ENGL 668k: Digital Studies (Spring 2004)

Archives and collections

In class last week we discussed the digital archive in the context of such an archive’s usefulness or even advantage over the traditional library archive. "The William Blake Archive" is an excellent example of the kind of site we were discussing, both in its scope and its vulnerable points. On the surface one would view the Blake Archive as an enhanced version of what we find at the Library of Congress site. Quite the contrary, the Blake archive site contains a serious degree of interpolative play, in the ways that the text can be sorted and searched. The word search is one we are familiar with. We are looking for the word “Tiger” and we find every occurrence in all of his work. The image search however is more difficult. An image of a tiger takes many forms. The assumption is that the viewer is able to objectively search for a tiger image and will find every distinct tiger depicted by Blake. Perhaps with some images this is true, but with many of Blake’s images, there is no clear descriptor. For instance if one searches for “snake”, 231 matches are found. Some of these images are more snake-like than actually clearly snake. In suggesting this link, a possible interpretation is made. In essence, any time a search mechanism is created, the link between the thing searched for and the image found informs the reader in a way that is suggested by the archivist. In this way the researcher looking to the site for a search interface is in a way collaborating with the archivist more than performing a generic search. It is as if the researcher is asking “do you think this is a snake?” and the archivist is responding “yes, I do”.

Of course that is not to say that the archive is in some way lessened by this association. Having the various copies of Blake’s work available in one place, even in facsimile, will allow ways of studying Blake that were never attainable before the archive was created. To compare similar images from different works side by side, to have the ability to zoom in on certain sections with a high level of accuracy, to search the images (even if biased), to view the text and image together as they were depicted on the page, are all monumental leaps in the research of Blake.

This kind of searchable archive has all of the advantages listed in the paragraph above over the kind of collection found on the Library of Congress site. At the Library of Congress site we see just the book, as one would leaf through it, page by page. There is no searching, and no attached commentary or critical work. The functions are limited. However, one can zoom in to see the detail of a page, attaining a sense of dimension that is unavailable on the Blake Archive site. We can see the detail of the binding and in some cases see who owned and printed the books. The interface treats the books more like artifacts than literature. The interface reminds the user that the book is a book, whereas the Blake Archive separates the book into plates, then words, then images. There is no attempt to separate the poem from the codex in the Library for Congress site.

The interface in every case lays over the underlying, real text a bias or interpretation. In the Blake Archive, the subjective labeling of the images is one example. In the Library of Congress, the treatment of the Blake book as an artifact is another. In every site we examined this week we can uncover the site creators hand in the presentation and interface. If we look deeper, in many cases this authorial overlay is discovered in other areas of the site. Consider how many links and resources are included in the Blake Archive site. What does that say about what was exclude or about the intended use of the site? In the Library of Congress site, all we find is the catalog data, again referencing the intention of the collection editor to have this site perform a specific function.

Posted by beth at May 5, 2004 02:42 PM