From the King’s College Archive
Dear XXXX
I’m sorry that you were disappointed by the news that we have to stick to King’s-approved suppliers for digitisation work, and I do understand that it must seem tedious and unnecessary bureaucracy. However, it is completely unavoidable - as I may have mentioned, Archives Services were audited just last month, and dealings with external suppliers of services were subjected to particularly close scrutiny.
<…>
With very best wishes
and many thanks,
XXXX
Archives Services
King’s College London
From John Whiting
Dear XXXX,
I find it ironic that Eric Mottram's tapes would not be considered safe in my
hands inasmuch as they only survive at all because, after his death, I went all
over his house gathering them up and boxing them. Many of them had already
passed through my hands making copies for Eric, and many others had originated
with me in the first place.
If the firms that digitize for you follow normal practice, their fee will be
for only making a straight copy of what is on the tape; any further work
multiplies the cost. My digitizing would have included listening to the tapes
as they were playing, editing out dead space and banding as appropriate,
adjusting the speed (which is often necessary) and correcting equalization
(which is almost always required). In the course of this I would also have
gathered further information not on the label that would have been useful for
cataloguing. And all this for about a third of your usual firm's charge for straight
unedited copying.
Fortunately, the many hours of Eric's lectures and seminars that I recorded
between 1969 and 1972 remained in my possession and so I have been able to
digitize them all and make them available on a dedicated website. As an
alumnus, it makes me very sad that King's, like the rest of England's great
colleges, is being strangled in red tape. It would have given me a great deal
of satisfaction to help to further preserve Eric's legacy, and for a merely
token hourly charge.
Yours regretfully,
John Whiting