Per:

You cover two completely different things in your excellent contribution.

On ICOM-L and ICOM's apparently complicated structures:

it has never been the case that members can only communicate through the
complex maze that you describe. More important, as the Executive Council
member with special responsibility for ICOM's Internet policy and
developments from 1994 to 1998 I can assure you that one of the key
aims in setting up ICOM-L was to both speed up and democratise
communication amongst ALL members, not just those holding official
positions in the national and international committees or the Executive
Council.

The lack of use of ICOM-L for the agreed purposes and according to the
policies for this - by either the central bodies of ICOM or the general
membership has been a matter of continuing concern, frustration and deep
disappointment to all of us who worked so hard to ensure that ICOM stayed
at the forefront of the Information and Communication Technology
revolution - in the way it was when we launched the extensive and very
advanced internet facilities in 1995.  The fact that it took three months
to get onto ICOM-L the English version of Bernice Murphy's urgent appeal
for members to submit evidence and views to her ICOM Reform Task Force
(and five months for the French version) says it all.



On the University Museums issue:

So far as I know everyone welcomes Peter Stanbury's efforts and agrees
that some organisation for university museums is necessary. Likewise,
nobody can defend the current structure of international committees
- particularly the "curatorial subject" committees (as opposed to the
interdisciplinary committees.  However, during my more than 25 years
in ICOM I know that every suggestion that there should be some
rationalisation - e.g. by merging the five or six applied arts
international committees, or even Fine Art and Modern Art, has been so
ferociously attacked from existing interests that the idea has been
dropped immediately.

However, your analysis of the situation in relation to a university
museums committee misses one absolutely key point: anyone joining such a
committee as a full member would first have to give up their existing
international committee membership (and any office within this).  Several
of the present international committees are currently very dependent on
university museum staff members, and have genuine concerns about their
survival if a large and strong university museums committee emerges.

In contrast with this, an affiliated organisation has its own membership
which does not prohibit membership or even holding office in an
international committee at the same time.  It is also able to have its own
legal personality and funds (neither of which is possible for
international committees - which are absolutely integral parts of ICOM as
a Paris-registered ="Association" under the French law of 1 July 1901).
However, affiliated associations still have a majority of ICOM personal
and institutional members, who can e.g. run for office in ICOM etc.

I don't think that ICOM members within - e.g. the International
Association of Transport Museums or the Commonwealth Museums Association
- to take just two very different examples - regard themselves as
second-class members because their home base is an affiliated organisation
rather than an international committee.

Indeed, the trend is likely to be in the opposite direction to what you
propose.  Already, two or three of the largest international committees
have been discussing for some time the possibility that they may in
effect be forced to re-constitute themselves as affiliated organisations in
order to be able to cope with both their long-standing funding problems
and the legal/constitutional problems that are emerging.

Similarly, no doubt the Reform Task Force will be looking at this issue
very closely from the other end of the telescope.  Under French law the
President, Vice-presidents, Treasurer and Secretary-General (not the
full Executive Council) carry full fiscal, civil and even criminal
liability for all the finances of, and any wrong-doing within, an
international committee, even though they have in practice absolutely no
control over how the international committees conduct their business.

I can tell you that during my six years as a vice-president, from 1992 -
1998, there were two or three actual or suspected problems within
international committees that caused me sleepless nights.

Best wishes


Patrick J. Boylan
Chairperson, ICTOP: International Committee for the Training of Personnel

City University, Frobisher Crescent, Barbican, London EC2Y 8HB, UK;
phone: +44-171-477.8750, fax:+44-171-477.8887;
Home: "The Deepings", Gun Lane, Knebworth, Herts. SG3 6BJ, UK;
phone & fax: +44-1438-812.658;
E-mail: [log in to unmask];  Web site: http://www.city.ac.uk/artspol/


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Change ICOM-L subscription options and search the archives at:
   http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html