Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)

Subject: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 06:55 AM

I have a delemma ... yet again. You might remember that I'm into a two year project of converting my 300 R/R tape recording into digital format and downloading them to CD's. I've been making these recording since 1955. Part of my approach is the composing of the details, as I know them, of the various performers. These are mostly obscure folk musicians. Here's my question for everyone:

What should I do with negative information I am uncovering about a criminal background? As an archivist, I feel obligated to provide future historians, maybe 50 years from now, with ALL the information I can provide.

I'd appreciate your thoughts. Bob(deckman)Nelson

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 07:07 AM

What should I do with negative information I am uncovering about a criminal background?

First, you consult a friendly attorney, on the record, about the legal implications to yourself, of having the information, and about potential liabilities as regards libel. Perhaps from there a brief statement (not much longer than your sentence above) can be inserted referring to the material on file with that attorney or another responsible party.

If the matters are already part of the public record somewhere, you can add that location to your sentence as above.

As I have seen it in biographies, such a sentence can't help but be paired with an editorial comment as to how the matter might be viewed in light of their artistic contributions-- so-and-so had a few flaws vs. so-and-so's legacy was sadly [value statement] by [legal issue]... which goes back to libel liability, see?

Or allude briefly (your sentence above) to the existence of the issues and state that your work focuses strictly on their artistic contribution. Whatever you are finding can only be part of the story, in any event, so how would you know how to present it, absent quoting sources, and do you really want to spread that can or worms around THEIR reputations?

~Susan

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 07:15 AM

Susan ... first of all I want you to know that appreciate your thoughtful contribution. I need to give a LITTLE MORE information here, but I'm obviously NOT going to mention names:

This person is long dead. But as I study, in depth, the total volume of his musical legacy, I'm realizing that his criminal activities clearly influenced his music. By that I mean the choice of songs he performed.

I can't help but think that 50 or 100 years from now, some future historian would appreciate knowing these details. bob

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 07:28 AM

I don't know from the ethical or libel side. What I do know is that historians should be obliged to present the facts especially the relevant ones. Whether they can do so with impunity, I don't know.

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Jack Campin
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 08:24 AM

If the person's dead, does it really matter if you let the cat out of the bag right now? There are plenty of precedents for criminal musicians, Leadbelly being the obvious one.

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 08:53 AM

There is a difference in archiving all information and making it information available.
We have a number of 'sensitive' recordings which we have noted as "only to be made accessible with the recordist's permission'. In thirty years I am pretty sure that this has never been breached.
There is another aspect of this. There is a very well know traditional singer who allowed the collector to record some extremely personal information. On her death, her family insisted that ALL the recordings of her made by that collector be withdrawn from the archive, thus losing all the information - not just the sensitive stuff.
While I agree with Virginia's point about the the duty of the historian, in the end, the wishes of the performer/speaker/ whoever, must be paramount. If the information in question is significant enough to have been recorded, then it is enough that it should be archived.
Jim Carroll
It occurs to me - wonder what Huddie Leadbetter would think of his prison record being common knowledge!!!

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 09:13 AM

As a pure matter of opinion, mine is if he hadn't wanted his criminal past to be known through history, he shouldna done it.

Ethically, history has a commitment to truthtelling.

Legally, I would echo Suz' advice.


A

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 09:20 AM

Interesting comments ... thanks. bob

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 10:28 AM

Here's what I discern now that I'm awake. :~)

Is one a historian, a reporter, an [???}, or an archivist? Each will have its own ethical boundaries, and its best mode of presentation and perspective. Define the former and you will see the latter more clearly.


Perhaps, for example, you have started as an archivist and are now feeling a pull to be a historian-- a complicated case might not be the best place to start a new approach? I would say that your urge to ask about this, carefully, indicates a need for a nice long think about the underlying questions such as what I've just posed, and their implications.


THEN form can follow function, and content can follow form-- it's as much a structural issue as a legal one.


Included in all that will be contingency planning-- how to describe and market the results, how to protect yourself and his family and associates legally, how to present yourself in such a way that your work on this will be respected in the circles in which you wish it to be received, how it will affect future projects and, indeed, existing ones......


In short, you wanted to think about this, so trust that instinct and think it through across all its layers and to all its depths. Then trust what you come out of that with, and be a good steward of the big picture of it that you see. But don't resolve it as a referendum. It's your project, not a collective. :~) Opinions may help you discover your own ethics, but they can't substitute for your own judgment.


Love to know how it turns out, and how much time you are able to devote to it. (Can you go around this artist and work on other stuff while it simmers?)

~Susan

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 10:34 AM

Susan ... MY GOODNESS ... when you WAKE UP ... you really wake up. Thanks again. bob

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 12:39 PM

Deckman,

First, what WYSIWYG said.

But to expand a bit.

I ain't no lawyer and I ain't no lawyer's son...
but I was a professional scholar in a previous lifetime

If your target audience is professional historians there are three things to keep in mind.
1. document
2. document
3. document

If you wish to provide future PROFESSIONAL historians with USABLE information, they will be more interested in your sources than your interpretations/synopses/summaries/paraphrases/liner notes of the information they contain.

What future historians will want is full disclosure of your sources so they can reference those sources themselves and verify your interpretation of those sources.

If your sources are a matter of public record, I don't see what sort of legal trouble you can get into by accurately reporting their contents. But I ain't a lawyer.

If you sources are in some sense "private", e.g. a private conversation you had with the person, I don't have a clue what the legalities would be, but professionals will be chary of taking your claims seriously unles they can access those sources, e.g, cassette tape, handwritten notes, themselves.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 01:51 PM

I find it a little disturbing that the emphasis here is on the legal rather than the ethical aspect of this question - ie "anything that you can get away with legally is permissable". This argument totally bypasses the responsibility that the collector has to the informant.
If, as ours is/was, the relationship you have with your singers, storytellers, lore-carriers, is a long-term one, a trust develops between the two - many of the people we recorded became close friends. In those circumstances, quite often you can be given information as a friend rather than a collector.
Our technique of interviewing was quite often done conversationally rather than formally. On one occasion we had been recording a man who was explaining how Travellers used to 'doctor' (ie - disguise) faults in horse in order to sell them. At the end of the session he said, "I've never told that to anybody outside of our community; please don't play it to anybody else". As the material is legally ours we would be perfectly within our rights to publish it in any form we wished. Should we - the information obtained certainly was important and relevant enough to merit it? Certainly not as far as I'm concerned, we shouldn''t.
One of the most spectacular abuses of trust was perpetrated by an American film-maker who was recording an old-time singer.
After the session, they adjourned to the local bar where the collector continued filming "background atmosphere". In the course of the conversation the old singer, a bachelor, who lived some way outside town, described how he came into town once a month "for a few drinks and a woman". Some time later the singer went to the cinema in town, and was appalled to find that the main feature was accompanied by a short film on old-time singers, and there he was, up on the screen, telling of how he came in to town once a month "for a few drinks and a woman".
That was the last time he sang for anybody.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 03:12 PM

What Jim Carroll said.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 03:34 PM

Very interesting postings. bob

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 06:20 PM

Just an aside re Jim Carroll's question of how Leadbelly might feel about people knowing of his prison past. There is a film excerpt from the March of Time programmes where Leadbelly appears in striped prison garb alongside John Lomax re-enacting his story. I guess it didn't bother him any more than it did Son House or Bukka White or Robert Pete Williams that people knew of their prison past.
It would appear that the way justice worked in some places in the south in the past meant that it could be relatively easy for some members of society to be incarcerated and would therefore not carry much of a stigma.

Hoot

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 27 Jun 09 - 10:36 PM

Deckman,

What are you planning do do with your material?
How are you planning to make it available to "future historians"?
Do you plan to donate your material to an organization, perhaps academic?

These questions are not idle curiousity.

I won't try to predict what the wolrd will be like in 50 years, but I am acquainted with the status of various archives these days.

Many archives have become "roach motels." If you can get an organization to accept your material at all, it will probably never be seen again.

The chronic problem is financial and it has been a problem long predating the current economic troubles.

It's all about money.
It costs money to prepare material for archiving.
It costs money to store material.
It costs money to catalog it properly.
It costs money to make it accessible to people outside the institution.
Many if not all organizations interested in the sort of material I assume you to have are working with budgets and staff cut to the bone.

I am aware of this because you are doing what a lot of us boomers are doing.

We remember the "golden age" of the Library of Congress Field Recordings and we have learned the hard way that those days are gone, probably for good.

One strategy is to bypass the organizations and get the recordings directly into the hands of those who are interested.

See for example,
The Field Recorders' Collective

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 07:46 AM

Russ ... You raise perfect questions. The final destination of my collection is still uncertain. Dissemination is my primary goal. I have been looking at "The Field Recorders Collective". It's very interesting. Over the next several months I will be continuing disscussions with a couple of Universities regarding the placement of my material. Thank you for your input. Bob(deckman)Nelson

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 08:50 AM

Bob,

Good luck.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 11:02 AM

Bob,

Just had another thought.

Sounds like you're doing the fun part. Transferring the tapes. Listening to the music. Reminiscing.

According to my archivist son-in-law, the more your collection is documented the more attractive it becomes to potential recipients.

In my collection of my own field recordings spanning several decades the recordings themselves are priceless (at least to me) but of much more practical importance is the database that allows me to search by artist, tune name, event, etc so I can put my hands on the particular recording I want to hear.

Since I am a nerd at heart the creation and maintenance of the database provides its own type of pleasure.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Azizi
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 12:12 PM

This is an interesting discussion. Thanks for starting it.

I have two asides, both to "Guest" posters (If you both were members, I probably would have pmed you and not go off-topic on this thread).

GUEST,Hootenanny -with regards to Leadbelly performing wearing stripped prison garb while performing-I think the reason for this was that Leadbelly's needed to keep a payin job and so he had to do what he had to do (i.e. he had to do what his "boss" Lomax told him to do regardless of his feelings about it). I also think it's a very erroneous belief that Black folks way back then didn't consider it a stigma that Leadbelly or other Black folks had been in prison even though the "justice" system then (and now) was/is made the chances of Black folks being incarcerated much greater than White folks.


**

GUEST,Russ, thanks for posting that link to The Field Recorders' Collective. I particularly read the notes on play party songs with great interest. But I can't figure out which CD (CDs?) on that site is (are) the party party one/s. Are these types of songs included with other fiddle song CDs? I tried to write a note to ask that question using the Contact page, but Microsoft Outlook doesn't work on my computer (you can see I'm not technologically savvy). It would be helpful for that site to include its email address for those interested but techie challenged visitors like me.

Again, sorry for this (largely off-topic) post.

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 01:07 PM

Azizi,

The email there is:

[e-mail]


How you find those when they are not shown is:

Hover your mouse over the link and right-click the mouse, choosing "copy link location" (or similar command). Then put your cursor at the "to" line of your email, and paste (Control-V) the email address into your email message.

~S~

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 01:17 PM

Azizi,

the address is
[e-mail]

I don't know where you live but they set up shop every year at Clifftop. I hope Ray is well enough to be there.

As far as I can tell, the CDs that specifically mention play-party songs would be FRC409 & FRC410,
Play-Party Songs and Dances in Texas from Bill Owens "Tell Me a Story, Sing Me a Song"

I don't have those CDs.

All the old musicians would have had play-party songs/tunes in their repertoires. But the players would have noticed that the collectors were most interested in the hard-core dance tunes rather than music they considered "kids' music."

I remain a guest on principal. That's why I am the "Permanent GUEST."

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 01:39 PM

Russ ... I would like to telephone you and pick your brain @ archiving issues. As a "guest" I don't know how you could do this, but would you please send me your telephone number or your private e-mail addy? Bob Nelson ... in the Seattle area

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Azizi
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 01:43 PM

Thanks for those directions and information, Susan and Russ.

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 09:23 PM

Bob,

threezerofourseventhreeeightfoureightonethree.

I screen my calls and hardly ever answer the phone.

You'll probably have to leave a message with your phone number and/or email.

For the record, I have never joined mudcat on principal.

Russ (Permanent Guest)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 10:08 PM

Bob,

Correction.

threezerotwoseventhreeeightfoureightonethree.

Got WV on my mind.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 28 Jun 09 - 11:12 PM

I'm PMing that phone number to Deckman, if a clone wants to remove it.

~S~

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 29 Jun 09 - 09:53 AM

WYSIWIG,

Thanks.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 29 Jun 09 - 11:13 AM

Azizi

I have to disagree with you I'm afraid. It is my belief that people on the lower end of the social scale for whatever reason often get shafted with the rough end of the stick as far as justice goes. They know this and probably assume that others are aware of it too.
Regarding Leadbelly only re-enacting his prison days for Lomax and pay you are probably correct but I believe that Leadbelly was an astute man and possibly realised that his past might just be a good selling point for his concert apearances.
I don't know because I never met Leadbelly but I did meet Robert Pete and Son House among others.

Hoot

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Azizi
Date: 29 Jun 09 - 11:17 AM

Azizi, I have to disagree with you I'm afraid.

Hootenanny, you don't have to be afraid to disagree with me.

:o)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 29 Jun 09 - 11:19 AM

Just in case you think I am continuing off on a thread drift can I suggest approaching the Smithsonian. They have among other material all of the old Folkways recordings which they still make available.

Hoot

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 29 Jun 09 - 12:33 PM

Hoot,

The Smithsonian is one of the institutions I had in mind.

Yes, the Folkways catalog is readily available and reasonably priced.

But material from the internal archives, particularly The Archive of Folk Culture, is another story.

Some cataloged material is simply not currently available and might not be available for the foreseeable future. Some cataloged material is available for a very steep price, assuming that there is staff to copy the material. If course, material that has not yet been cataloged might as well not exist at all.

I am not criticizing the Smithsonian. They do the best they can with they money they have. But times have been tough in the archiving trade for quite a while.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 30 Jun 09 - 08:42 AM

That's fair comment Russ. I wasn't aware quite how tough things are with the various archives but of course I should be. I am quite anxious about eventual disposal of my own very modest collection so will be keeping my eyes open for any wothwhile suggestions.

Hoot (another guest)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 30 Jun 09 - 08:46 AM

With this thread, I am becomming more aware of just how many of us are out there that are trying to preserve and disseminate our private collections. Interesting. Bob(deckman)Nelson

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 30 Jun 09 - 10:20 AM

Reading this thread has reminded me that similar ethics come into play regarding recordings of risque material. I am now worried about the fact that all my field recordings from the 60s/70s are now online at the BLSA site and I've just remembered that a few contain such material, with named singers.

Having said that, I do agree with Jim regarding sensitive material. On the YG site we were going to include a song by a young Yorkshire singer who died recently, along with a published article about his life and songs. In keeping with our policy we consulted his family first and we were informed that his brothers would be upset if reference was made to the site at any time. Needless to say we immediately dropped the idea.

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 30 Jun 09 - 10:30 AM

Steve ... maybe you should adopt the military policy ... "Don't Ask ... Don't Tell!" My delemma is that this particuliar performer is long gone and it appears that his family is also. bob

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 30 Jun 09 - 11:11 AM

Bob,

It's a boomer thing.

We've all been recording for years and we're all aware of the ticking clock:)

Did you get my phone number?

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Deckman
Date: 30 Jun 09 - 11:49 AM

Yes, I did. Call in half an hour? bob

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 30 Jun 09 - 01:14 PM

Bob,
I am at work.

Will be until 9PM EST.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 30 Jun 09 - 01:35 PM

Bob,
If he and family are long gone, the only problem I can see is the disillusionment of any fans. For instance there are numerous fans out there who refuse to accept that Bert Lloyd tinkered quite extensively with songs and led people to believe that he had collected them as such from oral tradition. (See the many threads on this)

Subject: RE: Archiving Ethics (AGAIN)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 30 Jun 09 - 01:37 PM

Somebuddy ought to ask a clone to delete the phone number now that it's in the right hands.

~S~