I rarely do this, but thank you Diane.

Janice Klein
Registrar, The Field Museum
[log in to unmask]



At 06:08 PM 9/3/97 -0400, you wrote:
>On 9/2, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>...snip...
>Just a thought, while I would not feel qualified to give advice on object
>care,  in the past, somewhat stale bread, french, not whole wheat, was a
>material commonly used by people, who took care of art, to lightly clean a
>variety of objects.
>>............................
>
>Just because my ancestors did it, doesn't mean it is a good thing to do. In
>the not to distant past, people were sprayed with DDT to rid them of lice.
>Not a recommended practice today.
>
>>........................
> If a good rule for a conservator, as for a doctor, is first do no harm, it
>seems a pretty risk free way to "dust", strictly a physical process as
>opposed to a chemical one.
>>...............................
>
>Are you actually suggesting that bread, a material formed by a complex
>chemical reaction,  won't cause a chemical reaction?
>
>>.....................................
>There are large numbers of sound paintings that illustrate practices of the
>past were not all harmful.  I wonder what shape 20th century paintings will
>be in 500 years from now, not that it will be of any personal interest.  I
>suspect in the dark corners of  European  labs there is still a loaf or two
>lurking about. When all is said and done conservation is still more of an
>art than a science.
>>.................................
>
>There are a large number of paintings that exhibit irreversible damage
>caused by the practices of the past as well. And if you think modern
>conservation isn't grounded in good science, please tell that to my
>colleagues who spent entire undergraduate careers in chemistry labs and
>biology classes. I do think you are selling the profession short.
>