I've Deaccessioned and Lived to Tell about It: Confessions of an Unrepentant Reappraiser

Abstract

Reappraisal and deaccessioning are topics that barely register within the archival profession. They seem to be rarely practiced—or at any rate rarely reported. Why the silence? This article postulates that our profession's reluctance to confront reappraisal and deaccessioning is both theoretical and practical, but that on both counts we have inadvertently weakened our repositories and our professional standing by our unwillingness and lack of action. Further, the essay will argue not only that reappraisal and deaccessioning should be as normal a part of standard archives administration as cataloging and reference, but that they can be. Most surprising, perhaps, this piece will present evidence that reappraisal and deaccessioning can be as public and transparent a part of our work as cataloging and reference, without harming the reputation of the repository—in fact, being open and honest about reappraisal and deaccessioning can positively help a repository in its relationship with not only resource allocators and peer institutions, but also with donors and researchers.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.