donated the duplicate drawings to The University of Akron Archival Services in Akron, Ohio. Ironically, the author of this paper, who formerly served as the Special Collections Manager at Stan Hywet, once again has these drawings under his care and must decide whether to deaccession them or spend limited time and resources to preserve, conserve, and catalog them.
21. For an explanation of why archivists usually should not describe architectural drawings at the item level see Lowell and Nelb, 98–100. See also Polly Darnell, “Arrangement” in Museum Archives: An Introduction, 37; and Wythe, 43.
22. The resulting finding aid totaled 195 pages, which made browsing the hard copy difficult and time consuming. However, patrons found the electronic version user-friendly and easy to search, which made access and retrieval quick and efficient.
23. For information on the different cataloging preferences of curators and archivists and for recommendations on cataloging architectural drawings see Darnell, 35. See also Vicki Porter and Robin Thornes, A Guide to the Description of Architectural Drawings (New York: G. K. Hall & Company, 1994), 43–44; and Lowell and Nelb, 102.
24. For evidence of the impracticality of performing full conservation treatment on architectural drawings see Judith Reed, Eleonore Kissel, and Erin Vigneau, “Photo-Reproductive Processes Used for the Duplication of Architectural and Engineering Drawings: Creating Guidelines for Identification,” The Book and Paper Group Annual 14 (1995): 41.
25. At this point, the Historic Structures Department did not perform any conservation on the modern drawings according to the Director of Historic Restoration because “most are rag or mylar based, so they are not dealing with pulp or acidic supports.”
26. Mark N. Gillis (Staff Architect and Director of Historic Restoration, Stan Hywet Hall & Gardens), in discussion with the author, March 2014.
27. Ibid.
28. For instance, the organization always thought the original estate included 3,000 acres, but through research in the historic drawings they discovered that this number includes the acreage in the neighboring cities of Goodyear Heights and Fairlawn Heights in addition to the Seiberling's property in Michigan and Florida. They also discovered that the estate originally included a farm that used to feed the family and workers on the estate and the family sold the surplus to generate revenue to operate the farm.
29. For a good description of the fundamental differences and similarities between archivists and museum professionals see Ann Marie Przybyla, “The Museum Archives Movement,” in Diess, 3. See also Darnell, 35; Wythe, “New Technologies and the Convergence of Libraries, Archives, and Museums,” RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts, & Cultural Heritage 8 (Spring 2007): 54; and John A. Fleckner, “An Archivist Speaks to the Museum Profession” Museum News 63, No. 1 (October/November 1986): 17.
30. Jones, 34.
31. For recommendations on best practices and ethics in regards to properly managing and maintaining museum archives see Museum Archives Section of the Society of American Archivists, “Museum Archives Guidelines,” adopted by SAA Council, August 19, 2003, in Museum Archives: An Introduction, 236–39.
32. Lemke, 5.
33. Wythe, “New Technologies and the Convergence of Libraries, Archives, and Museums,” 54.
34. Gerald Beasley, “Curatorial Crossover: Building Library, Archives, and Museum Collections,” RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts, & Cultural Heritage 8, no. 1 (Spring Citation2007): 25.
35. Wythe, “New Technologies and the Convergence of Libraries, Archives, and Museums,” 55.
36. Phillip M. Edwards, “Collection Development and Maintenance across Libraries, Archives and Museums: A Novel Collaborative Approach,” Library Resources & Technical Services 48, no. 1 (2004): 26–33.
37. Lisa M. Given and Lianne McTavish, “What's Old is New Again: The Reconvergence of Libraries, Archives, and Museums in the Digital Age,” The Library Quarterly 80, no. 1 (2010): 22.
38. Diane Zorich, Gunter Waibel, and Ricky Erway discuss nine circumstances that are more likely to make a collaborative project succeed in “Beyond the Silos of the LAMS: Collaboration among Libraries, Archives and Museums,” Report produced by OCLC Research, published online at http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2008/2008-05p.df (accessed December 1, 2017).