I didn't do much more than skim the appendix, but I wonder to what extent that community archives were surveyed for the purposes of this monograph? Along with what Millar states in the next reading, there are plenty of co-operatively developed written policies (between archivist / workers, institutions and representative communities, for example) that don't seem to slavishly adhere to the text and allow for wiggle room / interpretation.

The division between scholarly humanities work vs. the service-oriented work of the archivist is something at play throughout the article. I'm interested in finding out if there are more robust accounts of this division, since Caswell herself goes on to say things like, "It is difficult to find evidence of an erasure, let alone the gendered and classed nature of such erasure," etc. The emphasis on the life of mind taking precedence over the life of labor (and those that think the division is a stark, hard line) is a phenomenon that hits home.