Accessibility and Archives: “Of course I do all my work by myself and unattended by anyone”

This blog is partially a response to having had the opportunity to participate in discussions at summer 2024 meetings of the Museum Access Network for Sensory Impairments (London) and Autism in Museums, and the Sound Museums: Designing for Inclusion, Well-being and Community event at City University.  It also draws on ideas in this 2022 journal article about rethinking access in museums.

This blog series is always interested in stories from disability history that centre disabled people as active agents in their own lives, and as activists or philanthropists.  Another blog in this series, for example, briefly introduced the poet and abolitionist Edward Rushton as one of the founders of the Royal School for the Blind, Liverpool.  Here, I want, in passing, to introduce the philanthropist Elizabeth Gilbert (pictured in the preview image) who planned a book about blind people although she never seems to have got further than the preliminary research.  One letter quoted in her biography was from a former student of the Liverpool school.  Elisha Bates, quoted in the subtitle for this blog, had been born in the 1820s to agricultural labourers and his words offer us a life experience that rarely reaches posterity.   Blindness was not a barrier to him working with farm horses from the age of 9 and, despite training as a rope/net-maker, he subsequently returned to an outdoor equine life, earning his living as a fuel delivery driver in Richmond (Yorkshire) and environs, successfully supporting a wife and children. 

A century before scientific research into human echolocation, Elisha reported:

“I have no difficulty in avoiding obstacles. I think I do so from the acuteness of my hearing; I listen attentively to my footfall, and when approaching any object which may intercept my progress, even a lamp-post, I can discover a slight difference in the sound. If I have any doubt I tread a little louder, so as to satisfy my ear. I never fail in making it out. The difference in the sound is difficult to describe; but if I am near a wall or any object in my path I feel the sound to be more confined and not to extend itself as in an open space. It comes quicker to my ear… I can find my way to any house in the town and never have any assistance in driving my cart and going about. I get off and on to my cart as well as any other driver, and when it is empty I sit on my cart and drive with reins. With a load I go by the horse's head. I can tell instantly when any other vehicle is either coming towards me or coming past me in the same direction, and I turn my horse accordingly to avoid them. I never have any falls in walking alone, and never come in contact with anything when driving. I have never had any accident”

Elisha’s life was not one limited by a lack of sight.  However, to the majority sighted community, it seems natural to assume that blindness is suboptimal, and to use language (such as ‘visually impaired’ or ‘partially sighted’) that centres sightedness as the human default (rather than simply the majority experience).  It is important to note that these are ableist framings.  In the context of access to archives, the barriers presented when Blind and Partially Blind (BPB) users seek access to heritage (including, but not limited to, that of past BPB people like Rushton, Gilbert and Bates) are not inherent to them as individuals.  Rather the barriers have been erected by, for example, our exhibitions, engagement opportunities and outreach activities (not to mention our collection policies, catalogues, websites and even architecture) that prioritise sight as the dominant sense.  If BPB people are not habitually using our collections, that may not mean an active choice simply not to be interested, but rather an informed decision that their rights of access to our collections have not been considered. 

Sound and touch can be valuable heritage experiences in their own right, and in combination, rather than being viewed merely as optional add-ons to (or surrogates for) sight-based encounters.  Working in a theatre context, I am familiar with the idea of a Touch Tour that can precede a BPB person’s attendance at an Audio-Described performance.  These are understandably limited to specific, scheduled occasions and to a BPB audience (rather than anyone interested in exploring the dimensions of the stage space, meeting some of the actors and getting up, close and personal to items of costume and props). 

Touch Tours do occur in heritage contexts, but implementation in an archive context seems uncommon.  Ellen Oredsson, Digital projects Officer at The National Archives has just concluded a project which trialled a workshop for BPB students from New College Worcester, exploring multi-sensory learning, including the creation of tactile surrogates for inaccessible archival originals. Her Research Libraries UK presentation about making archives engaging to BPB people is available here, and her two blogs here and here. 

More generally however, multi-sensory experiences have the potential to enrich everyone’s engagement (embedding more detailed memories and fostering affective responses).  Whilst it may seem positive to programme events that are ‘accessible to all’, it is worth asking if they will adequately serve BPB people.  It is not only that the “non-visual life” may have been conceptualised by the creators as lacking (and needing compensation), but that a script adapted to be accessible to a child (or an adult with learning difficulties) may simply not meet their needs (unless they are also a child or have learning difficulties).  Moreover, who should BPB audiences be hearing from? – a generalist audio-describer (for example), and/or the archivist/curator with the expertise to answer audience questions.  Will BPB be well included by an event on general sale?  Might they have a right to opportunities for community interaction with other BPB people who share their interests? 

I would suggest that in thinking through these issues BPB people themselves will need to be invited to participate in both sector and institution-specific development conversations, rather than merely being the subjects of them (however well-intentioned). 

Guest blogs are welcome.  Please email diversityandinclusion@archives.org.uk.  We would also like to hear from you if you have found one of the Allies’ blogs helpful to your work.