UCLA Film & Television Archive - About Us

THE UCLA FILM & TELEVISION ARCHIVE

A Retrospective Look
By ROBERT ROSEN

THE BUCCANEER YEARS: 1966-1975

The UCLA Film & Television Archive's core identity was shaped by its origins in the utopian aspirations of the 1960s -the optimistic and sometimes naive assumption that with right on your side and truly sincere commitment you could triumph over even the most daunting obstacles. In 1966, when faculty members Arthur Friedman and Ruth Schwartz and Television Academy president Robert Lewine announced the establishment of the National Television Library at UCLA, the ambition of the name belied the modest holdings. In 1969, when film school chairman Colin Young proudly proclaimed to the New York congress delegates of the Federation Internationale des Archives du Film (FIAF) the existence of a film archive at UCLA, it was still wishful thinking. There were no actual collections or programs to back it up. The film archive's first director, critical studies professor Howard Suber, and its curator Bob Epstein spoke passionately of UCLA's intention to establish for Hollywood an archival center fully comparable to the great institutions already in existence in New York and Washington, but it was without benefit of financial resources, professional staff, film vaults, laboratories, a strategic plan, or even a clear institutional mandate to move forward.
Through a combination of personal charisma, unyielding commitment, and chutzpah, both the film and the television archival endeavors survived through the mid-1970s-a period of penurious resources and generosity of spirit that Howard Suber has aptly characterized the "buccaneer years." A typical acquisition might take the form of a midnight caravan of student-owned cars and Volkswagen buses racing to the rescue of a mountain of nitrate prints stacked on a studio loading dock awaiting imminent deposit in the "ocean vault" off the Pacific coast. A typical storage area in the earliest days was a private garage or a decrepit turn-of-the-century vault in downtown Los Angeles paid for by friends of the archive or the curator. Film inspection and repair were in the hands of a small, irregularly compensated staff, assisted by dozens of earnest undergraduates in Bob Epstein's curatorship class. Access to the growing collection was limited to a single Steen beck viewer housed in a closet in the film school and occasional screenings at the handful of campus or community theaters equipped to project nitrate.
It was a heady time motivated by high ideals. Some were educational in intent, a principled conviction that the newly emerging field of film and television studies should be built around the close analysis of original creative works rather than arbitrary value judgments. Others were rooted in the critical reevaluation of classic Hollywood film as an underappreciated art form -the discovery of an unjustly ignored auteur the passion of the day.
But most important of all were the underlying preservation objectives. For everyone involved with the archive, it was self-evident that works of film and television were far more than ephemeral entertainment; that moving image media were unique expressions of twentieth-century culture with irreplaceable value as popular art forms, historical documents, technological artifacts, ideological forces, and commodities in the marketplace. As markers in our personal histories and repositories of our collective memory, it would be inexcusable if our generation allowed them to be lost forever. Reputable archives were long engaged in the cause on the East Coast, but ironically there was none in the very heart of the nation's entertainment industry. That was to be our mission.

FROM STUDY CENTER TO ARCHIVE
1975-2000

Two daunting challenges loomed large when I formally became director of the film archive and the television archive in the mid-1970S. The first was the seemingly impossible goal of securing the significant resources, professional staffing, and organizational structures required to make the leap from a university-based study collection with preservationist aspirations to an authentic world-class archive. We had virtually no budget, substandard facilities, and a largely volunteer staff. How could we establish professional programs for preservation, restoration, research and study, cataloging, documentation, and sponsor the public screening of classic films?
A second goal was equally important. How could we build an institution that was truly professional without sacrificing the feisty independent spirit and the passionate convictions that marked the archive's origin? How could we be at once practical and idealistic, responsible and risk taking, respectful of traditional practices, and yet receptive to change and innovation? We listened and learned from the wisdom of experienced colleagues in the field and embraced fully the twin principles of preservation and access that shaped the international archival movement since its inception. But at the same time we knew we would have to chart our own distinctive course in ways that reflected unique circumstances at UCLA and our unconventional beginnings.
Now, four decades after the first fledgling initiatives at collection building in the 1960s and more than a quarter of a century since its formal establishment as a unified collection, the UCLA Film & Television Archive confronts a significant turning point in its history. With a dynamic new director in place and the dream of state-of-the-art facilities on the horizon, it is an opportune moment to reflect back on the concepts that have guided its growth. At the risk of oversimplifying a complex history, I would like to underline six enduring and recurring principles.

Humility in selection

This principle reflects the archive's development in the context of a world-class teaching and research university, a conceptually broad rationale for acquiring, preserving and using movie image media. Our study and research center was intentionally conceived to provide viewing opportunities not only cinefiles and media historians, but also public policy advocates, media industry professionals, and scholars from every imaginable academic discipline. Our public exhibition program screens not only the classics, but also documentaries, contemporary independent production, and cutting-edge works of international cinema. Our preservation programs were premised on acquiring a broad diversity of cinematic expression, with the single most important criterion for selection being humility-a principled recognition that future generations would certainly have tastes and sensibilities different from our own.

Collaboration

This second principle has been an ecumenical definition of the field. A commitment to collaboration seemed to be a self-evident necessity in the context of the United States where our "national" media collection resides in the vaults #'of a plurality of geographically dispersed and philosophically diverse institutions that share the common mission of preserving our moving image heritage. Our interdependence requires that we treat one another respectfully as colleagues.

The Quest for Resources

This third principle is rooted in the ethical imperative that an archive must prosper if it is to fulfill its mission. The ethos of the 1960s may have preached "poor but honest" as a virtue, but the compelling urgency of deteriorating film and tape dictates an equally virtuous quest for funding, the more the better. "Nitrate won't wait!" was a rallying cry for preservationists. Recognition of the movies as an art form motivated the programmers. And the educational and scholarly mission of media literacy energized the research staff. All of these cost money far beyond the resources of the university. A tireless effort was required to build the resource base.
Our core strategy for meeting these needs was founded on the principle of partnership long-term relationships based on common commitments rather than one-time deals. It was important that all our volunteers and all those who had generously donated their collections or financial resources felt they had a personal stake in the success of our mission and that each was respected as a fellow preservationist.
Moreover, we believed that if the archival field as a whole did well, so would we. Rather than compete with sister institutions for the same limited resources, we preferred to increase the pie by creating collaborative initiatives. With this in mind, we have supported the Film Foundation, the Association of Moving Image Archivists (AMIA), and the National Film Preservation Foundation since their inception, and we have a long-standing commitment to FIAF projects and programs.
Finally, the well-being of the archive needed to be a cause embraced by the entire staff. Film programmers not only selected the titles to be screened, but also found sponsors to pay for the event. The Study Center staff not only assisted thousands of patrons each year, but also wrote challenging grant proposals for submission to government and private foundations. The preservationists were our media stars, serving as guest speakers at benefit screenings and as public advocates for the cause. As director, it was often my role to take the public bows when new resources were secured, but the archive's growth and vitality were very much a communal effort.

Preservation and Access

This fourth principle speaks to the core mission of all moving image archives and can be summed up by the mantra intoned by virtually every working professional in the field: to save and to show. The principle of simultaneous support for both preservation and access is simple, but the practice is far more complex when scarce resources require painful prioritizing. How do you choose between two competing but equally valid objectives and two equally important constituencies: the long term interests of generations yet to come or the immediate needs of theater patrons, media artists, and researchers knocking at the door?
One partial answer we found to this ultimately irresolvable dilemma was by transforming competing programs into mutually supportive activities. The pioneering Festival of Preservation, first launched fourteen years ago, was conceived to merge both objectives to be at once the centerpiece of our exhibition program and the preeminent showcase for the work of the preservation staff. The core premise driving the festival was the belief that the single most compelling case for preservation is made when spectators in a theatrical setting fall in love with the images on the screen and come to realize viscerally the tragedy of what might have been lost.
Parallel efforts to maximize cross-programmatic synergies became standard practice whenever possible. The Archive Research and Study Center's multiyear Prelude to War initiative assembled a blue-ribbon panel of archivists, documentary filmmakers, and historians to establish preservation priorities for holdings in the newsreel collection. We made the striking of an exhibition print integral to the preservation process so that restored films could find new life on screen at UCLA and at sister archives around the world. We organized initiatives that mobilized all sectors of the archive such as our Mexican film initiative that included the screening of more than one hundred films, a scholarly conference, a book of scholarly essays, the teaching of university classes, support for international preservation efforts, and the creation of a permanent study collection. While respecting the autonomous integrity of preservation, exhibition, and study, we sought ways to create a whole that was greater than the sum of its parts.

Continuity and Change

Operating principle number five was to seek the proper mixture of traditional and innovative practices. On the one hand, an archive's commitment to tradition follows naturally from the intrinsically conservative nature of the field, notably its belief in the values of historical continuity, its principled quest to restore media works as originally conceived, and its necessarily skeptical attitude toward quick-fix preservation panaceas. On the other hand, it is clear that tradition alone is insufficient to validate past practices and that new challenges require fresh solutions. Revolutionary technological changes, unforeseen forms of media product, and a massively intensified demand for access to archive holdings, all require an openness to innovative practices, even if they appear to go against the grain of long-standing consensus in the field.
While profoundly respectful of all that a fledgling archive had to learn from elders in the field, we never shied away from challenging the status quo. In the years when even a passing reference to the use of video technologies for viewing purposes was taboo, we advocated electronic technologies as a way to democratize access to archival holdings. At a time when a litmus test of doctrinal purity was the rejection of all commercial goals, we advocated entrepreneurial activities as one of the ways to raise money for preservation. In the decades when secrecy about holdings was still the norm, we adopted the radical policy of full disclosure including on-line access to the entire catalog. When television and film institutions still viewed one another with dark distrust, we actively assembled holdings in both media and stressed their interdependence.
And, when film and television producers were still widely stigmatized as implacable foes of public archives, we energetically sought to build mutually beneficial partnerships.
In the realm of preservation, UCLA frequently took the lead in developing innovative methodologies, particularly with reference to color and sound restoration. We strived to be ahead of the curve in selecting films for screening. UCLA showcased Asian and Middle Eastern cinemas long before their current critical acclaim. In the arena of research and study, we were early experimenters in the development of digitally interactive publications and regularly sponsored panels and conferences on intellectually groundbreaking topics. We embraced the mission of making the past relevant
to a new generation of innovative media makers. In short, true to our utopian origins, the archive never lost its taste for troublemaking if the cause was right.

Community

This final principle deals with the quest for consensus among all of us who shepherded the archive through its formative period. From me, the director, it required a leadership style comfortable with collaborative decision making, suspicious of bureaucracy, and disdainful of the trappings of hierarchical authority-our democratically alphabetical staff listing is one small marker of that spirit. From the staff it required strong-willed and ferociously dedicated individuals willing to speak their minds freely, but committed in the end to seeking common ground around shared principles and core objectives. Whatever success we have had in remaining true to our mission is due, above all else, to the spirited and at times tumultuous interchange of passionately driven professionals, each of whom treated media archiving as a sacred trust.
Someday, when a proper history of the archive is written, it will recognize the towering status of Robert Gitt as an international leader in preservation, the brilliant innovations of Steven Ricci in making the collection come alive for;? broadly diverse clients, and the fearless programming of Geoffrey Gilmore and Andrea Alsberg. It will take note of the principled and enduring commitment of our longest-serving employee, Charles Hopkins, and the professional achievements of many other dedicated people too numerous to name in a brief essay.
Above all I would single out my personal debt of gratitude to Eddie Richmond, who as curator was my constant coconspirator for more than two decades. Despite chronic disagreement about whether the glass is half full or half empty, our complementary temperaments and principled exchanges kept both of us on target.

THE FUTURE

Although crystal ball gazing is risky for a field in rapid transition, a number of predictions about the future evolution of the archive can be made with a fairly high degree of probability. All follow from the logic of several firmly established realities: that film and television production practices are changing dramatically, that digital media technologies will revolutionize preservation and access practices, and that the archive will respond to these challenges with its long-established commitment to change and innovation. Here are ten preditions that are most consistent with the archive's practices over the past thirty-five years:

1. Because of the continuing development of new media technologies, the archive's ongoing conservation, preservation, and restoration program will become de facto an arena for applied research. What we preserve will always be of primary importance, but how we preserve it will become a close second.
2. As digital projection technologies come to dominate commercial exhibition, the screening of films in their original format and on a big screen will become increasingly central to the archive's mission. Preservation will come to include not only the actual films, but also the theatrical experience itself.
3. Interactive technologies will dramatically expand user access in the Archive Research and Study Center of the future. Clients will be empowered to select clips by subject matter, image characteristics, production history, and more. The archive's holdings of film and television materials will be complemented by instant access to library-based documentation from around the world. Cross-national collaborative research will take place in a globally accessible on-line viewing room.
4. As moving image archiving becomes increasingly complex, the next generation of archivists will require professional training that combines the knowledge of history, aesthetics, information technologies, and hands-on preservation of a dizzying array of formats. With a cross-disciplinary M.A. in moving image archiving firmly in place, UCLA will be ready to respond to these needs.
5. As the study of media literacy emerges as a required competency for students in all sectors of primary, secondary, and higher education, teachers will increasingly come to rely on the archive's holdings, public screenings, and experience with learning technologies. Educational innovation will be high on the archive's public service agenda.
6. The growing hegemony of American film and television production and distribution around the world will intensify the archive's commitment to complement its screenings of classic and independent cinema with a broad range of international productions. Given our location on the Pacific coast, we will have special responsibilities to represent the cinemas of Asia and Latin America.
7. The archive will deepen and broaden its working relationships with media artists, in part because of our formal affiliation with UCLA's School of Theater, Film, and Television and in part because of our location in the midst of the entertainment industry. Our primary goals will be threefold: to engage film and television creators in a fuller understanding of their moving image heritage, to protect the rights of artists to have their works survive intact, and to encourage the creative community to support the cause of preservation.
8. Partnerships between the archive and the media industry will intensify in the coming years based on a growing convergence of interests. Both share a common need to train preservation specialists, to make access and preservation compatible, and to develop new practices for conservation and preservation in the digital age.
9. Collaboration with sister institutions nationally and internationally will become increasingly important to the archive in confronting the dizzying diversification and proliferation of moving image production. Saving the national collection as it evolves into the future will require a more clearly defined division of labor and sharing of responsibilities.
10. As a public institution committed to preserving and presenting popular art forms, it is both logical and right that the archive be committed to cultural and gender diversity in all areas including professional training, staffing, programming, scholarship, and educational outreach.

Most of all, the archive's future is tied to key lessons learned from its own past: That rescuing our moving image heritage is not only a profession, but also a moral commitment and a cultural mission. That preservation should not be conceived as a passive activity, but rather a dynamic intervention in contemporary life and a positive investment in the future. That technical expertise, modern facilities, and administrative agility are necessary for an archive to succeed, but are insufficient without an underlying passion for on-screen storytelling. That the archive must be adaptable to changing technologies, evolving tastes, and shifts in the entertainment industry, but inflexible in its commitment to preservation. For nearly four decades, the archive at UCLA has embodied the belief that utopian aspirations are a practical necessity. Therein lies its strength.