In regard to the apparent dichotomy discussion...until 3 years ago, the
collections and research staff was slated to go by a board that did not
see the value of a department not apparently pulling its own weight in
tough economic times. That situation has been improved, but the staff cuts
in this department were still disproportionate to those taken elsewhere,
and I know that this is not the only institution of which that can be said.
 
But it's not the sole responsibility of the wine and cheese crowd up at
the big house, y'all. Are WE communicating enough? My experience (and I'm
not flaming, I swear; this is very sympathetic, so just imagine a coo in
the voice) is that curation, collections management, and conservation
professionals tend to be very objects-oriented, and are often not so hot
on human interactions. We know these things are important, the heart of
the museum, the repository of information, etc. But we forget that (1)
other people don't know this; (2) it is not inherently obvious in the
nature of and care given to the materials; (3) we have a very real
obligation to the communities we serve to give back something in return
for the support we receive, and that something is often best served by
public education.
 
We just had a tour by an Elderhostel group that wanted a behind-the-scenes
tour of our place. I had to talk others into it, even though it was very
low-impact on the collections (I've seen more damage done by us!). The
tour was a resounding success with the group, the collections were
unaffected, and I hope that some of them went away with a more updated
view of the roles and the functions of the museum. It definitely refreshed
my understanding of the true purpose of the museum.
 
In a directors' seminar at the Getty Conservation Institute two weeks ago,
Bob Child of the National Museum of Wales spoke of the need to reexamine
codes of ethics, in part because strict adherence to them may violate the
mission and purpose of the museum. I would go one step further in the
context of this discussion and say that we need to look at how WE are
communicating with our own museum staff and communities, rather than
preaching so much to the converted, before we decide that we are being
unfairly shunted aside. These are tough times, and even collections
professionals have to wear many hats and serve many interests. Preserving
the collections is the means; the valuable use of the collections is the
end; and I don't think we can pretend that our own scholarly peers are
going to be the only users whose needs we consider. I don't think that's
ethical unless our s.p. are also the sole support of the collections. So
stick up for fair treatment of collections issues, but be prepared to be a
part of the larger picture, too. Enough soapbox.
SAlly Shelton