Search results

The purpose of this chapter is to delineate a number of factors unique to archives that problematize commonly accepted rhetoric in library and information studies (LIS).

This study reports on an analysis of several core concepts in archival studies (evidence, access, and power) and delineates how such concepts differ from dominant conceptions in the study of libraries.

Our research shows how archives call into question three dominant discursive tropes in LIS: the primacy of informational value (as opposed to evidential value in archives); universal access as a professional and ethical obligation; and the assumption that information institutions are universally benevolent. Although such tropes have been increasingly challenged by growing numbers of critical LIS scholars, we argue that they remain dominant discursive formations in LIS and reflect key areas of divergence that differentiate archives from libraries and distinguish the professional ethos of archivists and librarians.

This is the first chapter to delineate how archives differ from libraries in regard to human rights concerns and will spark discussion about such differences between the fields.