Hierarchy, complicity and culture in the library and information science preservation agenda: Observations from Romania

This paper argues that researchers involved in cultural heritage preservation need to adopt a more inclusive ethnographic research methodology that pays special attention to how power, class, and status shape the communities we study. Based on observations from field research in Ghimeş-Făget, Romania, we discuss why the Hungarian ethnic identity was chosen as the village’s most visible representation although residents had many other identities from which to choose. We show how local efforts to preserve culture, history and self ‘in one direction’ were shaped by the current socio-economic reality in the village. Our findings suggest that identity selection is influenced by shifting power relations between ethnic groups over time as much as it is by the dominant ethnic group in a community. In an effort to show how existing research falls short, we discuss why one recently proposed ‘culturally responsive research methodology’ could not support any kind of legitimate preservation agenda in Ghimeş or any other community.

[1]  M. Herzfeld,et al.  Anthropology Through the Looking-Glass: Critical Ethnography in the Margins of Europe , 1990 .

[2]  Kathy Bowrey,et al.  The Politics of Global Information Sharing: Whose Cultural Agendas Are Being Advanced? , 2009 .

[3]  Ramesh Srinivasan,et al.  Indigenous Knowledge and Culturally Responsive Methods in Information Research1 , 2009, The Library Quarterly.

[4]  Annemaree Lloyd,et al.  Guarding Against Collective Amnesia? Making Significance Problematic: An Exploration of Issues , 2007, Libr. Trends.

[5]  P. Sillitoe.  The Development of Indigenous Knowledge , 1998, Current Anthropology.

[6]  Michele Valerie Cloonan,et al.  The Moral Imperative to Preserve , 2007, Libr. Trends.

[7]  J. Nyce,et al.  Why study up? The elite appropriation of science, institution, and tourism as a development agenda in Maramureş, Romania , 2009 .

[8]  Michele Valerie Cloonan,et al.  The Paradox of Preservation , 2007, Libr. Trends.

[9]  Ramesh Srinivasan,et al.  Ethnomethodological architectures: Information systems driven by cultural and community visions , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[10]  Krisztina Laszlo.  Ethnographic Archival Records and Cultural Property , 2006 .

[11]  Lucian Boia,et al.  Romania: Borderland of Europe , 2013 .

[12]  K. Verdery.  Transylvanian Villagers: Three Centuries of Political, Economic, and Ethnic Change , 1983 .

[13]  Shiva Kanaujia Sukula,et al.  Developing indigenous knowledge databases in India , 2006, Electron. Libr..

[14]  Sophia K. Jordan.  A Review of the Preservation Literature, 1993–1998 , 2000 .

[15]  R. Handler,et al.  Tradition, genuine or spurious. , 1984 .

[16]  Ramesh Srinivasan,et al.  Where Information Society and Community Voice Intersect , 2006, Inf. Soc..

[17]  F. Barth,et al.  Political Leadership Among Swat Pathans , 2020 .

[18]  J. Nyce.  Can a "Hard" Science Answer "Hard" Questions? A Response to Sandstrom and Sandstrom , 1999, The Library Quarterly.

[19]  E. Sapir.  Why Cultural Anthropology Needs the Psychiatrist , 1938 .

[20]  Michael Herzfeld,et al.  Anthropology : theoretical practice in culture and society , 2001 .

[21]  J. Nyce,et al.  Community analysis needs ethnography: an example from Romania , 2007 .

[22]  Beth Davis-Brown,et al.  The making of memory: the politics of archives, libraries and museums in the construction of national consciousness , 1998 .

[23]  Marlene Manoff,et al.  Theories of the Archive from Across the Disciplines , 2004 .

[24]  JeanAnn Croft,et al.  The Preservation Evolution , 2003 .

[25]  Brian E. Beasley,et al.  Who wins? Who loses? , 2010 .

[26]  J. Nyce,et al.  A study of the information infrastructure of a Transylvanian village , 2006 .

[27]  S. Abrams,et al.  Interpretation: a dialogue , 1992 .

[28]  Michele V. Cloonan,et al.  W(H)ITHER Preservation? , 2001, The Library Quarterly.

[29]  Sherelyn Ogden,et al.  Understanding, Respect, and Collaboration in Cultural Heritage Preservation: A Conservator's Developing Perspective , 2007, Libr. Trends.

[30]  D. Tedlock.  The Analogical Tradition and the Emergence of a Dialogical Anthropology , 1979, Journal of Anthropological Research.

[31]  F. Barth,et al.  Ethnic Groups and Boundaries by , 2004 .

[32]  Trevor W. Purcell.  Indigenous Knowledge and Applied Anthropology: Questions of Definition and Direction , 1998 .

[33]  JeanAnn Croft.  The Preservation Evolution A Review of Preservation Literature , 1999 – 2001 , 2010 .

[34]  Susan L. Wright.  The Politicization of 'Culture' , 1998 .

[35]  Sherry B. Ortner.  Theory in Anthropology since the Sixties , 1984, Comparative Studies in Society and History.

[36]  Kevin Dwyer,et al.  Moroccan Dialogues: Anthropology in Question , 1982 .

[37]  L. Nader.  Up the Anthropologist: Perspectives Gained From Studying Up. , 1972 .

[38]  W. Boyd Rayward,et al.  Libraries in Times of War, Revolution, and Social Change , 2007, Libr. Trends.

[39]  Amanda Stevens,et al.  A Different Way of Knowing: Tools and Strategies for Managing Indigenous Knowledge , 2008 .

[40]  J. Nyce,et al.  Does universal access mean equitable access?: What an information infrastructure study of a rural Romanian community can tell us , 2009 .

[41]  Betsie Greyling.  A model for community participation in African libraries to preserve indigenous knowledge1 , 2008 .

[42]  Patricia Montiel Overall,et al.  Cultural Competence: A Conceptual Framework for Library and Information Science Professionals , 2009, The Library Quarterly.

[43]  Michael Moerman.  Ethnic Identification in a Complex Civilization: Who Are the Lue? , 1965 .