Month: March 2016

The ‘poor cousins’ of national collections? Considering the value of archives to the third sector

By Mary Wills, Wilberforce Institute 

As part of our ‘Archives into the Future’ seminar series (in collaboration with Performing the Jewish Archive and supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council’s ‘Care for the Future’ theme), the recent workshop at the British Library conference centre provided a forum for discussion and debate about the many issues facing archives in the third sector. Around sixty delegates from across the heritage sector, academia and third sector organisations exchanged ideas on the value of archives to the third sector, and how heritage resources can be utilised in modern day campaigning. This theme is prominent in our own Antislavery Usable Past project, with its focus on using histories and heritage as tools for creating a greater theoretical understanding of the issues we face in society, and also as practical aids for creating modern strategies and campaigns to tackle these issues.

The programme consisted of two panel sessions and break-out discussions. Speakers in the morning session addressed the relationships between archives and the third sector, with a particular focus on public policy and social activism. Philip Gale of the National Archives spoke about the need to move away from third sector archives being viewed merely as ‘country cousins’ of larger national collections. Stressing the ‘multiplicity of different narratives’ in archive collections around the UK, he encouraged the establishment of sector-wide strategies for conservation, interpretation, and promotion of smaller collections.

Dr Andrew Flinn explored the variety of relationships between archives, civil society and campaigns for social justice. His idea of a ‘useful past’ focused on social campaigns, knowledge production, and community based archiving. The latter offered mutually beneficial relationships: both in allowing communities to create and curate their own histories, and in enabling the archive to be part of contemporary community campaigns. The idea of creating archives of communities as opposed to archives of the powerful was continued by Dr Stephen Muir of the Performing the Jewish Archive project, who promoted the use of archives as a way of stabilising connections between past and present.

Dr Charlotte Clements discussed the challenges inherent in encouraging third sector organisations to understand the value of archiving their work, as part of the Digitising the Mixed Economy of Welfare in Great Britain project (which looks to make available materials which will enhance understanding of the role of voluntary organisations in society). This theme was continued into the afternoon session, which focused on experiences from the archives. There was much discussion about the idea of archives as strategic assets to third sector organisations, although this can pose a strain on the archivists that care for them. Matthew McMurray from the Royal Voluntary Service Archive reported on his own efforts to convince the charity of the value of their archive, in financial, historical and promotional terms. Speakers recounted the struggles within third sector archives to balance the needs and resources of organisations against the demands of academic and public researchers to gain access to their histories. Liz Sykes from the Together Trust argued that promoting the value of the charity’s archive was the key to its survival; she offered exhibitions, outreach programmes, and social media tools as ways to do this. Similarly, Ruth Macdonald from the Salvation Army International Heritage Centre discussed the idea of a ‘useful past’ in the use of the charity’s material in contemporary social campaigns – those against human trafficking, for example.

A further theme of the afternoon session was hidden histories. Nicky Hilton discussed the Bishopsgate Institute’s policy of ‘assigning value’ to its collections which would otherwise remain hidden, such as the extensive collection relating to LGBT history. Emphasising the importance of history ‘from below’, Nicky argued that more needed to be done within the professional archives sector in the way of offering free advice and support to third sector organisation in preserving their archives, to ‘ensure that everyday lives become everyday archives’ (a sentiment that echoed Andrew Flinn’s earlier presentation). Currently writing a history of the first 50 years of the Child Poverty Action Group, Professor Pat Thane spoke as a user of archives and stressed the cultural importance of a well-preserved archives sector for academic research.

The workshop also included break-out discussions to discuss the particular relationships and tensions between archives, public policy and social activism; and how repositories and third sector organisations can work together for the benefit of research and campaigning. Issues raised included the lack of resources afforded to these organisations, both in terms of funding and human resources. New opportunities were also discussed, in particular those offered by digitisation technologies (although opinion was divided on how helpful these developments were in reality).

So how best to ‘care for the future’ of archives in the third sector? Many delegates spoke of the necessity for collaboration, but also a need to instil a ‘record keeping culture’ across the sector. One overriding theme was the balancing act between repositories being ‘dynamic’ – whereby material is used as well as stored – while also protecting the reputation and ownership of the archives in question. There was much support for the idea of users of third sector archives engaging with social action and making something of the information they uncover; as one delegate said, it is ‘within our own rights to write our own history’.

Unchosen Film Competition

Screen Shot 2016-03-04 at 13.12.41

 

Unchosen uses the power of film to combat modern slavery. They believe that film can be a powerful tool that can explain modern slavery in ways that words cannot.

Every two years they invite national and international filmmakers to enter their Modern Slavery Film Competition, to help them highlight the issue of Modern Slavery in the UK. You can see some of the results of previous competitions here.

This year, they are focusing on child slavery in the UK. You can find out more about the film competition here. If you think film really can change things, and you’re a filmmaker with a vision, then enter the Unchosen Modern Slavery Short Film Competition. Details on how to enter the competition can be found  here. You can follow all the news about the competition on their  Facebook pages Unchosenfilmcompetition2016 or on Twitter @comp_film

“The Man Struck is the Man to Cry Out”: White Allies, White Enemies and the Antislavery Usable Past

By Hannah Rose Murray, PhD candidate, University of Nottingham

Plate 4

Frederick Douglass, unknown photographer, c. 1850. Image courtesy of the National
Portrait Gallery Charter Collection.

During a Deep South trip in 2013, I visited numerous plantations and historic sites that did not interpret African American history accurately, if at all. Tours of plantation houses involved a deeply nostalgic narrative that painted the black enslaved population as ‘part of the family.’ My fellow white visitors on these tours accepted this nostalgic narrative without question. It was accepted as the truth, which not only disastrously perverts the history of slavery and the nature of black resistance, but it also implies that these white visitors failed to understand how the legacy of slavery impacts society today. Racial discrimination and police brutality are deeply embedded in both America and in Britain, and these narratives must be resisted.

There is nothing new or radical about this, but it leads me to a very important question: what is my role as a white scholar studying the history of slavery and antislavery? In Britain, only 85 professors are black, 17 of whom are black women. This horrifying statistic alone highlights how white privilege is still very much alive, and we have to do whatever is in our power to fight this. Recognizing this (and the fact that I, like many of my colleagues, are white), we must confront racism in an academic environment and encourage ethnic minorities to attend university and create opportunities for them to remain. White and black scholars, activists and members of the community must collaborate together to confront racial discrimination. But within that should lie a recognition of the prevalence of white privilege as well as a respect towards those who continually fight a daily battle against racism.

In contemporary society, it is impossible to study the history of race without referring to Mike Brown, Eric Garner, Sandra Bland, Mark Duggan, Sean Rigg, and the problems black Americans and Britons face today. My PhD analyses the influence of African Americans on British society in the nineteenth century, and how in particular they resisted British racism. My last chapter focuses on racism and police brutality towards black people in both the UK and the USA. One of the main abolitionists in my research is Frederick Douglass, ex-slave and the most famous African American of the nineteenth century. What can we learn about collaboration through Douglass’ experience with white abolitionists?

470px-Maria_Weston_Chapman_BPL

Maria Weston Chapman, c.1846. Image courtesy of the Boston Public Library

Although Douglass had sincere friendships with male and female white abolitionists throughout his life, many were frequently patronizing and racist towards him. Boston-based abolitionist Maria Weston Chapman infuriated Douglass when she warned him he might become “drunk with vanity” if he did not follow the example of white abolitionists. This reveals the racism endemic within the abolitionist movement, and how white activists often mistrusted their black counterparts and believed they needed to be guided and looked after. As one might expect, Douglass was incensed by this and defended his independence and his decision to live a life dictated by himself, not by others. (Chapman to Webb, 1846; Douglass to Chapman, 1846)

Douglass was also wary of traveling with some white abolitionists. British-based American activist Henry Clarke Wright was a radical abolitionist and great friend of William Lloyd Garrison, but attracted much controversy during his time in Britain, one reason for the sparse interest in his lectures. Wright often championed disunion of the republic, and Douglass believed it would “prevent that harmony necessary to success” in antislavery meetings. Wright “identified with doctrines for which I do not wish to seem responsible”, and Douglass evidently believed lecturing with Wright jeopardized his antislavery mission, and therefore, his celebrity. (Douglass to Webb, 1845). Clearly, this is a lesson in how not to collaborate.

Famously, these squabbles led to Douglass’ break with Garrison in the 1850s, after both men had fundamentally different beliefs about the Constitution and the means of which to champion abolition. Another element to this, though, was the tendency for Garrison and other white abolitionists to constantly disrespect and patronise Douglass. On numerous occasions, Garrison wanted Douglass to just talk about his experience in slavery, and disregard any thoughts about racism in the North. There was no room for Douglass’ independent spirit or his desire to tell something beyond his story. Hence, in the first edition of his newspaper The North Star, Douglass very clearly and powerfully stated:

It is neither a reflection on the fidelity, nor a disparagement of the ability of our friends and fellow-laborers, to assert what “common sense affirms and only folly denies,” that the man who has suffered the wrong is the man to demand redress,—that the man STRUCK is the man to CRY OUT—and that he who has endured the cruel pangs of Slavery is the man to advocate Liberty. It is evident we must be our own representatives and advocates, not exclusively, but peculiarly—not distinct from, but in connection with our white friends. (3 December 1847)

Douglass believed that the individual who had suffered slavery, and continues to suffer racial discrimination, had greater authority to “cry out” against white supremacy. No white person would ever know what it was like to experience racism on a daily basis. Yet Douglass did not advocate a separation between white and black abolitionists, on the contrary, he wanted collaboration, and one that was based on mutual respect. He would work with anyone as along as they respected him as an individual, and as a black man.

In an article entitled ‘In my Brother’s House’, white scholar Tim McCarthy argues race “has both fueled imperialism and undermined democracy” and can explain the ways in which white supremacy is still prevalent today. As white scholars, we have a duty to “document and foster interracial alliances” and “we must confront our fellow white Americans [to] challenge them and make them realise contributions of black Americans in society.” My duty as a white scholar is to acknowledge and fight against this white privilege, which exerts itself in myriad ways, from within the academy to a plantation tour. My work focuses on African American resistance, which has been an important and heroic thread throughout history. I want to uncover what has been omitted, reclaim what has been forgotten or purposely forgotten and chip away at the barriers of white history and scholarship. My contribution is to reveal, analyse and honour the strength of black resistance in a transatlantic context, and respect those who are fighting the same battles as their ancestors.