Ch06

Sam Kula

INTRODUCTION

As the exponential increase in the volume of contemporary records threatens to inundate the archival repositories of the world, appraisal and selection have become essential elements in the archival process. Despite the inarguable theoretical objections to selection advanced by Jenkinson (neither the historian nor the archivist should share in the creation of archives), the dual pressures of space and cost are forcing all archivists to adopt at least some of the proposals of Schellenberg for modern archives management, proposals in which appraisal and selection are deeply embedded.

Appraisal remains, however, the most sensitive aspect of archives administration, with the archivist open to allegations of subjectivity, or the inherent prejudice of a bureaucrat, regarding records selected, and charges of incompetence, if not criminal complicity, regarding records destroyed. Decisions are made, nevertheless, even though the policies on which they are based are seldom precise or unequivocal. And if the policies were clear and consistent, it is doubtful whether they would be interpreted in the same way in another organisation, in another country, or by the next generation of archivists.

The uneasiness with which archivists now approach the appraisal and selection of traditional government paper records - the record groups, series, and files that still represent the administrative history of a government department as well as constituting a record of its activities is intensified when the archivist is faced with non-textual records. If little exists in the way of guidelines or uniform practice when dealing with traditional paper records, there is even less when the newer media are at issue. Since moving image records are sledom part of government records series, and therefore firmly grounded as to provenance and evidentiary function, they are not readily assessible in the context of the activity that initiated their production. Moving images produced outside of direct governmental sponsorship - the so-called private sector in countries where film and television production are not state monopolies - are even more difficult to appraise using the selection criteria developed for government records.

Henri Langlois, the founder of the Cinemathèque Française in Paris and one of the founders of the International Federation of Film Archives, always maintained that any selection policy was indefensible, that no archivist had the right to play God in determining which films would live and which would die. The position is theoretically unassailable, and when only a relative handful of titles were accessible for archival conservation in the chaos of the immediate post-war years in Europe, the policy of total inclusion was probably the only practical one to adopt. As the volume of production increased, however, and the archives, operating without a copyright or mandatory deposit law, had to actively solicit acquisitions through voluntary deposit, of necessity choices were made. The film archivist, by acting to save only certain titles, was inevitably condemning other titles to oblivion. In the absence of an articulated appraisal and selection policy the accessions that were made took on the character of accident, or

That there were only a handful of archives throughout the world actively acquiring and conserving motion pictures in the first fifty years following the invention of cinematography, and that those were exclusively non-governmental museums and cinematheques, perhaps explains the scarcity of references to the archival preservation of moving images in the literature of the day. Appraisal and selection policy had to wait for a more serious engagement with moving images by a broad spectrum or archival organisations. This has now occurred in many countries and the pervasive influence of television is accelerating the process. In many countries without a history of motion picture production, the archival preservation of moving images is a direct outgrowth of the advent of television broadcasting, and the concern that this aspect of the cultural heritage, linked as it is with many other aspect of the culture, should not be lost.

Although the International Federation of Film Archives was originally established in 1938, it was not until 1972 that the International Council on Archives (ICA) took official recognition of moving images in a report entitled Archives of Motion Pictures, Photographic Records and Sound Recordings prepared by Kohte for the Moscow Congress. Following a report on the archives of film, television and radio which the present author prepared for the London Congress in 1980, the ICA established a Working Group on Audio-visual Records. Unesco's link with the movement until 1980 was through the International Film and Television Council and its efforts to establish international standards for the cataloguing of moving images at least for the purposes of international exchanges. The present study is another indication that archival repositories, both governmental as well as non-governmental, are beginning to accept responsibility for moving images in an era when the volume of production makes appraisal and selection not an option, but a critical necessity.

In the years to come appraisal of moving images may be linked to the objectives of the Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Moving Images, adopted by the General Assembly of Unesco at the 1980 Belgrade Conference. It is, after all, the intent of the Recommendation that all moving image documents of cultural, historical or social significance be deposited and conserved in official archives, designated or established for the purpose, but not necessarily all moving images produced and/or distributed in any one territory.

Appraisal of moving images is still a very new concept, and one that is not universally accepted as necessary or wise. Several of my colleagues in the field stand firm with Langlois in the belief that it is dangerous, or at the very least an inherently evil practice to be avoided at all cost. The Recommendation wisely leaves designation of what should be deposited, as well as when and how, to national legislation, but implicit in the Recommendation is the concept of selection. In the light of that attitude, and with due regard to the history of benign neglect that can best characterize the relationship of state archives and moving images during the past eighty years, the guidelines suggested here are tentative. They represent an attempt to extrapolate from archival principles and practices in processing traditional paper records a few principles that could form the basis for an appraisal policy in moving images. If they facilitate the formulation of appraisal policies, or if they even succeed in generating a discussion among archivists that will eventually lead to the development of principles on which to base the appraisal of moving images, they will have served their purpose.

7. GUIDELINES

7.1 Appraisal of moving image records is a contentious issue.

Archivists have just begun to recognise their value as historic documents and while many archives have initiated limited programs of selective acquisition, many more have deferred action due to the financial commitment associated with the technology involved. In the absence of any action by national archives, and as a response to the severe losses that occurred in the first fifty years of cinematography and in the first twenty-five years of television broadcasting, a variety of non-governmental organisations working for the most part with inadequate resources, have tried to restore part of the moving image heritage and to safeguard those contemporary moving image records that have obvious historic, social, cultural or artistic value.

7.2 These non-governmental organisations, now being joined by state archives at both the regional and national level, are linked in their activities through the International Federation of Film Archives (FIAF) and International Federation of Television Archives (FIAT). Both these federations have been attempting to develop appraisal standards, but there has been little consensus within each federation and between the federations. At one extreme archivists in non-governmental organisations echo Sir Hilary Jenkinson and argue that any selection is wrong, that the archivist does not have the right "to play God". In the light of this position all moving images should be safeguarded by a network of moving image archives acting in concert.

7.3 The argument for total conservation is encountered more often in FIAF than in FIAT where archivists have to contend with the enormous volume of moving images generated by television broadcasting, and where archivists attached to broadcasting networks theoretically have the entire production available as acquisitions. Selection criteria in television broadcasting, however, is inevitably orientated to the needs of broadcasters. Value is determined to a large extent, on the likelihood of re-use by the production organisation. That determination, however, is based on the intrinsic historical or cultural value of the programme or sequence. In addition television archivists add illustrative specimens of repetitive programming and programmes that mark a significant advance in the art of the technology.

7.4 In practice all non-governmental moving image archives are selective even though the appraisal standards are seldom precise or well - articulated. The emphasis among FIAF member archives is on national productions that documents the film and television industries and on international productions that advance the art of the film or which constitute important historical or cultural documents. Selection criteria for non-governmental depositories also include moving images that are part of the oeuvre of producers and directors whose careers are significant in the history of the film and television industries.

7.5 Appraisal standards for governmental archives may now embody similar criteria, but in the past they have been rooted in the classic world today meet these criteria. The value of moving images as historical documentation lies primarily in their informational value. They seldom reflect the activities of a governmental or institutional entity, nor do they often offer insight on the implementation of government regulations or the application of corporate policies.

7.6 Moving images are, however, part of the "public" record, and they reflect the ideology of their producers, whether they are government departments or private entrepeneurs. Regardless of the mechanism of distribution - theatrical, non-theatrical or television - they are normally intended for mass audiences and they play an increasingly important role in determining how that audience perceives the issues of the day and the society in which they function. Moving images may not always be an accurate mirror of the societal structures that have generated them, and of the audiences that have consumed them, but they always impact on societal development and thus, for better or worse, become an integral part of that society's culture.

7.7 For state archives with a broad mandate tp conserve all documents of national historic interest the following criteria for the selection of moving images, by no means exclusive or exhaustive, should be considered:

i) Administrative: Moving images which are produced as a result of the activities of government agencies and which document the policies and programs of the sponsoring agencies, or which complement documents in other media that have been selected and conserved. This is sometimes referred to as evidential or functional value.
ii) Historical: Moving images which document the political, economic, scientific, technological, social and cultural life of the country, either as actualities (documentaries, and newsfilm) or as dramatisations.
iii) Sociological: Moving images which document the significance of the film and television as an integral part of the public record and the popular culture, and which function as an unofficial record of the national cultural heritage, either as actualities or as dramatisations.

7. Moving image archives attached to production organisations or officially designated as the archives or such activity in a country should also consider the following criteria:

i) Moving images which document the history and development of the image making activity in terms of significant milestones in time, in form, in genre, in technology, and in content.
ii) Moving images which document the activity in relation to a significant personality, an image making unit, or to a regional or ethnic or racial minority involvement.
iii) Moving images which have been distinguished by critical or popular acclaim and which have been instrumental in influencing the nature and direction of further production. iv) Moving images which have a high potential for re-use by the production organisation, or which meet perceived immediate or future research needs by the community the archives serves.

7.9 Moving image archives which are private, non-profit, non-governmental organisations which a mandate to promote and develop public appreciation of the media as well as to conserve the media could add the following criteria:

i) Moving images from both the foreign and domestic production that mark significant advances in aesthetic, artistic or technological development of the media.
ii) Moving images whose production and/or distribution, both foreign or domestic, documents major social or political changes, or which challenge contemporary community standards and/or censorship laws on what is acceptable in subject matter, treatment or form.
iii) Moving images that explore the relationship between the audience and the screen, or which reflexively examine the image-making process.
iv) Variant versions of moving images regarded as 'classics' which are valuable for film study and for the purpose of film restoration; 'outtakes' from such productions if significant in documenting the process of production; and 'cuts' made from such productions on demand of censorship authorities.

7.10 Factors which should be considered in applying these selection criteria could include the following:

i) First priority should be given to the moving images of the national production, including moving images produced in the country by visitors or under the authority of former administrations. Where such images no longer exist in the country every effort should be made to repatriate them as part of the national moving image heritage.
ii) Foreign films distributed in the country, especially when sub-titled or 'dubbed' in the language of the country, may be designated as part of the moving image heritage and selected if they meet the appraisal standards.
iii) Specimens of repetitious or voluminous productions (serials, advertising commercials) should be selected systematically and with sufficient frequency in order to document the entire production schedule.
iv) Specimens of moving image production for television broadcasting, in the context of the broadcast schedule, should be documented by recording and conserving entire days of broadcasts with a frequency that adequately reflects schedule changes.
v) Given the severe losses that have occurred world-wide as a result of technological obsolescence (the introduction of nitro-cellulose stock, pre-1950) any film produced before 1930, regardless of content, should be seriously considered for selection as a relatively rare surviving example of a very substantial production; and all films produced before 1950 on 35mm stock should be given priority in appraisal and processing because of the inherent instability of the stock. Special precautions must be taken to segregate film on nitrocellulose stock in environmentally controlled vaults.

7.11 In order to achieve the orderly transfer of moving image production resources to achives custody, the introduction of modern records management techniques should be encouraged at the earliest stage possible in the production process. All production elements (negatives, prints, videotapes, etc.), and related documentation, should be identified, designated, and scheduled so that the disposition of the elements can be controlled at every stage of the production/diffusion process. The short term (3-5 years) retention of the broadest possible selection of moving images should be the objective, to provide opportunity for a final selection with some sense of historical perspective.

7.12 Whenever possible documentation directly related to the production (scripts, stills, posters, press books, etc.) or associated with the production (production files, correspondence, memoranda, etc.) should be appraised at the same time as the production itself. When selected, such documentation must be intellectually linked with the production although it may be physically separated.

7.13 In the final analysis, the appraisal of moving images is as unscientific, as imprecise, and as inherently frustrating as the appraisal of any type of archival record and indeed any judgemental process. After years of personal soul-searching, open forums, and professional debates, archivists are still without a consensus but some progress has been made since the first theories of modern archives administration were being developed at the turn of the century. It is obvious untenability of the alternate positions let the administrator (image maker) decide, or retain everything in perpetuity - that has forced archivists to practice appraisal, and because the policies have never been precise, or practical, or consistent over time, the results have normally been a compromise fully acceptable to neither archivist nor researcher, or an outright disaster.

7.14 Faced with an exponential increase in the volume of production that shows no sign of levelling off (the introduction of low-cost videotape cameras and recorders has expanded and exploded the use of moving images throughout the world), the archivist must select, and select in a co-ordinated program with fellow archivists in the home territory and with colleagues around the world. Needless duplication must be avoided . Even with the possibility of applying the emerging technologies of the videodisc and the digital encoding of moving images to the development of new, low-cost storage mediums and instantaneous modes of diffusion, this generation of moving image archivists will still have to apply appraisal policies to prevent that archives from sinking under the weight of accessions, and the researcher of the future from drowning in a sea of redundant, and trivial images.

Contents - Previous - Next