I subscribe to an RSS feed from the New York Times called "Libraries and Librarians". It searches for stories from the daily New York Times that are related to the field and pulls them out for the RSS feed. When I checked the feed today, I came across an Op-ed piece that had to do with the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum, which happens to be the very first presidential library that was built. The Op-ed piece was basically an advocacy piece. Apparently, the FDR Library and Museum is outdated and falling apart, in desparate need of repair, and no one is doing anything about it.
That a repository of historical records and artifacts is being left to fall apart does not suprise me. I only need to look at one of the places I work to see that it can happen- the exposed wires, the unruly cooling system, the humidity that cannot escape, the fight against the onslaught of mold. However, the author of the Op-ed piece is arguing that such unsightliness should not be just be the accepted reality for those who work at or visit such an institution. Much of what is contained in our archives- papers dealing with the founding of New Deal programs, a state constitution- are important records to the history of the state or the nation.
This Op-ed piece is probably very lonely in the fact that it is probably one of the few of its kind. The state of our historical repositories is not something that receives much press or itnerest. There are most likely only a few constituencies who are roused to action by such an artlice in the paper. However, because of the dire state of many archives throughout the nation, more articles like this should be showing up. The message of advocacy needs to be taken to a public forum like the newspaper, a blog, or a podcast.