A ‘glass half full’ response to Participatory Archives would firstly acknowledge the topicality of its subject. It traverses some of the archival aspects of the social media web 2.0 digital culture world, a ‘space’ where groupings variously called communities activists citizens and crowds interact with, participate in and contribute to their own and others’ archives and to similar heritage collections institutions and projects. Across eighteen chapters the twenty-six authors singly or severally examine four themes: social tagging and commenting; transcription; crowdfunding and outreach; and alternative and activist communities. Most chapters are case studies explaining what a particular project involved and what was learnt.
A further positive is the volume’s gathering of much of the key English language professional literature. If the blurb is correct that its potential readership includes students of archival studies programs, the chapter bibliographies and notes will also be appreciated. And, to the editors’ credit, the writers assembled include some strong activist voices who recount firsthand the experiences of participatory projects and names (e.g. Andrew Flinn, Isto Huvila and Alexandra Eveleigh) of very high standing. Of the remainder, Stacy Wood’s chapter especially stood out.
By contrast, Participatory Archives’ disappointments were many. From the editors’ own first chapter on, they struggled to articulate the book’s core topic, initially simply because it is not self-evident what those two terms in juxtaposition actually mean. They discuss rather than offer and defend a definition. Their linking of a ‘participatory archive movement’ (and elsewhere, ‘participatory archival practice’) to postmodernism and archival principles is unconvincing, as if the undoubted reality of web 2.0 processes alone will conjure theoretical grounding. There are also references to ‘precedents from the analogue era’ (p. 2) and to community participatory archives ‘well before the 20th century’ (p. 168). Despite the implications and importance of an historical perspective, the acknowledgement remained undeveloped beyond a paragraph and a handful of references.
Further problems of conceptual clarity relate to scope. Four chapters are devoted to community archives and related activism, in effect a sizeable overlap with this separate subject’s established scholarship literature and theory, and a theme already very well addressed by Facet in 2009 and again in late 2019. As for institutions archives are often grouped with such as libraries and museums, they are mentioned repeatedly throughout Participatory Archives, yet the book never properly explains what is specifically distinctive about archival participatory processes.
The book’s editors note its content aims to fill a ‘scholastic gap’ and its case studies divide between North American and ‘international’, i.e. European examples. Frankly, the gap remains. A new volume from either side of the Atlantic might include serious historical and theoretical chapters including the participatory recordkeeping continuum model, stronger analysis of examples, and case studies from, say, Hong Kong and here, including the crowdfunding of Professor Jenny Hocking’s appeal to the High Court of Australia to have the so-called ‘Palace Letters’ released. A good start, but more focus can still be given in future works on this topic.