Reviewed by: The Filing Cabinet: A Vertical History of Information by Craig Robertson Eva Hemmungs Wirtén (bio) The Filing Cabinet: A Vertical History of Information By Craig Robertson. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2021. Pp. 328. "Storage is not neutral." Craig Robertson's red thread in The Filing Cabinet has general applicability but also a very concrete embodiment: this is a book about the filing cabinet. Although the author never uses the term microhistory, his ambition to "see how the cabinet as an object shapes people's interaction with information" (p. x) reminds me of how microhistories zoom in on something—an event or an object—in order to tell a much bigger story, in many cases of something "too insignificant" to notice. Like a filing cabinet—once ubiquitous in offices, today just one among many metaphorical or more concrete "machines" that have become the stuff of media-archeological excavation. As Robertson argues that the filing cabinet both belongs to "the genealogy of information's ascendancy" and "exemplifies the material history of efficiency" (p. 4), he situates The Filing Cabinet in a broad and dynamic scholarly field that considers paperwork practices in the history of information and knowledge. The book is divided into two major parts, the first of which turns to the object itself (the filing cabinet) and the second of which turns to the associated practices of the object (filing in action). The first part consists of three chapters. Chapter 1 considers the concept of verticality of information, looking at how the cabinet was marketed and associated with the skyscraper skylines and famous New York landmarks such as the Woolworth building; the second chapter turns to the cabinet in relation to its capacity for storage integrity; and the third zooms in even deeper to the cabinet's structure, to consider how tabs, indexes, and compressors worked in order to make office work more effective and faster. These three chapters enable the author to approach theoretically the concepts of storage, information, classification, and indexing. The four chapters that make up the second part of the book are quite different and less "object focused," moving from considering particularity, what is referred to as "granular certainty," in chapter 4, to the questions of how and why the filing cabinet may be considered a "machine" in chapter 5; the consequences of the gendered labor of filing in chapter 6; and in the last chapter, moving from the office to the home, showing how office storage translated into "scientific housekeeping." Richly and pedagogically illustrated, the images and advertising posters add to the narrative and analysis. Although The Filing Cabinet is deftly written, highly readable, and contains a wealth of interesting and sometimes eye-opening examples and ideas, my main problem with the book as a monograph is precisely its structure. As the narrative stands, it sometimes feels as if the division of object and practices into two separate sections is counterproductive to the very argument that the author is trying to make, which is that these two are profoundly [End Page 222] integrated. The separation occasionally forces the author to reference what is to come later, and the reader to try and recall where and when something was said in the first part, which would have worked much better integrated with the second part, precisely because the object and practices are so closely related. Some of these problems of unfulfilled integration could have been offset by a stronger introduction and conclusion, but the author does not take the opportunity to bring out the overlaps between the various individual chapters, and the conclusion feels somewhat rushed and unrelated to the previous chapters. So, while I remain somewhat frustrated by the narrative structure of the book, believing that a stronger integration between the object and its practices would have resulted in an even more convincing study, Robertson's book defends its place in the context of studies focused on the office or bureaucratic culture, especially in its close material relationship with paper. Scholars such as Delphine Gardey, Cornelia Visman, JoAnne Yates, and many others have shown just how much we did not know about the office as space, bureaucracy, and the materiality of files...
Read full abstract