Rethinking Our Archive: A Beginning

Author(s): John C. Brereton

Source: College English, Vol. 61, No. 5 (May, 1999), pp. 574-576
Published by: National Council of Teachers of English
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/378974 .
Accessed: 27/11/2013 01:43

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

National Council of Teachers of English is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
College English.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 203.197.118.73 on Wed, 27 Nov 2013 01:43:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
574

ARCHIVISTS WITH AN ATTITUDE

RETHINKING OUR ARCHIVE:

A BEGINNING
John C. Brereton
Whoeverwouldwant to print the wholearchive?
Leopoldvon Ranke

Shoseof us who workin the historyof rhetoricandcompositionknowthatover

the few decades our
past the
archive, of
repository and
primary secondary
sources, has been expanding dramatically.For twenty years we have been mak-
ing splendid use of an ever-widerrange of material,creating a constantly grow-
ing archive. Some parts of this archive, student papers for example, were collected
quite haphazardly and barely examined; other material, like the relatively small
group of essays that appear so often in textbooks that they form what Lynn Bloom
calls the essay canon, has been in front of us all along, but didn't come into focus
until historians began looking at it in unfamiliarways. And still other material, like
the journals and non-fiction produced by women's clubs or the writings that consti-
tute the rhetorical tradition developed by AfricanAmerican women, was barely col-
lected at all or existed in hard-to-find places and awaited the vision of scholars to
bring it to life.
However, the successful work of the recent past ought not to obscure some
uncomfortable facts:we still aren'tsure what should be in our archive, or how access
can be broadened, or which tools we should bring to our task of exploring the past.
In fact, we aren't sure exactly what we alreadyhave in our archive, or how in fact we
even define the term. As scholarship in rhetoric and composition grows, we need to
begin asking what is missing from the archive and how it can get there. And we can
also ask some questions while there is still time to act: Are there things we should

The articlesthatfollowarerevisedversionsof papersfromthe panel"Archivists with anAttitude"pre-

sentedat the 1998Conferenceon CollegeCompositionandCommunication. They representthe first
byJohnBrereton
stagesof a long-termprojecton the archivesin compositionstudiesto be undertaken
andThomasMiller.
His documentary
John C. Brereton is Professorof Englishat the Universityof Massachusetts-Boston.
history,TheOriginsof CompositionStudiesin theAmericanCollege,1875-1925,receivedthe 1997CCCC
OutstandingBookAward.His "FourCareersin English,"a reviewessaypublishedin the September
English,is availableonlineat <http://www.ncte.org/ce/sep98/brereton.html>.
1998 College

COLLEGE ENGLISH, VOLUME 61, NUMBER 5, MAY 1999

This content downloaded from 203.197.118.73 on Wed, 27 Nov 2013 01:43:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ARCHIVISTS: RETHINKING OUR ARCHIVE 575

be workingto preserverightnow?What canwe do now to makesurecurrentprac-

tices andmaterialswill be accessiblein the archivesof the future?
Questionslike these shouldalwaysbe in the mind of those who conserveand
interpretthe past,of course.Historiansdependon the workof theirforebears,on
the collectingthatformslibrariesandrepositoriesgreatandsmallandon the inter-
pretationsandnarratives thathelpshapeconsciousness.Scholarsfreelyacknowledge
debts in the frontmatterof their booksor in a few footnotes,but only those who
havedonearchivalhistoryknowhow crucialtheworkof theirpredecessors hasbeen.
Three or fourlines in the acknowledgments thankinga librarianor archivist
barely
conveyscholars'realdependenceon the foresightof others.Now it'stime to return
the favorandto considerthe needsof thosewho will dependon our own foresight.
Rhetoricand compositionscholarshave been makinguse of an archiveassembled
by others,with other purposesin mind.Now that we'rein a positionto assemble
archivesof ourown,whatprincipleswill guideus?How shouldwe considerthe cre-
ation,preservation,andbestuse of archives,both thosewe'vebeen usingandthose
we'll be creating?
The threeessaysthatfollowthis briefintroductionarethe beginningof a pro-
ject to rethinkandredefinethe compositionandrhetoricarchive.They aregeneral
overviewsof threedistinctareasof concernand,thoughwrittenfromdifferentper-
spectives,keepcirclingbackto threekeyissues:accessto archives;tools to usein the
archives;and the interpretiveactsneededto makesense of the archivesin the first
place.
What techniquesare needed to deal with archivalmaterial?LindaFerreira-
Buckleypointsto the importanceof the historian'straditionaltools, which,despite
so muchprogress,basicallyhaven'tchanged.Futurehistorians,dependingon their
subspecialty,will still need some combinationof paleographyand the appropriate
languages,anda workingknowledgeof the relevantonlineandprintbibliographies.
Additionally,they'llneed to knowwhichjournals,authors,andpublishersmattered
mostat differenttimes,andwhichcollectionscanprovidea researcherwiththe most
help.Whateverthe subjectof study,andwhoeverthe historians,theywill still need
exacttraining.How will they get it? Doctoralprogramsin history,followingRanke,
have traditionallyhad theirown archiveof originaldocuments,whicha seniorhis-
torianused to introducestudentsto the practicesof workingwith originalsources.
Today,worriesFerreira-Buckley, studentsof compositionandrhetoricareoftenlim-
ited to a single graduatecoursein historicalstudies.Can thatbe enoughto impart
the necessaryskills?
Steven Maillouxelegantlydemonstratesthat the question of how one ap-
proaches an archive is fraught with fascinating problems. When does interpreting
begin? Before or after one has established a text? In fact, the very process of estab-
lishing the text is far from simple. Examining the intersection of literary theory and
textual scholarship, Mailloux shows how the editing process, and particularlythe

This content downloaded from 203.197.118.73 on Wed, 27 Nov 2013 01:43:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
576 COLLEGE ENGLISH

correction of what seem at first like simple typographical errors, calls forth inter-
pretative skills of the highest order.
Thomas Miller and Melody Bowdon contextualize the rhetorical archive and
move beyond composition to the rich traditions of civic discourse, classical rhetori-
cal theory, and moral philosophy, sites eminently rewarding to rhetorical scrutiny.
Citing a hallowed notion, the "civic ideal of the individual citizen speaking pur-
posefully for the common good," Miller and Bowden wonder what kind of archive
of actualhistorical practiceswould enable rhetoriciansto confirm or qualifythe exis-
tence of a genuine tradition of civic discourse. Ultimately, Miller and Bowden take
as their central issue the rhetoricalstance scholars ought to have toward their archive
and their research processes.
Additionally, all three essays confront the key issue of access to the archive.
Miller and Bowdon remind us that not all we need is available in the archive, and
much of the online material still has restrictions on its use. Ferreira-Buckleypoints
out that even with access, historiansneed appropriatetools to make the access mean-
ingful. Mailloux's essay shows that access and tools themselves aren't enough. The
users themselves need to perform acts of interpretation to bring the archive to life.
So our term "archive"is hardly static; these three essays represent a beginning
of what we regard as a necessary examination of both our heritage and our legacy.
We hope they help scholars to think about the archive in new and productive ways.

This content downloaded from 203.197.118.73 on Wed, 27 Nov 2013 01:43:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions