Interviewer(s): Michael Kurtz
Interviewee(s): Frank Evans

Michael Kurtz: Frank thank you very much for being willing to come in this morning and to talk with us. This is part ofa whole series that the National Archives Assembly is sponsoring - our Legacy Project, trying to conduct the interviews and collect oral histories on individuals who have been really important in the history ofthe agency.

Frank Evans: That is very flattering.

Michael Kurtz: It is true. Patrice Brown has prepared some questions. We don't have to stick to them; we can kind ofwander the field. I think perhaps the most interesting way to begin is for you to tell us a little about how you came to the National Archives, how did you find out about it, what brought you here in the first place.

Frank Evans: i graduated from high school during World War II and I enlisted in the Navy at 17 -I did not want to get drafted by the Army. I already had enrolled at Lehigh University for Engineering, just to make sure that I got in before I went into the service, then I transferred to Penn State when I got a State Senatorial Scholarship - one of those things that they have in Pennsylvania. I went into the Navy and I qualified for the Navy Air Corps, and the Navy sent me to Colgate for a year. Colgate did not have an engineering curriculum, so I took history and architecture courses, and then for the second year the Navy let me go on inactive duty and back to Penn State. After I finished the two years of college, they sent me down to Pensacola for pre-flight and flight training. What I have always been sort ofproud of in a curious way is that I am one ofthe few people you will ever meet who leamed to fly a plane before they learned to drive a car. During World War II with gasoline rationing, tiring rationing, my father needed that car for work and you had to know my father-that he didn't offer to teach me to drive and I didn't ask him and that was it. So I went to the Navy, I still remember the first time I went up, in the good ol' SNJ Advanced Trainer, the instructor showed me everything in terms of how you drove a car, and when we landed he said "do you have any questions?" I said "Yes. I don't drive." Well, I got through that. There was a tradition in the Navy. When you soloed, you bought your instructor a fifth ofhis choice. My instructor bought me a fifth. I was not one ofthose guys who flew by the seat ofthejr pants-I flew by the book. By 1948 I was having some difficulty with depth perception on pre-carrier landings, and I decided I didn't want to make the Navy a career, so I got out. I went back on the G.I. Bill, took my Bachelor's at Penn State, took a Master's at Penn (University ofPennsylvania), in eight months I fmished that Masters, but I was waking up in the morning with words coming out backwards and the doctor said "you have to slow down," so I slowed down. I joined the faculty at Penn State and taught, went over to their Altoona center and taught history and political science there for four years while I studied German, began to work on a dissertation, went back to Penn State for two more years. While I was working on my dissertation, I went into the State Archives in Pennsylvania in Harrisburg and I asked to see some records relating to the Molly McGuires and [the State Archivist, Henry Eddy] old Henry told me, "Well they're under the bridge across the Susquehanna River; they're awfully dirty." I said "That's alright." After I'd been there a few days working on those records, coming back at the end ofthe day pretty dirty, he invited me out to lunch. He said, "You know I'm looking for an assistant, and since you're willing to get your hands dirty you might make a good archivist." The critical thing at that time is that I was earning about $7500 a year as an instructor with a wife and two kids. He offered me $2000 more than I was making as an instructor. Plus the fact that I was interested in working with research materials, so I became an archivist. That was in 1958. In 1960 the Pennsylvania Historical Museum sent me dowu to Washington to take an institute, a one month institute co-directed by [Professor] Ernst Posner and Ted Schellenberg. These were my teachers. That was two weeks in the classroom and two weeks on a project. Then I went back to Pennsylvania and reorganized the state archives. They had collected all kinds of things. I had to restore original order where possible and I had two good assistants. I had been appointed State Archivist when I came back because I had my Doctorate by that time. We restored original order where possible and put things in chronological order when there was no other meaningful order. We established series, subgroups, record groups, like I had been taught. By '63 Ernst Posner was conducting his study of state archives; he wrote a very glowing account [on the Pennsylvania State Archives] and reconunended that since he was retiring that they hire me to replace him. That's how I got to Washington. I went on the Historian's Register at the Department of Defense and they pulled me off. Bob Balnner and Wayne Grover were then Deputy Archivist (ofthe United States) and Archivist (of the United States). The first job they gave me was the Ford Film Project. I remember I walked into Bahmer's office and he said "Do you know anything about motion pictures, Frank?" I said "No." He said "you'll learn." I hired, upon Ernst Posner's recommendation, Mayfield Bray, who was the wife ofthe head ofthe History Department at American University. We sat there with thousands offeet ofuncaptioned, unidentified motion pictures and I learned the real value ofpicture books. [Now] I knew something about the eastern part ofthe United States, and Mayfield knew the western part-the big problem we had was the Midwest [What I did was] I took the films back dowu to the lab-Harry Badeau at that time was in the lab -and he made still pictures for me ofvarious sites, monuments, buildings, etc. I sent copies ofthese to about a half dozen Midwestern historical societies. The one that finally came through and broke through a major barrier was the Soldiers and Sailors Memorial in Indianapolis, Indiana. I went there years later and looked for that site. But that project was a lot offun, a real good learning experience-the trouble was that I developed allergies from unprocessed motion picture film, We had set up the project and Mayfield was then put in charge, and she completed the guide to the Ford Film Collection. They then sent me over to be an assistant.. ..

Michael Kurtz: What year was it when you came to the Archives?

Frank Evans: '63

Michael Kurtz: '63 to the Archives ... OK, so you started with motion picture ...

Frank Evans: And then Bahmer asked me to go over, assigned me to assist Oliver Holmes in NHPC (National Historical Publications Commission). They wanted to set up a microfilming publication program. So Holmes sent me out to state historical societies to get them to cooperate in this program. I had written a little manual on selection and preparation of records for microfilm publication, so that was the occasion for that [this assignment]. I stayed there for a time and when that project got under way they put me in charge of the Diplomatic, Legal and Fiscal Records Division. I had that for a couple of years. It was very interesting. The one thing that stands were the restrictions the FBI had put on their records. They said that not only were we not to release, without prior approval any records originated with the FBI, but we weren't to release any documents that might contain information that could have come from the FBI. I just told the staff, forget it; this is an impossible restriction. You can't possibly know, unless there is an attribution that the information in the record came from the FBI. It never got us into any trouble, so there was no problem there. But it was one of the most foolish things that I have ever run into.

Michael Kurtz: Well let me just ask you this ... at this point you have worked in motion pictures, you have worked with the National Historical Publications Commission, you have worked with textual records. What was your impression of the Agency when you first came? We all have our impressions of this place when we first hit it, what was yours?

Frank Evans: That there were a lot of good people doing a lot of important work, but increasingly I became unhappy with the fact that the records were not being used for the purpose, which we were keeping - we were not promoting the history of the government and its effort to solve national problems. We were using the records for secondary and tertiary purposes - genealogy, those kinds of things. The presidential libraries were preempting us because of historians' preference for personal papers rather than for institutional records. I think that is a problem that still continues ... I tried to address it by getting Harold Pinkett to join with me, and in 1970 we organized a conference on administration of public policy and I always remember that one because the secretary, when she addressed the invitation letters, thought the title was too long so she abbreviated it: C.R.A.P .P. So I became associated with the "crapp conference" the Conference on Research of Administration of Public Policy. I never had much success with acronyms. When I was at UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) I was responsible for creating an archives records management program. That came out A.R.M.S. and that's not appropriate for an agency dedicated to peace. So I turned it around, Records Archives Management Program, R.A.M.P. Then my friend Eric Ketelaar, who is now the Archivist of the Netherlands, said, "Frank do you understand any Dutch?" I said "No." He said, "Do you know what ramp means?" He said "that means disaster." laughter I gave up acronyms after that. ..

Michael Kurtz: After the textual - after you were diplomatic, judicial and fiscal, where did you go?

Frank Evans: There are a number ofplaces, and I use this little reminder because I don't remember the exact sequence. I had an archival projects division in there. '63-'64 was the Ford film project-assistant to the executive director NHPC was '64-65, director archival projects division '65-'66, then Diplomatic, Legal and Fiscal '66-'68, then Burt Rhodes brought down Dan Reed, Jim O'Neill, and Frank Burke from the Library of Congress. Dan became head ofthe NHPC. I went over there as his deputy from '68-'69. Then I served as Deputy Assistant Archivist for the National Archives with Ned Campbell '69-'72. Then Assistant to the Archivist ofthe United States '72-'74, and Regional Commissioner ofNARS from '74-'76-Region 3.

Michael Kurtz: Why don't you kind of explain a little bit about NARS and the. Regions?

Frank Evans: At that time we were a part ofGSA [the General Services Administration], and one ofthe four major offices was National Archives and Records Service. Each ofthe four offices had in each region a commissioner who managed, directed, administered the programs ofthat office in that particular region. We had the Suitland Records Center at that time and the Philadelphia Records Center. I also had a records management division. Jack Galwardy was the GSA regional commissioner and I was one ofthe four under him. We supported the regional archives branch in Philadelphia and the archival branch in Suitland. Next I was Assistant to Walt Robertson, the [NARA] Executive Director. I felt by that time what was emerging as my career was a troubleshooter in some problem area, starting up a needed new program, getting going and moving on. Quite frankly, I enjoyed that and benefited a great deal from it.

Michael Kurtz: What is really interesting is it seems at the Archives, there is kind of two ways to manage your career in general: one is to become an expert in a particular body of records, and the other is to move around from program to program, as you did, troubleshooting and starting new programs and so forth ... I think there is two kind ofoptions here.

Frank Evans: In 1964 [Archivist ofthe United States] Wayne Grover was scheduled to give a paper at the ICA [International Council on Archives] Congress in Brussels. He asked me to prepare the paper on modern methods ofarrangement of archives in the United States - the record group, subgroup, and series concept. I did the paper and I still have a copy of the title page. He wrote one word on it, "excellent." It made my year. He then called me in his office and he said, "I've got to testify on the Hill on our budget at the same time as that Brussels Congress; how would you like to go to Brussels and represent the United States at the Congress?" How would I like to go to Brussels? laughter Well, life was never the same after that. I arrived in Paris the following morning, I didn't check into a hotel, although it was noon the next day before I caught my train for Brussels. I went to the Gare du Nord, checked my bag, and walked Paris for the next day and a half. From the Champs Elysees to Montmarte and Sacre Couer. I floated. In Brussels I met many National Arehivists, and then when UNESCO and ICA was putting together a team to go to Turkey and advise on the Ottoman archives they selected me to go with them and that got me another invitation over there. By '76 I had gotten involved in the international area, both as a consultant and on committee work, preparing reports and attending congresses and Round Tables. And I think it was Morris Reger more than anybody else to join UNESCO. Initially, I didn't want to do it, but he told me they were going to set up a new program to develop archival and records management programs in member states, particularly developing countries. I found out I could take a two year leave of absence and I went for two years. In that international bureaucracy getting a new program started in two years-wow! It took a while so I applied for an extension when I found out that you're entitled to four years leave ofabsence for one ofthese international positions. I got the program going and then I found out that ifthe State Department decided it was in the national interest for you to continue to serve in an international organization, they would extend you. So I extended for another. two, and then for a final two years. I stayed for eight years on that two year hitch. I served as UNESCO's consultant to 29 foreign governments during that period, and did an awful lot oftravel. I enjoyed it very much, learned a great deal, and then I came back. The Archives didn't quite know what to do with me after an eight year absence. I decided to leave UNESCO simply because I would have had to give up some 30 years of government service and a pension here, against mandatory retirement at age 60-I was then 58 at UNESCO- and faced a ten year retirement there. They have a very good retirement system, but not that good.

Michael Kurtz: So what year did you come back?

Frank Evans: '84. So I was in Paris '76-'84. When I came back in '84, I served briefly as assistant to the Deputy Archivist, and then as Deputy Assistant Archivist for Records Administration, '84-'95 under Jim Moore. I found that position challenging because we were working with the agencies and their records schedules and appraisals - to me that's the basis and the heart ofthe whole business. I also started an Inter-governmental Records Program between '87-'93, trying to get the states to coordinate some oftheir retention and disposition policies with ours in similar areas, covering the same functions, and Marie Allen took that over for me before she went to the Justice Department. I don't know ifthat one continues or not. Then in '95 at age 68 I decided it was time to pack it in, to leave a career for which I am very thankful, and that I really enjoyed. I was teaching history at American U. at the same time as an adjunct professor in night classes. I was also doing some lecturing abroad and doing consulting work. I found out that ifyou were in a profession before you joined the government, you could continue in that profession without conflicting with your official duties. So I again traveled a good deal, Rockefeller Institute in New York was one ofthe consulting jobs. I once went with Ed Leahy down to Florida and for a number ofyears I was consultant for the state ofMaine. After the "Dover-Denver Axis" broke up, do you remember Leon Devalienger and Dolores Renze? When they retired, one ofmy former students became State Archivist in Delaware. He brought me in as a consultant, so I did some work there. The U.S. Department of Agriculture sent me down to the U.S. Virgin Islands after a hurricane, and I did some consulting work for them.

Michael Kurtz: So let's just kind ofsummarize where we're at this point: you started at the Archives in'63, you really worked in almost all are<ts ofthe Archives ...

Frank Evans: Including Records Management ...

Michael Kurtz: ...Exactly, archives, records management, in a variety of positions as you describe, at the same time you're doing consulting, you're doing teaching, you're doing lecturing, spent 8 years in UNESCO, and then came back for another, about 11 years, and focused on records management. That's quite an achievement. As you look back on it, Frank, how would you describe the changes you experienced in this institution over that period of22 years?

Frank Evans: I think one ofthe most obvious things to anybody looking at it, would be the fact that we acquired this facility and we did a good job ofkeeping up with the technology necessary for the preservation of our records. I am not as familiar with the challenge being posed by electronic records today, but I know that we had met the earlier challenge and we are moving on this. I think as an institution, we still don't do the job that needs to be done as effectively as it could be to sell our main product. The conference report that Harold Pinkett and I did could still be a point ofdeparture to the extent that historians still ignore major historical developments the US government in our society and the economy. They're around the periphery of it, and the get into the personalities involved, but very few studies-and I don't have that much faith in agency historians, not that they don't try to be neutral or objective, but that's not the place to do it. Aging historians are in the same bind that the company historian, who's hired to write the company history, is. I would like to see more studies of how Congress attempted to deal with a problem, what authorities and responsibilities and budget they gave to an agency, and how the agency handled that responsibility with what results in our society and our history. I've seen very few of those kind ofstudies.

Michael Kurtz: We're taking a lot ofin depth research, and original sources, and that kind of thing...

Frank Evans: Maybe even team research in some places ... But I think that's the biggest area of neglect, and yet that's the primary purpose for which we're keeping all ofthese records.

Michael Kurtz: You did a lot ofwork in records management, so you had a lot of activity, or interaction, I should say with federal agencies, could you describe what changes you experienced that the agencies went through and how it affected our work here.

Frank Evans: To put it quite bluntly, I don't feel that many of the people who were hired in records management in the agencies were competent to do the kind ofjob that needed to be done. I don't know what qualifications they had, but most of them didn't have any qualifications that seemed to match up. It resembled a position that you just hired somebody to fill. Not quite as bad as the pure political appointment, but not too far away. I don't know to what extent politics was involved in that. I didn't see any signs of it myself-as to determining which records got preserved and which records got destroyed, and that kind ofthing, or which ones got emphasized. I don't think it was a question of partisan politics so much as it was simply a lack of understanding ofwhat we're trying to document and why ... in the records management field.

Michael Kurtz: From the archival perspective,' you also had extensive work with a variety of different parts ofour collection. What would you say are the records that you worked with that had the greatest institutional value, intellectual value, archival value - and how were they exploited or not?

Frank Evans: Congressional records-they weren't being used very extensively. I think also State Department records, but I don't think the documentation there is as complete as it could and should be. Because there is unfortunately a political orientation under our governmental system. Maybe it's too diplomatic, rather-ifI could use that term. I think we haven't fully made the connection, and the historical profession hasn't made the connection, between public problem, congressional action, administrative authorization to try to deal with the problem, or the service, and evaluating its effectiveness in that operation. I see it in that larger context, rather than little individual pieces-the monograph approach that frequently is taken to it, or the article approach, rather that the bigger study. I think the Archives as an institution is a worthwhile and a valuable career for people with a historical background. I think you have to give up your idea ofbeing primarily a research and publishing historian when you come in, but you will need to apply everything you learned as a historian to what you're doing. I think you can channel all ofthat into creating good finding aids and providing valuable reference service. I think we've done a good job on that-between the guides and the inventories.

Michael Kurtz: We have. We have very extensive finding aids. Well Frank, to kind ofkeep our focus on the agency and so forth, as you worked in so many different kind ofpositions and different aspects ofthe business, what were some ofthe challenges that the agency posed for you as you went through your career. Everybody going through a career of some depth and length encounters different challenges and issues, what were some that you had to wrestle with?

Frank Evans: None in particular, I was very fortunate in having Ernst Posner, Bob Bahmer that pretty much ended when Burt and Frosty, and Dick Jacobs, and Dan Reid and Jim O'Neill and Frank Burke came in. These were the ones who were making the decisions with regard to programs and personnel in the institution. I felt for a time that we had abdicated too much to the manuscript orientation ofthese people, to the neglect of promoting archives. But then presidential libraries does that also, so we have that dichotomy in our make up. I have always felt that the system of app.ointment, promotion, evaluation was fair-as fair as humanly possible in any kind ofhuman organization. I never felt being a victim, or ill, or a beneficiary ofthat system. I thought the people that were moved merited the move. I had no problem with the administration, per se, and its management of human resources, as they now call it. I thought it was a good organization. I particularly liked the way that Grover and Bahmer managed the institution in their years. I do feel that we have lost something when the appointment ofthe Archivist ofthe United States is given to a non-archivist. I think that there are sufficient qualified candidates in this profession and that a professional archivist should be appointed to that position. I guess it really started with Bob Warner, and then it went on from there. Not that they can't do the job, but I think that there would be a better understanding by a better leadership of a person who is in the profession itself, rather than coming in from an allied field. But there's nothing we can do about it. .. that's just a personal opinion.

Michael Kurtz: You mentioned Wayne Grover and Bob Bahmer. What would you say are the hallmarks that made them successful leaders?

Frank Evans: They recruited good people. They made sure they had the training that was necessary, and the experience. They went up on the Hill for our program .and our budget, and they had the respect oftheir staff. There are others ... Oliver Holmes is one ...

Michael Kurtz: Head of the NHPC ....

Frank Evans: Yes. Maybe because they were my teachers, I don't know, I do have a predisposition towards judging them, rather than simply viewing them simply as colleagues.

Michael Kurtz: You mentioned training. This is one of the strengths that these two, and others like them, brought to it. When you came you had already been the state archivist of Pennsylvania. What kind of training or orientation did we have at that time?

Frank Evans: Well the first thing I did when I replaced Posner and Shellenberg was to take the four week institute and make it two weeks, because two of the weeks were spent in Washington doing a project in the stacks. Talking with students, and from my own experience, I knew that that was one of the reasons why so many other archivists couldn't be sent to Washington, because ofthe cost. The understanding was you would do an internship project on your own time, in your own .institution. As a result the enrollment in the institutes just multiplied and after a while I was offering two each year rather than one; I from the 17th to the 34th I directed the institutes. But I was able to draw on an awful lot of good people, I didn't do all the lecturing. I brought Frank Burke down on personal papers, I had Phil Mason come in, Jerry Hamm, and I used people like Artel Ricks, on records management. So we had a very intensive program. Maybe you can say in two weeks, 'what can you possibly learn?' You can learn as much as you can in a one semester course ifyou add up the hours. Ifyou're serious about this-that's about what it was. To go beyond that would have been to spend an awful lot of time on practical examples; there wasn't and isn't that much theory. But I felt that if they had a good historical background that was the preferred background. I was getting people from other backgrounds and that could compensate in some respects, but I felt they were lacking something in the process.

Michael Kurtz: Well the institute continues to the current time.

Frank Evans: I know she ... (

Michael Kurtz: Mary Rephlo) ...Mary called me and asked me ifl could get to the SAA (Society of American Archivists) meeting where they were giving her an award for the institute and I said, "yes," but I had a medical problem at the time and wasn't able to come. I would have liked to. I think the institute deserved the recognition.

It did. Now ...

Frank Evans: Oh yes, Ed Weldon was another one ... I took him as co-director and we had ...

Michael Kurtz: Now where did Ed work at that time?

Frank Evans: He wasn't in the military ...

Michael Kurtz: So he was in the National Archives ... (

Frank Evans: oh yes) Because he had left and then at some point ... (

yes, he went back down to Georgia) ... Right. (

We used to talk about his program at Emory where he took his doctorate and compare notes ... it was a lot offun).

Michael Kurtz: What kind oftraining did we have for the staff? The institute is really for people coming from the outside? Internally, when you came, what kind of training program was there and did you participate in it... how did that work?

Frank Evans: It was largely in-service. You learned by doing under supervision, and we did offer a series oflectures for staff training, but it was never formally, or highly organized. People took the institute; our own stafftook it when we hired them. Dolores Renze had an institute out in Denver; those were the only two at that time. There were no college programs anywhere in the country. When I retired there still wasn't a recognized curriculum, even as a minor for a history major. That carne along later. We used to have discussions; is there enough intellectual substance here to set up a separate degree program for archives? Well, come on now, let's be serious. They set them up for everything else nowadays. Maybe we were just being too formal, and setting our standard too highly. I think most of the training, apart from the initial introduction into the field, was largely "learning by doing" by the staff because ofthe uniqueness ofthe records, and once you had mastered the principles, the basic concepts, it was largely learning the informational content-which you did by your work with your researcher and your creation ofthe finding aids. I don't think that there is much that you can do beyond that... Now with the new technologies that have emerged and with electronic records, there are whole new areas here that requires training ... (

Michael Kurtz: yes, a tremendous amount) ...but I think that we had developed a program adequate and appropriate to the type ofdocumentation that we had, up until that point, recognizing that still pictures, and motion pictures and cartographic records all had their own special requirements.

Exactly, exactly ... Let's turn for a minute to your work at UNESCO because I think it is really unique. I am not aware ofanyone else at your level in the history ofthe National Archives who spent so much time on the international stage. And from your perspective, what was the role or place ofthe National Archives, ofthe United States in this kind ofsystem and how would you evaluate the agency from the international perspective?

Frank Evans: The Dutch had the Merthur, Feith, and Fruen manual. You learn to discount the pretensions ofthe French, who are pretentious in every area, I Jove them but I wish some day they would get beyond Napoleon and join the world in which we live (laughter), but they are remarkable people. When I used to teach the history of archives administration, which was one ofthe courses that I taught for American U ., I emphasized that we created a model for many new types ofdocumentation that did not previously exist. European colleagues had their own method for older records but the volume and varieties ofrecords was not so great that they needed the kind of distinctions that we made between record groups, subgroups, etc. I think we also contributed greatly on preservation, on archival repositories, air conditioning, fire proofing, this kind of thing; we made important contributions that way internationally. And not only to the developing countries as they began to develop a national archival service, but even to the older countries as they adapted and updated their systems. One ofthe biggest problems was "removed archives," and I attended a number of conferences, and wrote a number ofpapers on this topic. Restoring archives to countries after intensive occupations, conflicts, revolutions, and occupations, still is an unresolved problem, as it is with removed paintings and sculptures.

Michael Kurtz: Frank, at your work in UNESCO did you have to deal a fair amount with restitution issues when it came to archives and so forth (

Frank Evans: No ...) the legacy of World War II?

I would simply tell them this is the responsibility of your foreign ministry. Ideally you should restore these, but we're not in a position to require you to do so. UNESCO never took a formal position on that. I think that the major accomplishments were in countries newly independent after World War II, and there were a number of countries that established a National Archives before they established a National Library. Their consciousness of their history was very strong and I remember that in Sudan they took over the building that was formerly the harem of the Sultan and made it into the National Archives and Abu Salem with degrees from Oxford and Cambridge was the National Archivist, a rather remarkable scholar. We once held a conference on the White Nile on a riverboat.

Michael Kurtz: So our contribution primarily is in facilities, preservation and how to manage large quantities ofcomplex records ...

Frank Evans: Yes ... I think also there was some contribution with regard to non-textual records; not so much with cartographic records, but with motion pictures and sound recordings where we had some things to teach them and they were willing to learn. I think there was a good exchange with the British-and their new building... have you been to Kew to see what they're building? (

Michael Kurtz: yes ...) They've done some good things. I also have a great deal ofrespect for the Canadians, who contributed greatly internationally, too.

And now they've just merged their library and the archives ... interesting model.

Frank Evans: Who's currently the archivist?

Michael Kurtz: Hugh [Taylor].

Frank Evans: Yes ... I'm thinking of Hugh with the glasses, former Englishmen .. .let's see it was Wilson (

Michael Kurtz: Ian Wilson) Ian Wilson, oh yes, I remember him, too.

Prior to this he was the provincial archivist for Ontario.

Frank Evans: Ontario, right- yes, they've got a good program, good archival program. I've always admired them.

Michael Kurtz: Frank is there any question, or anything that we haven't covered that you want to share from a legacy perspective about the institution, about your career, or anything?

Frank Evans: I feel I've been fortunate in having a worthwhile career in essentially a service area. It has given me opportunities for professional growth, for personal satisfaction, for travel obviously. I feel it's a career that should prove attractive to people with a basic interest in this area, and willing to develop competence in this kind of work. I envy a young person starting their career now in archives.

Michael Kurtz: I do too. It is changing so dramatically and it's so interesting. So if we had here somebody either considering a career or just starting as an archivist here, what kind of advice would you give them?

Frank Evans: If they don't have the doctorate in history? I think that unless the person is motivated and demonstrates competence otherwise, they should master the informational content of a significant body of records in all media. That's where they can make their major contribution- both through the description of the records and through the servicing of them to the researcher. And that's what it really is all about.

Michael Kurtz: Well, thank you very much. I really appreciate the time that you spent.

Frank Evans: I appreciate your time, Michael.

Michael Kurtz: This is really very interesting.