The Living document (https://j.mp/millisessions-iaw2020) of the event will help you get a gist of discussions, links to reading materials mentioned during the session.
This is the shortlink for the youtube playlist of all video recordings: https://j.mp/IAW2020-Milli-YouTube
Wrapping up and connecting dots from sessions held over the past week, today’s interaction attempting to address persisting questions regarding accessibility. Making archives less intimidating, more participatory and transparent, as well as involving students in the archival process were some of the points discussed at length.
Beginning with a detailed walk through of Sahapedia, Sarmaya, NCBS and ARCE, today’s session was centred on the archival process and setting of international standards.
Our discussions this morning brought quite a few new ideas to the table. Panelists introduced us to methods and challenges involved in archiving community knowledge such as that of nomadic storytellers, languages, mud wall paintings, collection techniques, etc. Concerns regarding intellectual property rights, maintaining indigenous safety while decolonising our practise and ensuring consent from beginning to end, were some crucial points that were raised.
Today’s first session centred on silences and dilemmas within archival spaces. Panelists laid out the marginalised histories of Mental Health and anti-dam protests, emphasising on the role of ideology in shaping the scope and presentation of historical evidence. Questions from the audience then greatly added to the session, ranging from discussions on Manto, madness and partition to nation building and displacement
From software frameworks to methods of physical and digital preservation, today’s session delved into the technical side of archiving. Factors of deterioration, both natural (fire, floods, etc) as well as human (war, vandalism, etc) were discussed in detail as were the cumulative effects of pollution, humidity, micro-organisms and more. The conversation then shifted to accessibility for the lay user and how platforms such as Sahapedia help narrativise and annotate archival material.
Moving from archives to the role of museums, our panelists today focused on questions around archival objects, communicating relevance and improving accessibility. Methods of preservation were also discussed, as was the protocol followed by different archivists when processing new material. The second half of the session was an open discussion on oral histories that emphasised on ethical aspects of the practise. Subjectivities of different people, why and how our memories can be selective, as well as the manner in which oral history tends to run against dominant narratives was also central to the conversation.
Today’s session provided insights on several archives across the country. Each of the speakers began by describing their respective archives in terms of structure, approach, members, methodology and scope. Questions from the audience largely centred around what it takes to set up an archive, what kind of information and material one needs to be equipped with and what to keep in mind. The value of all material, even the most seemingly insignificant ones, was one crucial point brought up by several archivists as they discussed the use of everything from student yearbooks to balance sheets and small office notes. Methods used to conduct institutional surveys, to compile archival books that serve to visibilise oral histories et cetera, were also brought up. Interestingly, most of the archivists also mentioned the considerable overlap that occurs between archives, as for example, the Godrej Archive which also contains material on recruitments from IIMAhmedabad.
