This has been making the rounds of several lists I'm on.  Does anyone know
who it would be appropriate to write to in protest of Small's actions?  Are
the people mentioned in the last paragraph of this letter the best bets?
South Carolina's public history & folklife people await your answer!  Those
interested might also want to check out the action alert about the closing
of SCMRE on www.aaanet.org (I think it's still there).

Kathy Mancuso

----Original Message Follows----
From: Robert Weyeneth <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: H-Net/NCPH Discussion List on Public History
<[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Smithsonian in the News Again
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 08:14:24 EDT

Apologies for cross-postings but these developments at the Smithsonian
warrant wide circulation.  This is from H-PUBLIC, to which you might
wish to post comments.

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Included below is a notice sent recently by Bruce Craig, Executive
Director of the National Coordinating Committee, regarding another
exhibition issue at the Smithsonian Institution.  This pertains to
a substantial donation to the National Museum of American History
and the proposed involvement of the donor in the content of that
exhibition.

I invite you to read the article and consider the ramifications of
what is being proposed.  If you wish to exchange your thoughts on
this list, you are most welcome to do so.

Historical organizations are beginning to react to the situation.
The Organization of American Historians released a statement today.
You may find it at the OAH website --  www.oah.org

Last year, the Board of Directors of NCPH accepted museum exhibit
guidelines that had been drafted and approved by the Society for
History in the Federal Government; you may find those on the NCPH
website at www.ncph.org

I will keep you apprised of any other developments in this matter.

David G. Vanderstel
Executive Director
National Council on Public History

_____________________________________________

NCC WASHINGTON UPDATE, Vol. 7, #22, June 1, 2001
by Bruce Craig <[log in to unmask]> of  the National Coordinating
Committee for the Promotion of History
*****************

1.   Smithsonian Secretary Criticized by Staff

1.  SMITHSONIAN SECRETARY CRITICIZED BY STAFF
In a blunt letter to the Smithsonian Institution Board of Regents, over
70 curators, historians, and other scholars associated with the Museum of
American History have called on the Regents to review a series of recent
decisions made by Secretary Lawrence Small and his staff.  Small is a
former investment and mortgage company executive and the first
non-academic to head the Smithsonian in its 160-year history.

According to the letter, the scholars believe the Secretary's actions
"circumvent established decision-making procedures...breach established
standards of museum practice and professional ethics...[and] commit
[the] museum to unethical relationships with private donors." While the
letter falls just short of calling for the Secretary's dismissal, it does
accuse Small of a series of actions that have caused "irreversible and
deserved loss of public confidence in the Smithsonian."

The series of actions undertaken by the Secretary discussed in the
letter include: renaming the National Museum of American History;
committing the museum to unethical relationships with private donors;
creating a "hall of fame" of individual Americans, and reconfiguring
exhibit space in absence of "deliberative procedures [that are to be]
applied to all proposals." In short, the letter states that the
"Secretary's actions create the appearance of impropriety." Of prime
concern to the scholars is the apparent loss of intellectual control of
exhibitions. The letter asks: "Will the Smithsonian Institution actually
allow private funders to rent space in a public museum for the expression
of private interests and personal views?"

The letter comes on the heels of a series of developments - an
unsuccessful attempt by Secretary Small to close the Smithsonian's renown
wildlife conservation center, the abrupt resignation of Robert Fri,
Director of the National Museum of Natural History (Fri is the third
Smithsonian Director to announce his intention to quit the Institution;
Fri cited disagreements with higher level Smithsonian officials who are
reorganizing his museum and the current plans to curtail and consolidate
programs at the worlds largest museum and research complex as reasons for
tendering his resignation) and by the acceptance of a $38 million gift by
the Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation that will finance a 10,000
square-foot "hall of fame" that will honor American achievers.

One historian characterized the Reynolds achievers hall concept as
"ahistorical"; a curator noted  that the exhibit probably will break
with Smithsonian tradition of focusing on the display and interpretation
of the Smithsonian's world-class museum collections.  Instead, the exhibit
(tentatively named "The Spirit of America"), will probably be a series
of self-serving stories punctuated by pictures and a smattering of objects
donated by the "achievers."

Concerns raised in the letter by the Smithsonian professional staff were
recently bolstered by the unauthorized release to the press of donor
contracts signed by Smithsonian officials.  According to the contract
between the Smithsonian and Reynolds, Ms. Reynolds will choose 10 of the
15 members of the advisory committee that will select the achievers to be
included in the exhibition. Reportedly, among Ms. Reynolds' candidates
for the achiever hall are home/garden guru Martha Stewart, the founder of
Federal Express Frederick Smith, newsman Sam Donaldson and movie
director Steven Spielberg.  The contract also gives Reynolds some
supervisory authority over exhibit content and construction: "Before
construction of the exhibition commences, the donor and the Smithsonian
Institution shall mutually agree on the final location, the design of the
exhibition and construction schedule." Reynolds will be acknowledged in
the hall of achievers through a display of her name and the logo of her
foundation, and mention of the American Academy of Achievement, a project
of the Reynolds Foundation run by her husband.  The contract also states
that the Secretary alone "shall finally determine the contents of the
exhibition."

Reportedly, officials at the Museum of American History were not
involved in negotiations relating to the Reynold's gift, but were simply
informed by the Secretary's staff of the plans for the new museum exhibit.
Apparently, Reynolds had tried to market her museum concept to at least
one other private museum back in the early 1990s but was turned down.

Smithsonian spokeswoman Mary Combs said Secretary Small had no comment
about the employees letter. Sheila Burke, Under-secretary for American
Museums and National Programs, however, said the complaints were
unfounded, that the public trust had not been compromised and that the
Secretary was acting within his powers.

In addition to the issues raised in the letter, curators, historians and
independent scholars are starting to voice concerns about the leadership
and direction of the Smithsonian.  Members of the advisory Smithsonian
Council, for example, were informed in a recent meeting that support for
independent research will be condensed if not curtailed in order to
support a number of handpicked projects and opportunities.  The hurriedly
assembled recent exhibitions ordered by Small, some of which demonstrate
"a remarkable lack of intellectual depth" (the recent Presidential exhibit
is most frequently cited) also has not gone unnoticed within the scholarly
community.

Recent press reports have also zeroed in on Small's reported
"anti-intellectualism" which was most recently evident in a May 6, 2001
CBS "Sunday Morning" interview. As a consequence of developments, the
nation's press including the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and
Washington Post are now watching developments at the Smithsonian with
renewed scrutiny as Small comes under increasing criticism for what is
characterized as his attempt to transform the Smithsonian into a "theme
park" devoted to "attracting crowds and big private donors." On May 31,
for example, the New York Times published an editorial criticizing the
"questionable donation...that can warp an institution's priorities and
professionalism."  The Times also reports that an "anti-Small sticker
campaign" at the Smithsonian museums has been launched by staff.
Reportedly, small green and orange stickers reading
"dump Small" are finding their way into elevators, have been placed on
bulletin boards, are being worn on employee jacket lapels, and can be
seen on automobile bumpers.

Igor Sikorski, a member of the Smithsonian Council, has asked for a
Congressional probe of Small's conduct as Secretary, warning that "the
future and stature of the Smithsonian Institution is at stake."
According to a spokesperson for the Senate Rules Committee, a routine
hearing on the Smithsonian has been tentatively scheduled for later this
summer, but plans to go forward with a special oversight hearing would
have to be made by Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn) the incoming Chairman
of the committee. Dodd's office has yet to decide what action (if any) to
take.

=========================================================
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).