Question 7- Why Technology? : Books and Digital Preservation

While considering this week’s topic, it is quite obvious that books have a clear advantage for longevity. These artefacts continue to exist long after their intended use and may outlast thousands of years of neglect. Yet knowing these facts, it is curious that we place so much attention and effort in digital preservation. Often the simplest formats are the most durable. As technology advances, devices are becoming more intricate and brittle. Frequently, companies even create these flaws purposely to increase sales. They want their items to break-down after a certain period of time. A product that is indestructible and faultless would never need to be upgraded or re-purchased. There is a great market ploy at hand that adversely affects any conservation effort. Can we rely on such unpredictable and erratic means of storage?

Before the advent of the flash disk or external drive, CDs were the main source of storage. I can remember transferring many of my important files to these devices and then being told in ten years they will wear out. “What is the point then,” I might say. Technology does not last; it is a constant struggle to keep up to date. As a result, undoubtedly, books are so advantageous. They are a format that seems to always be relevant and unchanging; nevertheless, their value is not always appreciated.

More recently, museums are converting many of their records to digital formats, in the hopes that their information will preserve and last longer. They would hold the main digital project on one network, with an external back-up at hand. There is caution, since technology is undependable. Practitioners almost expect disaster, a crash or malfunction in the system is nearly anticipated. These electronic databases can be beneficial, allowing for an easier navigation of records; however we must be always aware that technology is not necessarily the best solution. More often than not, modernizing can create further complications, especially since the act is a continuous process. Digital copies of information are not full proof and we know this; we ask ourselves why are museums placing their records in a potentially stressful position?  

Electronic devices are just as susceptible to fire and water damage, yet, apart from books, come equipped with a multitude of difficulties. Not only are digital projects vulnerable to crashes, glitches, and updates, but also viruses, corrupt files, and human error. Books, on the other hand, have just the two concerns. Certainly, digitization is a method to keep updated with new technologies and allows for convenient plus efficient modes of retrieval and input; however it is a strategy with drawbacks all the same. Surely, if an institution is going to convert to a digital database they should always keep a back-up in a paper-based catalogue. This may seem intuitive, yet, more and more, museums are surrendering to the electronic age completely. We may cringe slightly at the degree of trust increasingly being bestowed.