Understanding the archival fonds as autobiographical text through three discourses


Over the last few decades, textual criticism has shifted its focus away from the reconstruction of final authorial intentions in favour of exposing the multiplicity of intentions concurring in the formation of literary texts. A similar shift in focus can be tracked in the theoretical literature on lifewriting exploring the nature of autobiographical texts. There, the notion that such texts function as sites for the revelation of a unified authentic self has been displaced by an understanding of them as sites for the construction of multiple selves. Both these shifts resonate, in turn, with a growing body of archival literature investigating the multiple layers of agency implicated in the construction of archival fonds. Drawing on the insights of textual criticism, lifewriting scholarship and the archival theory of arrangement, this article considers the ways in which personal fonds in general and writers’ fonds in particular may be understood as autobiographical texts.


Archival arrangement; Personal archives; Textual criticism; Lifewriting.

Full Text:




Brothman, Brian. 1991. “Orders of Value: Probing the Terms of Archival Value.” Archivaria 32:78−100.

Cook, Terry. 2001. “Fashionable Nonsense or Professional Rebirth: Postmodernism and the Practice of Archives.” Archivaria 51:14−35.

Dean, Gabrielle. 2011. “The Archeology of Archival Practice: Disciplinarity and Disorder.” Archive Journal 1 at Accessed 16 July 2019.

Douglas, Jennifer. 2013. “Archiving Authors: Rethinking the Analysis and Representation of Personal Archives.” PhD dissertation, University of Toronto.

______.2015. “The Archiving ‘I:’ A Closer Look in the Archives of Writers.” Archivaria 79:53−89.

______.2016. “Toward More Honest Description. American Archivist 79, 1:26−55.

______.2018. “A Call to Rethink Archival Creation: Exploring Types of Creation in Personal Archives.” Archival Science 18, 1:29−49.

Douglas, Jennifer and Heather MacNeil. 2009. “Arranging the Self: Literary and Archival Perspectives on Writers’ Archives.” Archivaria 67:25−39.

Enniss, Stephen. 2001. “In the Author’s Hand: Artifacts of Origin and Twentieth-Century Reading Practice.” RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts and Cultural Heritage 2, 2:106−120.

Fothergill, Robert A. 1995. “One Day at a Time: The Diary as Lifewriting.” a/b: Auto/Biography Studies 10, 1:81−91.

Greetham, D.C. 1994. Textual Scholarship: An Introduction. New York: Garland.

Hobbs, Catherine. 2006. “New Approaches to Canadian Literary Archives.” Journal of Canadian Studies 40, 2:109−119.

Kaplan, Elisabeth. 2002. “Many Paths to Partial Truths: Archives, Anthropology, and the Power of Representation,” Archival Science 2, 2:209−220.

Light, Michele and Tom Hyry. 2002. “Colophons and Annotations: New Directions for the Finding Aid.” American Archivist 65, 2:216−30.

MacNeil, Heather. 2005. “‘Picking Our Text’: Archival Description, Authenticity and the Archivist as Editor.” American Archivist 68, 2:264−78.

_______. 2008. "Archivalterity: Rethinking Original Order.” Archivaria 66:1−24.

_______. 2009. “Trusting Description: Authenticity, Accountability, and Archival Description Standards.” Journal of Archival Organization 7, 3:89−107.

_______. 2016. “Deciphering and Interpreting an Archival Fonds and its Parts: A Comparative Analysis of Textual Criticism and the Theory of Archival Arrangement.” In Research in the Archival Multiverse, edited by Anne J. Gilliland, Sue McKemmish and Andrew Lau. 161−197. Melbourne: Monash University Press.

Malamud Smith, Janna. 1996. Private Matters: In Defense of the Personal Life. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.

Marcus, Leah S. 1996. Unediting the Renaissance: Shakespeare, Marlow, Milton. London and New York: Routledge.

McGann, Jerome J. 1991. The Textual Condition. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.

________. 1992. A Critique of Modern Textual Criticism. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.

McKenzie, D.F. 1999. Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.

Nesmith, Tom. 2005. “Reopening Archives: Bringing New Contextualities into Archival Theory and Practice.” Archivaria 60:259−74.

Olshen, Barry N. 1995. “Subject, Persona and Self in the Theory of Autobiography.” a/b: Auto/Biography Studies 10, 1:5−16.

Reiman, Donald H. 1995. “Nineteenth-Century British Poetry and Prose.” In Scholarly Editing: A Guide to Research, edited by D.C. Greetham. New York: Modern Language Association.

Savoja, Maurizio and Stefano Vitali. 2008. “Authority Control for Creators in Italy: Theory and Practice.” Journal of Archival Organization 5, 1−2:121−147.

Smith, Sidonie.1995. “Performativity, Autobiographical Practice, Resistance.” a/b: Auto/Biography Studies 10, 1:17−33.

Smith, Sidonie, and Julia Watson. 2010. Reading Autobiography: A Guide for Interpreting Life Narratives, 2nd edition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Tanselle, Thomas G. 1989. A Rationale of Textual Criticism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Threadgold, Terry. 2005. “Text.” In New Keywords: A Revised Vocabulary of Culture and Society, edited by Tony Bennett, Lawrence Grossberg and Meaghan Morris. 345−347. Oxford: Blackwell.

Velios, Athanasios. 2011. “Creative Archiving: A Case Study from the John Latham Archive.” Journal of the Society of Archivists 32, 2:255−71.

Yeo, Geoffrey. 2009. “Custodial History, Provenance, and the Description of Personal Records.” Libraries and the Cultural Record 44, 1:50−64.

______. 2012. “The Conceptual Fonds and the Physical Collection.” Archivaria 73:43−80.

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Heather MacNeil

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Logo Università di FirenzeLogo is a journal of the SAGAS Department, University of Florence, published by EUM, Edizioni Università di Macerata (Italy).

ISSN: 2038-1026

Openaire Logo DOAJ seal