Suchergebnisse

Historically, libraries, archives and museums (LAMs) have been perceived as institutions providing infrastructure for an open and enlightened public discourse. While Norwegian public libraries are regulated by law that focuses on libraries being providers of knowledge and agents of popular enlightenment as well as local meeting places and arenas for debate,¹ the Norwegian museum sector is governed by relatively general and open political signals about the role of museums in society. Nevertheless, diversity, inclusion, and dialogue are important key words for both institutions.² In addition, public libraries and museums are also supposed to keep up with technological development, not only to digitize their own collections but also to offer digital services to the public.³ Most public libraries and museums do not only have official webpages offering information about their services and self-services, but are also present on social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or YouTube. This article investigates how three institutions in Tromsø (the main branch of the Tromsø public library and two museums) are using Facebook. By analyzing the frequency of posts, their content and the user participation created, I seek to answer the following questions: what type of posts are the institutions posting? What type of posts are the ones that engage users? What type of user engagement is most common? What similarities and differences can be observed between the three institutions? By answering these questions, I hope to show how the three institutions and their followers use Facebook. I have chosen to focus on the institutions' Facebook pages because Facebook is by far the most popular social media platform with about 64% of the Norwegian population having a Facebook account in 2017. All three institutions are in addition to Facebook also present on other social media platforms like Instagram, Twitter or Flickr, but the highest number of followers is on Facebook.

The notion of authenticity seems to have grown more and more important for artistic documents during the last decades. Critics are using the term as a kind of distinction; an authentic novel or film is a good novel or film. Authenticity in these cases does not mean questioning the novel or film as an original work of art; rather, what is meant by authenticity is the relationship between reality and the content of a novel or film, assuming possible mimesis in terms of a mirror-like relationship. The highly acclaimed and award-winning film Das Leben der Anderen (The lives of others) can be considered one of the most successful recent German films about the GDR. Many critics focused on the film's authenticity and thus the film's truthful representation of life in the GDR. In this paper I would like to claim that this happens because of how the producers are using elements of the paratext in convincing us that what we watch is real, is authentic. By focusing on aspects like the producer's research, the personal experience and memory of producer and actors, and last but not least the approval by leading intellectuals and political institutions, the message of authenticity is broadcasted in an effective way.

Christa Wolfs "Was bleibt" (i svensk oversettelse 1991 under tittelen "Vad blir kvar") står i sentrum av denne avhandlingen som undersøker dens kontekst, paratekst og tekst. Utgangspunktet for avhandlingen er observasjonen at den så kalte tysk-tyske litteraturstriden – som startet i juni 1990 i de store vesttyske avisene Die Zeit og Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung – egentlig ikke handler om teksten, men ble brukt som påskudd for å delegitimere forfatteren politisk. Ved siden av avhandlingens innledning der dens tema og oppbygning blir presentert og det blir redegjort for det teoretisk-metodiske grunnlaget, består avhandlingen av 3 kapitler som går inn på bokas kontekst (først og fremst den historisk-politiske rammen fra 1970-tallet og frem til murens fall og Tysklands gjenforening), dens paratekst (ved siden av de forskjellige bokutgivelser og omslag blir det fokusert på manuskripter til teksten, teksten i forskjellige medier og til slutt en innholdsanalyse av litteraturstriden) og tekst, før det i et avsluttende kapittel blir sett på forholdet mellom tekst og dokument.

Paper presented at DOCAM '03, University of California, Berkeley, August 13-15, 2003 ; Christa Wolf – one of the most famous East German writers – published a little story called What remains in the summer of 1990. Written in the late seventies under the GDR regime but first published after the opening of the Berlin Wall, What remains caused a great stir in the almost reunified Germany known as the Christa-Wolf-Debate. Especially in big German newspapers like Die Zeit or Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, but also in the smaller local ones, German intellectuals for years were discussing the moral responsibilities of the writer and the politics of literature and literary criticism. All the critics refer to one literary text, not taking into consideration that there might be a unit of documents caused by several editions and several versions. In this paper I therefore would like to examine what kind of influence these variants might have on the interpretation of the text. In relation to this, I also want to take a closer look on what Gerald Genette (1987) calls the "paratext" of a text and its consequences for the public "epitext". In this context I will also discuss the fact that an important part of the artistic documentation – the several versions of a text which may be found in private or public archives – are seldom or never considered as relevant by literary critics who only relate to the "finished" product.

This article raises the question of why ABM–u was not continued as a cultural policy instrument for the LAM sector. The question provides a basis for elucidating conditions for state governance in the cultural heritage area, contributing to the academic and professional discussion of organizational and governance models in the public sector and reorganization processes in Norwegian public administration. Also, the chapter is a contribution to the international literature on institutional convergence in the LAM field. Convergence in the LAM sector concerns co-location, forms of collaboration, and digitalization. The article describes the process from the establishment of ABM–u in 2003 to reorganization and closure in 2010. An underlying and central issue in the process was the importance of digitizing cultural heritage and whether a separate coordination body was appropriate to achieve this.

[T]he advent of electronic sources of information and their ever-increasing volume and variety will require a major redefinition and integration of the role of archives, museums, and research libraries. It is my point of view that the distinction between all of these apparently different types of institutions will eventually make little sense. (Rayward 1998, 207). Rayward's prediction describes expectations in the LAM (libraries, archives, and museums) field that technological change and digitalization would produce coordination gains and institutional mergers over time. In Norway, The Norwegian Archive, Library and Museum Authority (ABM–utvikling – Statens senter for arkiv, bibliotek og museum), from here on referred to as ABM–u, was established in 2003. The digitization of documents such as books, journals, archival material and museum objects, and with this increasing similarity in working methods between the sectors was an essential argument in the process leading up to the creation of ABM–u: The commonality between the three sectors is even stronger through the growing use of information and communication technology (ICT) both in the organization and management of collections and materials and in the dissemination work towards the public. In addition, the three types of institutions increasingly handle digital material, either in the form of digitized representation of other original material, or material that already exists in digital form. This may lead to the working methods becoming more similar, and it is natural to consider how closely the coordination potential can develop so that users can have the easiest possible access to combined services. (St.meld. nr. 22 (1999–2000), 2).¹ ; publishedVersion

Source at http://www.informationr.net/ir/24-4/colis/colis1918.html ; Introduction. This paper presents and discusses a historical institutional framework for studying institutional change processes in library, archives & museum institutions. A limited application of this framework is applied to the case of modern public libraries in Norway and Sweden, for illustrative purposes. Method. We conducted a literature review on institutional and organizational convergence among library, archives and museums, which is contextualised and discussed in the context of literature on institutional theory. A historical institutional framework developed through these methods is then applied to the case of modern public libraries in Norway and Sweden. Analysis. Qualitative analysis was carried out, using institutional theory and a review of previous literature to develop and apply a novel approach to understanding the convergence of these institutions. Results. The studies conducted on institutional change during convergence processes are few, limited in empirical scope and under-theorized. Drawing upon institutional theory presents new ways to approach this topic, as illustrated in this paper's limited application to the Swedish and Norwegian contexts. Conclusions. Additional historically oriented research is needed to comprehensively understand the multiple ways the institutional bases of libraries, archives and museums and related institutional change processes unfold.

Source at https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/docam/vol5/iss2/12 . ; The paper outlines a research effort into the changing representations, policies, strategies, activities, and practices of libraries, archives, and museums (LAMs) in the digital age. Comprehensive social changes including big slow-moving processes, such as aging populations, global migration, technological change, and environmental change, expose communities and LAM institutions to vulnerabilities. How do the institutions handle vulnerabilities, how do they become more resilient, and how do they contribute to building the resilience of their local communities?