----------
> From: Barry Dressel <[log in to unmask]>
> To: Collections Dept SOHS [log in to unmask]
> Subject: 20th century
> Date: 05 June 1997 10:48
>
> SAMDOK is a great model, alright, but there are others. Canada Parks, I
> believe has done some great work.  But if you are operating a local
> institution, all this becomes too overwhelming. At places where I have
> laboured previously we have taken as text the thought "local history does
> best when it reflects trends in national history." We stood that on its
> little pointed head, to wit, in regards to 20th century collecting
national
> history does best when it is reflected in local life." By illustration,
we
> developed a list of what historians--social, technological, etc.
considered
> the most important 20th century developments. One of these, I remember
was
> dependable control of human fertility. We then went out and collected
> materials, including birth control devices as well as posters and
> literature from Planned Parenthood, and also the material provided by
> various Right to Life. Other topics I remember were the development of
the
> semi-conductor, which permitted a privatization of leisure entertainment,
> the invention of nylon. I currently work in the Caribbean, where AIDS is
a
> real problem, along with illegal immigration from Haiti, and the pros and
> cons of development. We collect AIDS information materials and posters
and
> posters targeted at illegal immigrants--in Haitian Creole they say "Do
you
> want to return to  Haiti with dignity?"  We also collect develpment
> prospectuses and tourist literature. This is material that is
> epheral--ephemera is a  20th century category that merits special
concern,
> since so much of 20th century material that is telling IS ephemeral.
> Obviously, not every 20th century topic is worth localizing.   Curators
> were supposed to prepare, for discussion in our collections commitee,
> pro-active collecting statements--what areas, and why. Once adopted,
> curators were supposed to collect accordingly. This statement could be
> reviewed for progress and revised once a year or so.The object was to
avoid
> long collections meeting discussions about ad hoc, one of a kind items
> divorced from other collections strains. The agreement was supposed to be
> that if you collected 20th century stuff previously agreed to, only a
> simple majority in the committee was necessary (after all, there might be
> other considerations to turn objects away, such as storage or
conservation
> concerns). Otherwise, there objects had to be unanimously accepted.
> Curators do not like the restrictions all this implies, they prefer to
just
> improvisionally do clever things--it's why curators drive directors
crazy.
> But if they can't or won't examine scholarship that can translate into
> collecting agendas, or think practically, rationally, and analytically
(as
> well as creatively) about what they're doing, maybe they're not doing
their
> job properly. The tactics I've outlined above are less grandiose than
what
> is done in Canada or Sweden, but require just as much discipline and
effort
> within the institution. Perhaps that makes it difficult or impractical,
but
> that takes us back to square one. If the only way 20th century collecting
> gets done is on a fragmentary basis, without justification, made up as it
> goes along, it pretty much guarantees that the future record will be so
> uneven as to be useless for interpretive purposes, (assuming anyone  will
> still care about visiting museums and seeing artifacts). In that case,
> better not doing it at all than just being goofy amateurs  A
concentration
> along specific "spines" of documentation whose rationale is clear,
> resulting in collection strengths developed for a deliberate purpose, at
> least guarantees some future utility, and the respect and care that a
> collection grouped around a specific goal generates from staff, present
and
> future.
> You touched a nerve here, obviously. Barry Dressel, Turks and Caicos
> National Museum, Grand Turk, Turks and Caicos Islands, BWI
> By the way, I collect beach junk--plastic, glass, metal--which
> self-identifies its  far-flung origins to make a point about the
> international nature of ocean pollution, and expect to use it for an
> exhibition: Wind, Waves, Tides, Trash, and Currents. Sounds like an ad
> agency or a law firm.
>