Sure it’s genealogy; it’s just not mine!

I don’t know what it’s been about the past few weeks, but I’ve been somewhat inundated with emails stemming from this blog recently. Now, when I say “inundated,” okay, it’s still only been about one a week or so. (I think there have been 4 or 5 separate reach-out emails in the past month.) But that still seems like “a lot” when sometimes it’s weeks or months in between receiving those kind of communications.

It was a variety this time, too:

• One was thanking me for the Howard Forrer story. (You’re so welcome; thank you for enjoying it!)
• One was: Can I use your  Bessie Tomlin article in this non-commercial digital history project I’m doing? (Yes you can, thanks for asking first, & your project sounds awesome!)
• Two were family history related: Do you know anything about my rather noteworthy Dayton relative so-and-so? (No, actually, I don’t, but here are some suggestions of where else to look.)

I love these. You have no idea.

Not just because they make me feel like a rock star for (apparently) writing an interesting story or a well-researched history or bio sketch. But because it’s proof positive that there’s somebody else out there who cares about these people, places, and events.

Sure, hypothetically, I know that such people probably exist out there somewhere. And sure, I see the search terms on my blog statistics page that tell me people are looking for these things (and finding me). But when you sit down to actually take the time and write me an email — even if it seems half selfish because you’re really writing to ask me something — it makes  my day. And I’m happy to help you if I can.

But getting back to the title of this post. Over the past couple of years with the blog, based on the emails and comments I receive, usually with reference to the people I write about, I often have people asking me if these are my relatives. I guess it’s because they can tell that I’ve taken much care to write these lovingly detailed biographical sketches of them. After all, why would anyone do that if it wasn’t their own family?

Well, the short answer is that I did all that research in order to write the the biographical sketch portion of archival manuscript finding aids, and my boss gave me permission to re-post them here, my intention being additional discoverability for the collections. To write these biographical sketches, I used the collections themselves (duh, what better than a primary source right there in my hands?!) as well as genealogy research techniques to fill in the “Wait, who’s Aunt Sarah?”-type gaps. (You can read the longer versions of essentially this same explanation in my posts from May 21, 2012, and Sept. 2, 2011.)

But anyway—again—why would anyone go to such lengths to write these detailed, foot-noted, multi-page biographical sketches? After all–you caught me, fellow archivists–I admit they are probably longer and much more detailed than what was strictly necessary to fulfill my obligation of providing some biographical/historical context for the researcher via the finding aid.

But I can’t help it. I love these people. These wonderful, colorful, real people, who lived in the past, whose papers, whose stories, I’m holding in my hands (unless it’s photos- then in my gloved hands). They suck me in. I want to know them. I want to “get” them. Who are they? How do they fit together- with this “stuff”? with the other people they talk about? with the community where they live? Er, I mean, lived.

Don’t get me wrong, I am a fan of genealogy anyway. My grandma got me started on it, and I’ve been interested in it — oh dear God, I just did the math at this very moment — over half my life. But unfortunately, I couldn’t write such detailed biographical sketches about most of my own ancestors (at least, ones from the same time period as the Bio Sketches I’ve written here), even if I wanted to — and believe me, if I could, I would.

But I just don’t know their stories. And I don’t have the diaries and letters and other documents needed to “fill in the blanks” in between the official records (birth/death records, census, city directory, etc.). The manuscripts I would need just don’t exist. Or, if they do, I haven’t found the relative that’s stowed them away yet.

So, if you’re one of my relatives and you’re holding out on me, now would be a good time to speak up, please. I swear I won’t try to guilt you into giving me the docs; I just want a look. (And probably some photocopies.)

And while we’re at it, same goes for the owner of Sarah (Howard) Forrer‘s diary. It’s mentioned in other sources, but it’s currently “lost to history.” If anyone has it, I’d love to see it.

And there I go again, getting wound up about the history of people who aren’t even my relatives. Which seems to baffle the genealogists who email me, thinking they must have found a distant cousin in this girl who has made such an effort to document the life of their ancestor (or great-uncle or whoever).

Nope. Just doin’ it for the love of history, folks. And for the love of these super-cool people whose “stuff” I’ve been charged with arranging, describing, and preserving.

But don’t worry. I don’t mind if you think I’m a distant cousin. And I promise not to laugh or anything when I have to tell you I’m not. Keep those emails coming. I’m always thrilled to “meet” someone, anyone—genealogist, historian, whoever—who still cares about these long-dead people that I’ve cared about. And if I can help you, I will, and I’m happy to.

1913 Flood Centennial

What kind of Miami Valley archivist would I be if I didn’t acknowledge the centennial of the 1913 flood on my history/archives blog?

This week marks 100 years since flood waters ravaged the Miami Valley, bringing widespread devastation to cities like Dayton, Piqua, Troy, and Hamilton, as well as many other parts of Ohio (including my hometown of Portsmouth). This particular flood was so severe in the Dayton area (which was rather used to floods) that area residents finally said, “We’re not going to just sit back and take this from anymore, Great Miami River!” Within months, a fundraising campaign generated over $2 million towards the creation what is now the Miami Conservancy District, a system of dams and other mechanisms that control the rivers and have successfully prevented flooding since its completion. (Hooray!)

I’ve worked in Dayton-area archives long enough to know that the 1913 flood has been remembered on many days and in many ways ever since, as an important event in our area’s history. But we do love anniversaries—and the 100th is a very special one, after all, since it’s such a nice, round number!

There’s been a lot going on to commemorate the 1913 flood this year. And to be perfectly honest, I’ve already been involved in so much of it that I damn-near forgot to even mention it here, because I feel like my “1913 flood commemorating” mojo is virtually exhausted by now! But like I said, what kind of Miami Valley archivist would I be if I didn’t say something on my own blog as well?

So…well…to avoid re-inventing the wheel here, I think I’ll just point you to some of the things that I and others have been working on…

Most of the 1913 flood commemoration activities that I was personally aware of are mentioned in an article I wrote for the Spring 2013 issue of the Ohio Archivist (the newsletter of the Society of Ohio Archivists- see page 28). But I certainly want to point your attention to the official commemoration web site 1913flood.com.

We’ve done some cool things where I work at Wright State, too—so much so that we’ve even dedicated an entire section of the WSU Special Collections & Archives web page to the 1913 flood. There are a couple of exhibits listed, one of which is a web exhibit done a few years back called The Flood Menace. There is also info about the 1913 flood traveling exhibit a couple of my colleagues created–what it is, pictures, how to borrow it, etc. There’s also a lengthy Resource List detailing what research materials about the flood can be found at WSU and other area archives. (Don’t forget to check out the neat flood stuff we’ve got on our Campus Repository—interviews with flood survivors, for instance!) Oh, and there’s also an in-real-life flood exhibit (that I just happened to make) on the first floor of the Dunbar Library from now until about June.

I think one of my favorite projects I’ve personally done to remember the flood is the transcriptions of flood diaries and letters that will be on the WSU Special Collections & Archives blog Out of the Box this week. (I just love letters and diaries; I can get lost in them so easily.) We’ll be following flood survivors Margaret Smell, J.G.C. Schenck Sr., Edward and Nellie Neukom, and Milton Wright (yes, that Milton Wright- father of the famous Wright brothers!), through their flood experiences, reading about those experiences in their own words. Where applicable, I’ve added some small explanations, and I also hunted up some great photos from our collection to help illustrate their stories. I recommend checking out this intro to the diary/letter series, and there will be daily updates from the writers from today through early April.

As you may recall, I have written about the flood here before. I wrote a blog post about it a couple of years ago: “Remembering the 1913 Flood” (March 24, 2011). Then there are those super-cool geo-tagged maps I made using Flickr and Geo-Slideshow [May 9, 2011], for the flood photos and postcards at the Dayton Metro Library (where I used to work). And don’t forget the 1913 flood before-and-after exhibit at the Dayton Art Institute, which, although mentioned in my SOA article and on the 1913flood.com web site, bears repeating because I was privileged to see it in February, and it is super-awesome.

Obviously, there’s plenty more out there besides what I’ve mentioned here. (And let’s face it, I’m going to be a little biased towards the projects that I’ve personally worked so hard on—certainly not to undercut how hard everyone else has worked on their projects, but this is my blog, so why wouldn’t I toot my own horn a bit?) There have been tons of really great articles about the flood and the commemoration activities in the Dayton Daily News (and I’m sure many other area papers) lately.

DDN writer Meredith Moss did a great spread about the flood in last Sunday’s newspaper (over one whole page in the print edition); you can read the online version here, and you might just see a few quotes from yours truly in it. (Normally, my supervisor and head of the archives Dawne Dewey answers the press inquiries, but a combination of circumstances—one being that Dawne was out that day and another being that someone told the reporter to ask me because I’d been doing a lot of flood activities lately—led to my name being the one in the paper this time.)

Well, I think that’s about all I have to say about the flood for now. I hope anyone with an interest in this particular part of Dayton’s history takes notice of all these projects and events going on this spring, because there’s lots of great stuff to experience and absorb….and it might be another nice-round-number-of-years (25? 50? 100?) before there’s so much terrific culture being dedicated to the 1913 flood once again.

Un-Review of Dayton Art Institute’s 1913 Flood Exhibition

[I hate the term "review." It has this overtone, like if you're not sufficiently critical, you haven't really "reviewed" the thing. So this is not a review in that sense. It's "I experience this super-cool thing, and I want to share it with you," whatever that's called.]

Last Thursday, February 21, was a busy but fun day for me. After the Miami Valley Archives Roundtable meeting, I was fortunate enough to have been invited to attend a special preview of the Dayton Art Institute‘s new exhibition commemorating the centennial of the Great 1913 Flood: Storm, Watershed, & Riverbank.

Dayton Art Institute

Dayton Art Institute – Storm–Watershed–Riverbank

(The 1913 Flood was a defining moment in the Miami Valley’s history. It was a horrible disaster, but it ultimately led to flood control measures that have successfully averted such a thing happening again: the creation of the Miami Conservancy District. To learn more about the flood, check out 1913flood.com or even Wikipedia for a basic overview.)

The exhibition consists of three parts:

• Storm: Paintings by April Gornik
• Watershed: 100 Years of Photography Along the Great Miami River
• Riverbank: Exploring Our River-Centered Development

Storm: Paintings by April Gornik, consisted of several large scale (we’re talking LARGE scale, like 6 feet by 8 feet!) paintings depicting various kinds of storms, weather, and other natural waters. They were really beautiful. You can see many of April’s paintings on her web site, although my favorite one from the exhibit, “Light Passing” (1987), doesn’t seem to be on there.

After a transitional area showing three enlarged lantern slide views of the flood, as well as a Baltimore & Ohio Railroad map with notations about flood damage, we embarked upon the second part of the exhibition: Watershed: 100 Years of Photography Along the Great Miami River.

The Watershed exhibit consists of “before” and “after” photographs showing a scene from the flood, paired with a recent photograph taken at the same location and angle. The photos showed scenes from Piqua all the way down the Great Miami River to Hamilton.

The “before” photographs had been gathered, enlarged, and reproduced from the collections of many Miami Valley archival repositories, including Wright State University Special Collections & Archives, Dayton Metro Library, and many others. (I gleefully recognized many of the Dayton photos!)

The “after” photographs were created by Dayton photographer Andy Snow, who created more than 5,000 digital files for this project.

Photographer Andy Snow giving us insights to help us more fully appreciate his photos.

Mr. Snow was present on the tour to share his insights about the photos and the project. He shared lots of interesting stories and pointed out details that helped us more fully appreciate what we were seeing. He told us that he manipulated some of the photos slightly in order to make them “pop and sing,” saying, “I like singing photographs.”   He also gave us some historical context, including a lesson in historical photography equipment (examples of which is included in the exhibit) and the reasons why in old photos, the sky looks gray. He also referred to Dayton as “the Silicon Valley of the time,” in explaining why its destruction was such major nationwide news.

Angela Manuszak of the Miami Conservancy District, who was integral to the project, was also present on the tour and also gave us great historical context to help us better understand and appreciate what we were seeing.

Angela Manuszak of Miami Conservancy District sharing snipptes of the flood story to help give us context.

For instance, she pointed out that there are no known photographs of the river’s cresting in Dayton because it happened in the middle of the night. She also said that the Miami Conservancy District was the largest privately-funded infrastructure project in the world at the time; it was designed to protect against a flood equivalent to 140% of what the 191 3 flood was! (And it has worked!)

Here are a few pictures to give you a taste of the Watershed exhibit. (And I apologize that these are not the greatest — I’m no professional photographer, and my little pocket camera can’t even begin to do these things justice anyway. That’s why it’s really just a taste, even of these very photos, because the real ones look so much more amazing. Oh and also – Mr. Snow said it was OK for us to take pictures! Plus, I like to think I’ll make you want to visit and see the rest, if I show you a few ideas of what you’ll find.)

Before and After view from the hill where Dayton Art Institute is today. (Yes, it’s blurry; it’s not your eyes.) This pair was just awesome. You’ve got to see it!

Some of the 72 original hand-tinted lantern slides on exhibit from the Miami Conservancy District’s collection.

Everett Neukom’s Beaver Power Building photo (This was one of my favorite pairs, too, because I recognized the photo on the right immediately as one taken by Everett Neukom- it came from our Neukom collection at WSU.)

Near the end of the Watershed exhibit, there was a sitting area with the chairs pointed at a large flat-screen TV that was showing the Before/After photos fading into one another. I almost walked right by it, thinking, “Oh, I’ve seen this,” but after my brief conversation with Mr. Snow, he encouraged me to check it out, that it gave a little different perspective on the photos. And it really did: in some cases the photos were framed so perfectly that when the Before faded into the After, certain details that existed in both photos (like a church steeple, for instance) were lined up perfectly. It was almost like that part of the photo was simply turning color and having its surroundings changed, while it remained the same. VERY COOL. Thanks, Mr. Snow, for encouraging me to take a second look at that– it really was worth it. Plus, hey, it gave me an excuse to sit for a minute.

Also in talking to Mr. Snow, I asked if these were the same photos that will be featured in the 1913 Flood before/after book that I’ve been hearing about — the real title of which I couldn’t remember at the time, but which is, for your information A Flood of Memories–One Hundred Years After the Flood: Images from 1913 and Today. The answer was, yes, but only about 1/2 the images in the book were featured in the exhibit. So there’s MORE. Yay!  He said the book should soon be available for sale in the book stores at Dayton Art Institute and Carillon Park (which incidentally also has a new permanent exhibit on the 1913 Flood opening March 23).

The third part of the exhibition, Riverbank: Exploring Our River-Centered Development, had maps and sketches and sallelite images showing the development of the Great Miami River corridor over the years. The giant satellite map was pretty awesome. And I also enjoyed seeing a publication from the 1960s of proposed development of the river area near where Sinclair currently is– apparently, they wanted to put some kind of stadium or theater there at one point. (It’s always fun to see those architects’ or city planners’ renderings of proposed building projects from Back in the Day that never quite came to pass, knowing what’s there now.) There was also an interactive component with a big map of downtown Dayton and an invitation to answer the question “What would entice you to spend the day on the river?” on a Post-It Note and stick it to the map. (I admit I didn’t do this part; I was already late for a reception I was supposed to be attending upstairs, because I just couldn’t tear myself away from the photos…)

The Storm, Watershed, & Riverbank exhibition runs February 23 through May 5, 2013, and museum admission is $12. If you are interested in a visual history of the 1913 Flood, you don’t want to miss this. It was absolutely amazing.

[In addition to the official exhibition info on the Dayton Art Institute site, you might also be interested in this article from the Dayton Daily News: "Dayton Art Museum to Commemorate Historic Flood in New Exhibit," 17 Feb. 2013.]

Memento scribere

Memento scribere. Remember to write.

Maybe I need to write that on my hand (though I’d have to do it repeatedly thanks to hand-washing). Or perhaps (probably) it would be more effective to make it an Outlook task. Actually, I used to have such a thing, but it’s been tossed by the wayside for the past few months.

My new job (which I started in November) has…shall we say…routinely absorbed much of my naturally existing “writing mojo.” So…not a ton of writing mojo has been leftover for this, my public blog, or even my private writings. But that’s OK. For now. It will balance out eventually, I’m sure; hopefully it won’t be too long, because I miss this place!

In the meantime, I wanted to let you know that you can “find me” over on the blogs of the Wright State University Special Collections & Archives…just in case you are really jonesing for some of my writing.

The Out of the Box blog is our “general” blog for the archives- highlighting collections, making announcements, etc. And then we also have the Dayton Daily News Archive blog, which is exclusively for materials (including LOTS of photos) from the Dayton Daily News Archive (an extremely large newspaper morgue archive that WSU SCA has had for a few years now). If it says it was posted by “Lisa,” then I probably wrote it (unless it says otherwise).

So anyway… I will try to get back into remember to write mode, but until then, please continue “glancing backwards” vicariously through the blogs where I have been writing. And there’s no ignoring those — that’s (part of) what they pay me for! — so it’s certainly part of my agenda (“things that must be done” – sorry, this former Latin student couldn’t resist another Latin lesson for ya!).

Granularity of history

Since last weekend was the Thanksgiving holiday, I got to spend some time with my family. We spend a lot of that time sitting around, just talking. I don’t know how it is with your family, but sometimes the menfolk in ours have a little trouble getting a story in edgewise between me and my two sisters and mom.

But at one point last weekend, my Dad was all wound up about this show he’d been watching on The History Channel called The Men Who Built America. I hadn’t seen the show (although by the end of the weekend I had watched several episodes from Dad’s DVR!), but he was excitedly telling us all about it.

This in and of itself was rather exciting to me, because my dad is an engineering/technical type, and I have not often seen him chatter excitedly about history stuff the way he might about something with capacitors.

Anyway, Dad was giving us the details The Men Who Built America, which is a multi-part story about the interwoven lives (and fortunes) of Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Ford, and Morgan.

Finally, at one point, he exclaimed that it was all really interesting, and he had never heard most of this before, although he had heard of all the people involved. He was fascinated at how the show really plumbed the details of those men’s lives, really digging deep into everything to develop the series.

And that’s the really neat thing about history. Most people will only ever learn just a surface-scratch of all the history that’s actually out there to be learned.

I don’t happen to have an American history survey course textbook on hand, but I’d be willing to bet most of them would only spend a few paragraphs talking about Rockefeller, etc., mostly as a side note to a greater concept regarding the Gilded Age or monopolies. Whereas there is actually tons more stuff (interesting stuff) that could be said about them, even more than what that mini-series can tell you in several hours.

What do you think history is made of? Sure, in the books it’s made up of broad strokes and grand, sweeping concepts. There’s that. But what are those made up of? The words, actions, and ideas of people. All kinds of people. Rich and powerful people like John D. Rockefeller…and ordinary people like pioneers, Civil War soldiers, immigrants. That’s all history, too, of course.

The broad strokes of history are made up of teeny, tiny pieces of…life. Think of it sort of like the top part of an hour-glass. Most people see only the pile of sand. But if you want to look closely enough — the grains are there. Teeny, tiny, individual little grains of history that make up “the sands of time.”

“a drop in the ocean” by conskeptical, on Flickr (Used in accordance with the stated Ceative Commons license)

The grains could be actions, events, people, documents. In most cases, the grains, the details…they’re out there. Sure, much has been lost, but there is SO MUCH that has been saved and preserved. If you really want to “dive in” to the history of any topic, odds are, there is an archives out there with something you’d find interesting (i.e., documents with delightfully intricate details you’ve probably never heard before).

Trust me. I’m an archivist. The grains of history are sort of my thing.

Checking In

Hey there. It’s me. I’m still alive. No really, I am.

For over a year now, I’ve had this completely self-imposed goal of writing one blog post here per week, and for the most part, I think I’ve done a pretty decent job of accomplishing that [ever-recurring] goal….if you don’t count the past couple of months.

Well, folks, that’s because I’ve spent much of the past two months feeling like the Career-Related Universe was doing this to me:

Your head will now EXPLODE shirt by Ced, on Flickr (Used in accordance with the stated Creative Commons licensing terms)

Yep. My brain has been on overload from the sheer volume of stuff running through it the past few months — wrapping up all kinds of stuff from my old job before I left, and then soaking up all the new info coming at me from all directions at my new job — and it hasn’t left a whole lot of Creative Juice leftover to put here, for the moment.

Oh, don’t worry, you won’t get rid of me that easily. I have a few ideas coming down the pike, not least of which is an ooey, gooey, nostalgic episode about my return to alma mater Wright State as a permanent, full-time staff person. That one is still stewing, but when it finally rolls out, it will come complete with quotations from early chapters in the Book of Lisa (my journal). You’re on the edge of your seat waiting for that one, I just know it.

But until then, you’ll just have to content yourself with the knowledge that I have not abandoned this place. I’m just…trying to maintain equilibrium in my overloaded brain at the moment, trying to get back to that “got a grip” feeling, rather than that “just keep treading water” feeling.

When I feel back on top of things again, you’ll know it. I’ll be writing like gangbusters again, just like old times. Stay tuned.

Sincerely,
Lisa Rickey, Archivist

Career Reflections

The year 2012 has been a big one for me, career-wise.

If I look back on the past 6 years, there have been lots of “big” accomplishments: starting/finishing grad school (the first time – MA); getting married (“woohoo!”); getting my first full time job (“yippee!”); adjusting to my first full time job (slightly less “yippee!”); realizing that working full time is actually easier than working 40 hours a week at multiple part-time jobs while going to grad school full time (“yippee!” again); starting/finishing grad school (a second time – MLIS) while working full time (because I am a crazy person); and on top of all that, tearing our house apart and putting it back together (now with 100% more awesomeness) - basement, kitchen, family room, roof, master bedroom (again, because I am a crazy person – incidentally, I watched that Tom Hanks movie The Money Pit in the midst of all this and laughed maniacally throught he whole thing because now I truly appreciate it).

So, yeah…I’ve been party to “big things” for a number of years now. I’m not really a “go to work, come home, do only the things that must be done, and let the rest of my life pass me by” kind of person. I like to feel like I’m always ”getting somewhere.” So maybe that’s why I constantly find myself in the midst of “big things.” I really don’t know.

But back to 2012: The Year of A Little Less Home Destruction and Homework.

Here, in brief (don’t worry – you know I’ll expound in a minute), is a list of my shiny gold resume-worthy accomplishments for 2012:

• I was invited to run for and was subsequently elected (in May) to the Society of Ohio Archivists Council for 2012-2014.
• In August, I sat for the Academy of Certified Archivists examination, and a few weeks later, I found out that I had passed with flying colors.
• Also in August, I was offered (and accepted) the Chairmanship of the Miami Valley Archives Roundtable.
• In July-September, I applied for, interviewed for (both on the phone and in person), and was offered the position of Archivist for Digital Initiatives & Outreach at Wright State University Special Collections & Archives.
• I also spoke on several occasions (3 or 4, if I recall correctly) to the Public History students at Wright State—something I consider quite an honor, really, since just a few short years ago, I was sitting in those very seats!

In some ways, I feel like this Year of Big Career Stuff just kind of fell in my lap. I mean, I didn’t wake up one morning in January and say, I declare this the year that I add tons of stuff to my resume.

I think the only one of those things on the list that I had total control over was signing up for, studying for, and taking the CA exam.

I obviously, I don’t have any control over whether I am invited to be on SOA Council, lead an organization, or be a guest speaker. Nor can I control when and where archives jobs happen to open up. (Boy, if I could, I know some of my friends would have some requests!)

On the other hand, I guess in some ways I do have some control over those other things. Not whether I was invited to run for Council or be Chair or to speak to the students, but WHY I was invited to those things. And again, not the fact that there WAS an opening at the WSU Archives, but WHY they chose me.

I suppose I was chosen for all of those things…because I must be doing something good. (Cue that song from The Sound of Music.) And that’s something I do have a measure of control over—what I do and how I do it. Obviously, if we’re talking about a professional position, there’s only going to be a a certain amount of leeway in your job duties, based on what’s needed/required from your position. But there’s always going to be a way to make yourself shine—in your job or your education or your “extracurriculars.” (Can’t do it at work? Maybe you can do it on an “unofficial” basis [*cough*thisblog*cough*] or volunteer somewhere that needs a skill you want to hone for your resume.)

But whatever you’re doing, assuming you have the ability needed for the task, you have total control over how well you do it. Some people have a tendency to do the minimum required. Perhaps because they are just lazy, are happy where they are career-wise and maybe hard work isn’t properly rewarded anyway, or just don’t realize that it’s going to matter to a potential future employer.

In my case, it just seems to be in my nature to not half-ass things. I just have this tendency to work hard and want things done right. (I realize I sound like a pompous asshole right now. Forewarning, it’s probably only going to get worse in the next few sentences.) It’s always been this way. In grade school, I remember getting a “C” on a minor homework paper once, and I cried. I’ve had college professors tell me that they would put my paper on top, grade it first, and use it as a sort of yardstick for the others. (I’m not joking.) I think sometimes I do a lot more work than I need to, but I like feeling satisfied with myself that I’ve done a good job and that I’ve done my best. And if sometimes that happens to have resulted in more work than what was strictly required, then so be it.

But getting back to my reflections on my career and the “big stuff of 2012″ (and veering away from sounding like an arrogant SOB, which I swear wasn’t my intention but was probably a result nonetheless), what I’m trying to say is: I firmly believe that hard work and awesomeness is rewarded.

Sometimes it is its own reward. (I know–gag, how after-school-special–but sometimes it’s true.) When you know you’ve done a good job or done something awesome, you just feel good inside.

Sometimes the rewards are in the form of being recognized by your professional peers as someone who would make a good SOA Council member, MVAR Chair, or guest speaker…

Sometimes you might get rewarded by finding a full-time job in your field (and in your town!) right out of grad school, that you’re pretty sure has something to do with that second job in grad school that you couldn’t pass up applying for and actually got, so you worked your ass off at 2 jobs and school…

And sometimes, if you’re really lucky, the rewards come when you see a job posting that sounds perfect for you (even people I barely knew where telling me so)…in your town…at your alma mater, a place that already feels like “home” and where you already know the archives team is amazing…and after 3 months of stressing over the resume, cover letter, phone interview, all-day in-person interview, and then just waiting for the phone to ring again……you’ll find out that the Search Committee (some of whom were your former professors!) apparnetly agreed that you would be a good fit for the job…and when the Library Director calls to offer you the job, maybe you’ll even startle him a little bit with your excitment when you say, “Yes!…Yes, yes, yes!”

Yes, indeed, I was so excited to be offered that position at WSU last month. I’m excited about the job. I was excited when I read the posting. Here’s the job description:

Promote Special Collections and Archives’ resources by expanding online presence through a variety of digital initiatives, including social media, website content enhancement, and development and management of departmental digitization projects. Manage organization and preservation of Archives’ electronic (born digital) collections. Represent Special Collections and Archives on the University Libraries’ web team.

Actually, I get excited about a lot of things in my work. And I think it shows. And I like to think maybe that is part of why things keep coming my way, career-wise. I mean, sure, sometimes I think, “My God, I’m so lucky,” when, at the same time, I know I’ve worked hard, do my best, and show enthusiasm, as well as having experience in a lot of different areas of the archives field.

But when you do something you like and that you’re (apparently) good at, it’s easy. It feels a lot less like “work” and a lot more like getting paid to do something you already consider kickass.

So I’ll leave you with this little blurb from an article I read in June [Jack and Suzy Welch, "Dear Summer Intern: This is an Audition for Your Future," Reuters blog, 14 June 2012] that I’ve had in the back of my mind for months but never could think of a good wrapper for writing about it:

The pastor and author Terry A. Smith makes the case that people are happiest when they are working in their “Area of Destiny” – that gorgeous piece of emotional and intellectual real estate that exists at the intersection of what you’re uniquely good at and what deeply interests and excites you.

Thanks to nearly 30 years of working hard (even when I didn’t always realize it), always trying to do my best, and probably a certain amount of pure dumb luck, I’ve been able to do fulfilling work at a variety of locations but always in my “Area of Destiny.”

Starting in November, that location will be Wright State University Special Collections & Archives.

I get to work in my Area of Destiny, and I sincerely hope the rest of you are lucky enough to be able to do the same.

Wright Brothers Benches in the Dayton area

Last Sunday, I attended one of the Woodland Days tours at historic Woodland Cemetery in Dayton, Ohio. (I might write more about the tour in general another time.)

One of the first things the tour guide pointed out to us was a sculpture of a bench with two bowler hats on top of it, honoring the Wright Brothers (on the main road near the chapel):

Wright Brothers Bench, Woodland Cemetery (Photo by Matt Rickey, 7 Oct. 2012, used with permission)

The tour guide proceeded to tell us that there were several of the benches around Dayton: five, she thought.  I mumbled to my husband that I thought there were nine, in fact. (These mental–and sometimes whispered–”well, actually”s continued intermittently throughout the rest of the tour, as a matter of fact. I don’t mean to be critical, but as a local archivist and reference librarian, I happen to know a lot about Dayton’s history. So when I heard misinformation, it bugged me a little…)

After we got home, I double-checked, and sure enough, there are nine Wright Brothers benches in the Dayton area, according to the Ohio Outdoor Sculpture Inventory.

According to said inventory, the benches are located at the following places:

1. Carillon Historical Park;
2. Dave Hall Plaza;
3. Dayton International Airport;
4. Engineers Club of Dayton;
5. Medal of Honor Park at Wright Patterson Air Force Museum;
6. the U.S Air Force Museum;
7. Woodland Cemetery;
8. Wright Brothers Airport; and
9. Wright State University.

I have only personally seen four of these, so it’s theoretically possible that the inventory list has the number wrong, and maybe our tour guide was correct. (For instance, I’m wondering: Are there actually two at the Air Force Museum?) I have looked for the one (or two, apparently) at the Air Force Museum before but didn’t see it; then again, I didn’t realize it was out in the park. I thought it would be just outside the lobby or something.

The benches were created by artist David E. Black and dedicated in 1996.

For funsies, here are photos from my personal collection of the benches I have seen (in addition to the one at Woodland, shown above):

Wright Brothers Bench, Wright State University (photo by the author, July 2003)

The bench at Wright State was the first one I ever saw. I imagine I first laid eyes on it sometime in the Fall of 2001, when I was a freshman at WSU…

Wright Brothers Bench, Engineers Club (photo by the author, 7 June 2012)

Here’s the one at the Engineers’ Club on Monument Avenue, so you can see the context in which the bench is situated. (Honestly, do you really want to see several close-ups of these identical benches?)

I have seen the Carillon Park bench, but apparently I did not snap a picture of it. Darn.

If you search for “Wright Brothers Bench” on Flickr, there are several pictures of them… Since I don’t have photos of my own to show you of the other ones, let’s see if I can find them on Flickr and link…..

Once again, with gusto:

1. Carillon Historical Park;
2. Dave Hall Plaza;
3. Dayton International Airport;
4. Engineers Club of Dayton (or see above);
5. Medal of Honor Park at Wright Patterson Air Force Museum;
6. the U.S Air Force Museum;
7. Woodland Cemetery (or see above or see this other one of mine);
8. Wright Brothers Airport; and
9. Wright State University (or see above).

Huh…well. That was kind of a let-down, actually.

Guess I will just have to hunt down the ones I haven’t found yet and photograph them.

A rebuttal to HP’s “Scan and share children’s artwork” blog post

Dear Hewlett Packard,

I love your scanners and printers. I really do. (Seriously, I own two of each.)

But please, for the love of God, stop throwing around tips about how to “archive…priceless works of art” or “scan like a pro” as though you have any idea what those tips should actually be — because you don’t.

Everyone knows that your blog posts full of “helpful tips” are really just a ploy to sell your products. And that’s all well and good; any idiot should realize that when a company tries to give you “hints” (or recipes or coupons), what they’re really doing is trying to sell you something.

And I’m not knocking the ideas, necessarily. I’ve seen some neat ideas – including HP’s “Scan and Share Children’s Artwork” article I’m about to rip apart. (And my chicken parm recipe came from the back of a spaghetti sauce jar, and it’s pretty darn good.)

But here’s a thought: don’t go around masquerading as a “pro” to people who don’t know any better.

*****

Dear People who are not Hewlett Packard, if you want to know how to scan and preserve your kids’ artwork, don’t ask HP, ask an archivist. And oh wait, I just happen to be one.

So here are some rebuttals to what HP suggests in “Scan and Share Children’s Artwork.” I don’t claim to have all the answers on this; I have never attempted to archive children’s artwork. But I’m pretty confident that anything I suggest is going to be better advice than what your scanner’s marketing department dreamed up.

*****

And now…the much-anticipated flaying of HP’s article “Scan and Share Children’s Artwork.” (And if there’s time, I’ll take a vicious stab at “Quick Tips for Scanning Photos,” too.)

First off : I don’t really see a problem with the idea of scanning your kids’ artwork, with several caveats:

If you intend to save the original “forever”, can you digitize (either scan or photograph) it without harming it? Will scanning this artwork harm your scanner? (I’m imagining friable media such as crayon flaking off on your scanner; sounds like a mess to me.) And can you even capture the true essence of that macaroni-made man they show in the article, with a flatbed scanner? It’s 3D!

Maybe you don’t care about keeping the original safe “forever”. Perhaps the whole point is that you want to make a digital facsimile so you can save physical space by discarding the originals. (I’m not necessarily recommending this. Even HP didn’t flat-out suggest throwing away the originals, although they plant the seed of this idea about three different ways with phrases like “reduce clutter,” “avoid throwing out favorites” [emphasis mine], and “free up more space in your home”.) But anyway, if you DID want to digitize the art so that you could feel better about throwing out the originals, wouldn’t you want to make sure you digitized at a high enough quality to achieve your goal of preserving as good a copy as possible? If yes, then HP’s guidelines are not strict enough.

OK, let’s just go ahead and get this out of the way now : I’m going to rag on the “Quick Tips for Scanning Photos” blog post after all. It’s one of my top three annoyances with this article. (The other two are: the casual way they throw around words like “preserve” and “archive” and the digital storage recommendations they make.)

I don’t like the way they casually suggest making corrections to color, fading, or blurriness, especially letting the scanner “auto correct” things. Maybe this is what “the pros” in other professions – like photography – might do. But when you are throwing “archive” into like every other paragraph, you are in my world now, and that’s now how we roll as digital archivists. You should be striving for a true representation of the thing you are digitizing. Hey, if you want to tweak the color or something on a secondary copy, that’s one thing, but I think it’s a bad idea to not keep a copy of what the original ACTUALLY looked like, especially if you are going to throw the original hard copy away to “free up more space in your home” (because guess what, HP, the only way to free up more space in your home is by actually removing things; I’m pretty sure it’s the law of conservation of mass that says that just rearranging stuff doesn’t change how much of it exists).

I’m pleased that they at least acknowledge that TIFF files are the archival format, and they suggest using TIFF “if you’re uncertain how you’ll use it in the future” (and may wish you had a higher quality file). But they blew it when making scan resolution recommendations. I’m not even going to justify the suggestion of 75-100 DPI for Web use with a response; and the recommendation of 300 DPI for “printing or archiving” kind of makes me want to punch them in the face. MAYBE if we’re talking about a REALLY big piece of art. But then, if it’s big enough to justify only scanning at 300 DPI, does HP even make a consumer-grade flatbed scanner big enough to do that? I’m pretty sure they don’t.

If you are scanning Junior’s artwork, and you want to do it “like a pro” — like a real archives pro, not like the imaginary slacker that HP is talking about — then you should be scanning at about 600 DPI, saving as TIFFs, and not muddling things up with any color correction or auto-correct (figure out how to turn all that crap OFF in your scanner software). And no whining about the file sizes either. If you want to do this, do it right. Go big or go home.

Okay…now back to “Scan and Share Children’s Artwork.”

Here’s some food for thought : In most cases, a digital copy is never going to be as good as the original.

The only exception I can think of it is if your kid made a collage of newspaper clippings: if you scan it today while it’s new, that scanned newsprint is likely to look a whole lot better than the original in 10 or 20 years.

But oh wait, the only way you’ll ever know that for sure is if your digital copy (and the original) both survive for the next 10-20+ years so you can compare them. (Unless you have the equipment & know-how to conduct one of those artificial aging experiments – you know, the one that “proved” that microfilm should last 500 years.)

So, how are you going to make sure the digitized version of your kids’ artwork is safe?  Well, once they are digitized, I recommend following something along the lines of what I suggested in my “Save your digital photos” series (parts 1, 2, and 3) [June 2012].

HP recommends burning the image files to DVD and to “make two discs: one for archival purposes, and one to share with Grandma or other friends or family.” OK, I will give them credit for sneaking in the concepts of LOCKSS (lots of copies keeps stuff safe) AND geographic dispersal, whether they knew it or not, BUT I would still take this a little further. I don’t like optical media (CDs, DVDs) because they seem to go bad faster than real hard drives, even if you don’t use them. But they are easy to label and store. If you want to go that DVD route, make two copies FOR YOU and store them separately, AND give that third copy to Grandma (who hopefully lives in another state and not just across town?). I would also recommend backing up online using something like Dropbox, Carbonite, Smugmug, Shutterfly, or Snapfish (no I’m not selling these, they’re just ones I thought of). [There's more about this in the "Save your digital photos" blog posts I referenced earlier.]

Finally, the one last statement that really ticked me off about this article: “Digital files or prints of your children’s art pieces last longer than the pieces themselves.” Uh…there’s a statement that requires some qualification, if I ever saw one. The digital files MIGHT last longer than the original IF you follow an appropriate regimen of file storage and backup. And I think it bears mentioning that any archivist will tell you that the original is always better than a digital copy, because you can’t get a truer representation of the original than THE ORIGINAL.

*****

While there are many things about these articles that really pushed my buttons (clearly), I would like to end on a positive note.

I reiterate : in theory, the suggestion of digitizing your kids’ artwork is a good one. (You know, assuming you don’t damage the original or your scanner in the process.) I like the idea, and I hadn’t really thought of it before (maybe because I don’t have children so this hasn’t come up in my personal life).

I really like the suggestions they made for why you might want to do it:

• To share one piece of art with multiple people, such as self, both sets of grandparents, etc. (in Archivist-Speak: increased access);
• To “ensure the original won’t be worn and torn after show and tell” (in Archivist-Speak: to reduce handling on the original while still allowing access – welcome concepts in Archivist Land); and even
• To reduce clutter — this one I can get on board with, because if it means you can take 50 drawings off the fridge and put them neatly in a box somewhere, instead showing them off in a photo frame or on Facebook (thus still placating your kid that you are proud of their accomplishments – does Facebook Wall count as a virtual refrigerator door now in that sense?), then I think that’s fine.

I love that they reminded people to “write down as much information as you can about each piece” (in Archivist-Speak: YAY METADATA!), such as title of work, date of completion, and other anecdotal information (in Archivist-Speak: YAY PROVENANCE!).

Those other ideas about making a photo book, tee shirt, or thank you notes (to name a few) were also pretty awesome. Great ideas.

I guess what I’m trying to say here is : The idea of scanning kids’ artwork is basically good, in my opinion. What I disagree with (heartily) are the recommended specifications for the project’s implementation.

Okay, I’m going to go put my soapbox away now.

Advice to Archives Grad Students

Last night, I was invited to be one of three guest speakers for the Intro to Public History graduate class at Wright State University. The three of us, all archivists at different types of institutions, were asked to talk a bit about our educational and career backgrounds, our job duties, and any advice we wanted to share with the graduate students.

I’ll spare you the details of what I told the students about my background and job duties, as most of that can be found elsewhere on this blog. But I thought it might be worth writing about what I told them in the way of advice. (Please note, I will probably elaborate a bit more here than I did in the class last night. I was trying to keep my little spiel to a reasonable amount of time. But here at the blog, I can go on as long as I want…and you know I do.)

#1: Get experience.

All the job ads want you to have “experience” in something. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a professional archivist job posting that said “no experience necessary.” They don’t all necessarily require you to have “a lot” of experience, but…you’ve got to have something to offer them.

They do get some real experience just from the nature of the WSU program: hands-on activities in many of the courses, an entire (required) class on arrangement & description, a required internship, and a required project. This is probably similar in most archives programs, though – so the more you can do to set yourself apart, and the more (and varied) experience you can get, the better chance you have at being hired somewhere after graduation.

So, back to the basic advice snippet: Get experience. How? I want to say “any way you can” but the infinite nature of that statement leads me to think that someone will do something bizarre and nefarious and then say “but she said ‘any way you can’.” Okay…any legitimate way you can: volunteering, extra internships, extra projects on the side, etc.

In a lot of cases, this experience-getting is probably going to involve working for free. Because in case you haven’t noticed (and if you haven’t, I’m telling you now, so take notice): most cultural organizations are not rolling in cash these days (were they ever?). Sure, there are some well-funded organizations, but in the grand scheme of all the archives/museums/historical societies/educational institutions/local governments/libraries out there, the vast majority of them do not have a heck of a lot of money to spare (or none at all). Some have no paid employees at all. [On that side note, pay attention to the credentials of anyone you want to work for/with. If they the organization is not well-thought-of in archives circles, the experience may not help you. On the flip side, you may know more than anyone there and have an opportunity to bring a new professionalism to the organization in some way, which would look pretty awesome on your resume.]

Bottom line is — you may have to work for free to beef up your resume. I realize that is not ideal. Okay, I admit, “not ideal” is a gross understatement. It’s more like “downright crappy,” actually. But consider it an investment. Just like all those dollars you’re paying to the grad school or those hours and hours (and houuuuuurs) you’re spending on studying (right?!). You may have to give more (and more and more) now, but if you play your cards right, it should be well worth it in the end.

I have done grad school two times. I worked 40 hours/week both times (most of which was paid, luckily) and graduated in 2 years both times. And okay, I didn’t get as much sleep as I would have liked, didn’t spend as much time playing as I would have liked, and probably spent more time crying than was strictly necessary (usually at the start of the term when I first got all my syllabuses together and was staring down the barrel of all the work I had for the next 10 weeks)…but I made it. And I consider myself rewarded. I got a full-time archivist job the summer after graduation; meanwhile I have friends who had to wait for years (and some who are still waiting).

Hard work will be rewarded. Eventually. I can’t promise you a job right after graduation, but I believe that if you are hardworking, dedicated, and genuinely like what you’re doing, good things will come your way.

On a related note: as a graduate student, some organizations may think of you as a “special case” and let you do cool projects that they would not normally let a “volunteer” or “temporary employee” do, because they want to help you with your education. So just keep that in mind and make sure you take advantage of the idea that while you’re still a student, it makes more sense when you go around asking for an “internship”.

And finally, not to get your hopes up too high, but you never know when something temporary/voluntary/unpaid may turn into something paid and permanent. That organization just might become convinced that they simply cannot survive without your awesomeness, and they might find a way to keep you. So that temporary gig might turn into something more permanent. It happened to one of the other speakers from last night, and it happened to a friend of mine. It’s not just a total myth.

#2: Get experience…in the type of institution where (you think) you want to work.

This one doesn’t require as much explaining, because quite frankly, it’s just good sense. If at all possible, in the course of attempting to fulfill my Advice #1 (“get experience”), you really should try hard to get that experience in the type of institution or archives where you think you would like to work after you graduate.

You might just find that it’s not what you thought it was — which could be good or bad. You might find that it’s way more awesome than you imagined! Or, you might suddenly realize that it’s not what you want to do with the rest of your life. Either way, the sooner you find out, the better, because then you can start adjusting your career plans as necessary.

#3: A few skills I’ve found really helpful

In my work as an archivist — and this may not be the case for every archivist, depending on what the job actually entails — I have found the following skills really useful (in addition to all the other obvious ones):

• Understand the fact that archives users do not always know what they want. The question they ask you initially may not be the real question but a request to access what they think they need in order to answer their real question. Read up on the “reference interview” and how to drag the real question out of people, so that you can get down to the business of helping them find their answers.
• Learn about digitization and electronic records. All things digital are here to stay.
• Learn about databases. At the very least, learn some basics about how they are usually structured and how to tease the info you need out of them. Learn some common applications for databases in archives. Learn how to (properly) design one to store the data you need to store. And, I know not everyone is ”techy,” but if you can learn how to actually design and create & implement them, that would be better.

#4: Be aware of your online presence. Don’t just groom it; cultivate it.

If you have any sort of indiviudal Internet presence (Facebook, blog, etc.) and an impending job search, listen up: pay attention to how you portray yourself online. You have probably already heard this spiel repackaged in a variety of ways, so I won’t harp on it too much, because it is the same for getting an archives job as any other job:

Potential employers are going to Google you.

So, before you start applying for things, you better do some reconn. work and possibly damage control if you need it:

• Google yourself. If you find anything bad, do what you can to make it disappear.
• From this point forward, pay special attention to what you put online about yourself. (For instance, if you don’t post racist slurs on Facebook, you don’t have to clean them up; if you don’t post a picture of you smoking pot on Facebook, you don’t have to remove it. Better yet, don’t be racist and don’t smoke pot! If you don’t do/say questionable–or downright illegal–things in the first place, then you have no problem.
• Pay attention to what your friends put online about you. (Okay, so you’re 22 and you did shots at New Year’s. Fine. But you may want to think twice about being tagged in those pictures or even letting your friend post them. You know who’s never late for work because of a hangover? People who don’t drink. Just sayin’…)

This is all common sense, I think. If it’s not, well…I probably can’t help you much.

But I don’t need to harp about all the negative stuff you should look for and eliminate, or, like I said, not do in the first place–or at least not post online!–which makes it a whole lot easier. Although, I want to emphasize: I’m not necessarily telling you to change who you are. I’m just saying, think twice about how who you are might look to a potential employer, many of whom can have their pick of a zillion applicants these days.

The flip side of this, after you eliminate the negative, don’t forget the other half of that old song lyric: accentuate the positive. You know they are going to Google you. Don’t you want to make sure they find something good? And that is completely within your power to do. Give them something good to find.

Get your credentials out there. Get a LinkedIn account — and start networking with people on there. Create an online CV.

Get a blog. There are lots of free ones (just search for “free blogs”). (Make sure it comes up on Google and other search engines when you search for your name.) Write about topics related to your field of interest, perhaps your internships or work experiences.

This should also go without saying, but make sure anything you put on your blog is OK to share: watch out for confidentiality or privacy snafus, and it would be a pretty dumb idea to badmouth your boss, co-workers, or organization on the blog. Try to write only positive things! Things that highlight your knowledge and enthusiasm. Things that are both true and that make you look awesome. That’s the sweet spot.

Not a writer? Don’t want a blog? Okay, you could always use Twitter to share little snippets. You don’t need to be a writer to use Twitter because you’ve only got 140 characters; if you’re like me, you have trouble keeping it that short. Twitter is a great way to interact with others in the profession, share interesting articles, etc.

I could probably go on for a while about different ways to promote yourself on the Internet, but you get the idea. The bottom line of Advice #4 is to put positive things “out there” about yourself (and make sure they come up when you search for your name), because you can only put so much in a resume and cover letter.

And there’s more to you than two pages.