David, You raise an interesting point.  This is a problem in
university museums in particular where, in my case anyway, the
director answered to a dean who had little understanding or
appreciation for museum practice.  The particular place where I
worked (and left) wound up shooting itself in the foot.  With the
support of half the art department (well trained in art history and
studio practice but with little to no understanding of museums except
for having exhibited in some), created an unworkable organizational
structure that cost the institution its bid for AAM accreditation.
What continues to amaze me is that individuals, especially those
educated in related fields, think they've created/decided what's best
for THEIR institution based on a very limited personal experience.
Often they make these decisions while ignoring an entire body of
knowledge that has evolved from decades of theory, practice,
evaluation, and careful decision making.  With the "help" of the dean
(in this case, a person who functioned like the corporate CEO of a
major museum who has authority over staff with museum training or
experience), this particular university gallery lost its full-time
director, its university-wide application, much of its funding, AND
an opportunity to become one of the few AAM accredited university
museums in the state.  All this was done in the name of local
control, "local" being the art department.  While I am not there to
confirm this, I think they are proud of their "accomplishment."
Anna Fariello


>In a message dated 3/10/2004 10:08:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
><< What has lacked in the discussion thus far is a consideration of the
>  fundamental error that the museum made in contracting for this exhibit-not
>  contracting an exhibit based on a review of all materials beforehand. No
>  serious museum just agrees to an exhibit and them tries to "dig itself out
>  from a sticky situation." Agreement to what items constitute the exhibit
>  needed to have been negotiated out before an exhibition agreement was
>  signed. This would have raised the issue early on and in a very limited
>  scale. All affected parties could have laid out their needs and concerns and
>  in all likelihood a reasonably satisfactory solution could have been found.
>>>
>
>The above is certainly good advice.  I'd like to use it as a point of
>departure for a tangent--perhaps a new thread.  Curators often have
>to learn their
>lessons the hard way, and I suspect that many have had comparable experiences.
>(Those who get burned and can profit from the experience are probably better
>curators in the long run.)  It's the job of museum directors, it seems to me,
>to guide inexperienced staff and help them avoid pitfalls.  But this assumes
>that senior managers have sufficient training and experience (such
>as curatorial
>experience) to recognize potential pitfalls.  It is my impression that many
>museums, including some of the largest and most prestigious, are increasingly
>afflicted with directors and trustees from the corporate world who have no
>museum experience and who are creating havoc in their institutions
>through their
>ignorance and headaches for the professional staff.  Lack of sympathy with and
>knowledge of museum traditions, ethics, and values at top levels of
>management, combined with the arrogance acquired from climbing
>corporate ladders, and
>the never-ending quest (dare I say lust?) for ever higher attendance
>figures and
>greater earned income help to redefine (and sometimes distort) the work of
>museums.
>
>Candace will probably never make the same mistake again.  Imagine then her
>frustration, after having learned her lessons well in the school of
>hard knocks,
>if some future know-nothing administrator has a whim which forces her into a
>similar position against her better judgment.  Excuse my vagueness and
>reluctance to give specific examples, but I'm aware of situations in several
>institutions where arrogant administrators who lack museum training
>have forced
>experienced professional staff to implement their bad decisions on
>major exhibitions
>and other programs, resulting not only in bad publicity but actual damage to
>their institutions, including but not limited to the demoralizing of the
>staff.  This is a problem which I would love to see an organization
>like the AAM
>address.
>
>It's something to think about, IMHO...
>
>David Haberstich
>
>=========================================================
>Important Subscriber Information:
>
>The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
>http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
>information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail
>message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message
>should read "help" (without the quotes).
>
>If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail
>message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message
>should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Anna Fariello, Curatorial InSight, Box 505, Christiansburg VA 24068
www.curatorialinsight.com;  540-382-3946;  [log in to unmask]
Interdisciplinary Studies, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg VA 24061-0227
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).