Fred Schouten said: ... "but I always was under the impression that
Master's theses and Doctoral dissertations were supposed to generate
new information. That is, they are supposed to be designed as research
projects themselves, rather than just a long term paper citing other
people's research in support of a hypothesis."
As a San Francisco Bay Area researcher working in historical areas, I
can offer that 75% of the material used in my work is primary:
letters, topical civic reports, local magazine articles and ephemera;
even old blueprints, bumperstickers and advertising. Practically
speaking, none of this material is available on the internet or on
computer catalogs. Much of it is available in libraries and accessible
only via librarians with terrific memories, old card catalogs and
specific local indexes. From these "scraps" we write articles on
sweeping subjects like freeway revolts, urban planning, sociopolitical
trends, social undercurrents and the like. Until the unlikely day when
trillions of dollars are devoted to digitalization of such materials
(even the unprecedented 1940-50s national microfilm projects could not
finance such extensive archival transfers and should not be expected
to) we will continue to preen through paper archives like UC Bancroft
and SFPL History Room, as well as less known libraries and private
collections, in search of material to help us find out how we arrived
at our common present. Often, it seems a desperate race against time.
Although the internet and digital means offer valuable tools for
research, it seems unlikely that these technologies will ever
"replace" libraries. There will never be enough money in the world.
Unfortunately, here in San Francisco, we are finding that modern
trends are causing irrepairable damage to such 19-20 c. archives.
(20th century materials are particularly at risk given our
experience.) Our new Main library is particularly revealing.
At SF's new Main library, following a widely reported upon
administrative "purge" of collections which is ongoing and seemingly
unchecked even by concerned, talented and well-meaning librarians, our
checking against a carefully tracked pre-move library list of thirteen
research titles showed that seven were withdrawn. Half of these were
probably one-of-a-kind: itemized budgets, local pamphlets and booklets
and reports. Fortunately, these materials were copied in time and are
now published in a national magazine article on an important,
previously unresearched topic. It's easy to say that such obscure
materials are old and in the way, but from our experience it is the
material from which the highest quality modern books and articles are
generally drawn. One researcher's trash is another's treasure.
I hear little about preservation of such materials and little or none
of this material is available by digital means. Unless much more
attention is immediately paid to providing acceptable and
cost-effective preservation of such knowledge through the transition
to digital frontiers and the new methodologies and more pedantic hard
storage devices, we are in great danger of discarding the evidence of
the past decades just a generation before future researchers have the
opportunity to make sense of the present, and the all important
future.
I would be pleased to hear from fellow researchers and librarians that
might offer their insights and experiences in these new waters;
particularly those involved in 20 c. areas in their communities.
Walter Biller
Editor
The San Francisco Almanac
"San Francisco's Native Wisdom!"
E-mail: biller@slip.net