10/30/19 Reading Response

In Sharer's article, she approaches the archives with a specific objective in mind. She had already knew what she wanted to find in the archives, information about LWF and WILPF, and researched specific areas accordingly. Despite saying that the research was challenging, she had made the process much easier. It was beneficial for her to locate three different archive sources with diverse information, which could maximize the amount of content that can be useful with a limited amount of effort and time. At the Schlesinger Library, Sharer had realized finding information in a place with such dense archives is difficult, and there are also health repercussions from overworking yourself while reading microfilm images. Later on, she realizes that there are many holes in the archives regarding the history that she is researching, which is inevitable as not everything can be recorded and archived. She had said "An archival researcher, however, cannot realistically expect the historical figure she is investigating to have kept everything, much less can she expect that everything her research subject preserved will make its way into official archival collections. This statement is important because it highlights the fact that there will always be information lost in history, and it isnt plausible to expect archives to have the answers for everything. This makes it difficult to analyze history accurately, but we as researchers must make do with the information we are given as well as preserving the stories of our time. 

How do you think history is shaped by the missing information in history, rather than the history we already know?