2025 marks the 50th anniversary of the Association of Canadian Archivists—a milestone that offers a unique opportunity to reflect on five decades of archival practice, community-building, and collective professional growth. To celebrate, the ACA Blog team is launching a special interview series to spotlight the voices, experiences, and insights of ACA members past and present through intergenerational conversations. Students and emerging professionals will interview longtime members, offering a space to share personal reflections, institutional memory, and the evolving landscape of archival work in Canada.  

In today’s feature, Grace Phippard chats with Terry Eastwood—former President of the ACA and Editor of Archives Bulletin and Archivaria—for an insightful conversation.

* Image - ACA Conference opening reception in Hamilton, Ontario, 1987. Foreground (L-R): Rick Stapleton[?], Gary Mitchell, George Brandak, Anne MacLean, Jim Burrows, Sandra Kiemele, and Vincent Ouellette. © Catherine Bailey.

Can you tell us about your first experience with the ACA? What drew you to become a member? 

ACA was formed in Edmonton (my home town) in 1975, when archivists met as the Archives Section of the Canadian Historical Association and determined to form their own professional society to pursue their own mutual development and that of the field and discipline in which they worked. I attended that meeting and came away from it with the appointment as the Editor of the ACA’s newsletter, Archives Bulletin. I was then nearly two years into my archival career, and was one of a host of archivists, many of them also in the early years of their careers, who were drawn into the work of ACA to promote the professional development of its members and improvement of their practice. It was a joy to work with colleagues, to learn from them, and, best of all, to make so many dear friends from across the country. 

Over the course of your career, you served as President and Vice President of the ACA, as well as Editor of Archivaria. What accomplishments or contributions to ACA are you most proud of? 

In June 1980, a resolution was passed at the annual general meeting of the ACA that the Association establish a task force on standards for the arrangement and description of archival materials. After failing to find funding for such an endeavour, the task was taken up by the Bureau of Canadian Archivists (BCA), the umbrella body at that time representing ACA and l’Association des archivistes du Quebec (AAQ). The Public Archives of Canada then provided funds for Marcel Caya for AAQ and me for ACA to draft a funding proposal to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRCC), which in November 1983 awarded BCA a grant of $97,250 (the first ever grant by SSHRCC to archival research endeavour) to establish a Working Group on Archival Descriptive Standards, which Marcel Caya for AAQ and I for ACA chaired, and which issued its report entitled Toward Descriptive Standards in December 1985, and which led to the work to develop RAD, in which I was also involved. I feel honoured and, yes, proud of having had the opportunity to take part with many others (and in this regard I must recognize the work of Jean Dryden on the writing the final report and Laura Millar, who helped make sense of all the data we gathered of current descriptive practices) in this important work for the archival field, which began with a resolution at an ACA meeting. 

What do you think is unique about archives in Canada? How have the ACA and Canadian archivists influenced the global archival landscape over the past 50 years? 

The most usual claim for a distinctive feature of Canadian archival institutions is the so-called total archives concept of its public archives, which preserve both public and private records, a tradition begun by the government of Canada and followed in the provinces and in civic governments, although such is not unknown in the institutional circumstances of archives in other countries, but perhaps not so widely as in Canada. 

As for the influence of ACA and Canadian archivists worldwide, I would say that the tenor of presentations at ACA meetings were widely respected by attendees from out of the country, as were the writings of Canadian archivists in Archivaria. Canadian archivists were prominent in many international organizations, at international meetings of archivists, and in efforts to spread knowledge of archival science, and many eloquently voiced their perspective on archival matters, but I would be loath to cite any specifics in the matter. 

In your view, what have been the most significant changes in the archival profession over the past 50 years? 

At the risk of tooting one’s own horn, I would say that perhaps the most significant change is the advent and growth of pre-appointment education for the profession in our universities. I knew very little when I was hired in 1973, and proved, I suppose, that one could indeed learn on the job, but that is a far cry from having the breadth of the discipline exposed to one before undertaking practice. 

The other change I would note, is that 50 years ago the scope of archival institutions and places where archival knowledge was usefully employed were really fairly restricted. Now, the places where people with an archival education are employed has grown and will no doubt continue to grow to the benefit of the Canadian society. 

Recently, the news and popular discourse has questioned the importance of archival work. Given that so much of your career has involved advocating for the profession, how do you feel public opinion on archives has evolved? What do you think we can do to combat misinformation regarding the profession and make the public aware of archival work? What do you think is the role of archives in society, especially one where truth is increasingly called into question? 

I suspect these important questions cannot be adequately addressed in a few words. And, as preface to the forthcoming, forgive me for feeling I am going out there on very thin ice. 

Let’s face it, it is enormously difficult to tease out plausible truth about the past. The records reposing in archival settings tell only part of the story of what happened in the past, and all kinds of things can happen that prevent all the records that could reveal a better picture of what transpired from finding their way to archival care. People who are aggrieved about happenings in the past may well think that archival institutions, which are often an arm of the body at which they aim their grievance, are no place to find the truth, even that archives are somehow complicit in obscuring the truth. Still, the best one can do is expose what one has that reveal matters relative to a person’s quest, and, if relevant, where else the person may go in the pursuit of understanding. Along the way, there may be opportunity to show sympathy for person’s quest and understanding of both the possibilities and constraints it faces. It is all about avoiding becoming embroiled in disputes about truth.  

Of course, the real place where the rubber hits the road from the archival perspective in this quest for truth, at least in the sphere of public records, lies in the adequacy of archival institutions to appraise and acquire the breadth of records to support such truth seeking. 

What do you think are ACA’s greatest accomplishments? 

I think its accomplishments fall into these categories: (1) providing a situation for the expression of ideas about archives and their circumstances, in both senses of the word archives; (2) advocating regarding matters important to the health and welfare of archival institutions and the profession; (3) acting as an agent of continuing education for archivists.  

In the first instance, its publications have carried the load, as have the annual conferences. In the second instance, ACA committee and special bodies in which ACA was represented have done important work to formulate an archival perspective on matters important to the field or develop tools for the work, like RAD. In the third instance, workshops, publications, and even informal exchange of ideas have a positive influence on the professional development of its members. I am not sure how much has been done in all those realms lately for I have been for some years not been directly involved in ACA affairs, but do think that those things ought to be the motivating force of our national professional association. 

What does being part of ACA’s 50-year history mean to you personally?

In my previous answers, I think I have given some indication of the role ACA played in my professional life. I involved myself in its affairs in many ways, some of which I have revealed here, and I was sometimes even a critic of its shortcomings, in which of course I shared the blame (or ought to have), but ACA meant a great deal to me. It gave me countless opportunities to improve myself; it offered me challenges to meet as I held some or another office in the association; it offered me a circle of colleagues and friends off which to bounce ideas, hit the dance floor with, engage in friendly debate with, learn from, play baseball with in the annual east-west game, and generally be part of my gang going out to try to make things better in the field. It would not be amiss to say it played a huge part in allowing me to do many of the things I came to do in the profession. We all just buoyed each other up to do the things that we thought needed to be done for the profession and in our particular field of work. 

What advice would you offer to early career archivists or new ACA members who are just starting to engage with profession? 

As one might expect from my answer to the previous question, my advice is simple: get involved. Attend a conference, engage with colleagues to find those with whom you feel you have some connection; join a group doing something for ACA in which you are interested. Do not feel intimidated. It won’t take long for you to find a place where you fit in and people who share your circumstances, interests, or concerns.  

Terry Eastwood was an archivist at the Provincial Archives of British Columbia from 1973-81. In 1981, he assumed the position of Chair of the Master of Archival Studies Program in the then School of Librarianship at the University of British Columbia. He served the ACA as newsletter editor, Vice-President. President, and Editor of Archivaria, and spoke many times at ACA conferences. He taught in the MAS Program for 26 years, retiring in 2007. He is currently a volunteer processing records at the City of Richmond Archives. 

Grace Phippard is a student in the Master of Archival Studies and Master of Library and Information Studies program at the University of British Columbia. She currently works in the University Archives and Records Management Office at UBC, as well as in the Archives at Emily Carr University of Art and Design, and as the Coordinator of ACA@UBC. In 2024, Grace graduated with a BA in History from Smith College, where she also worked for two years as an Assistant Processing Archivist.