Difficult as it may seem at times in some museums, in my opinion it is
simply a matter of good donor relations to give thanks to those who
contribute valuable (or not so valuable) objects for our museums to use in
telling our stories.   My eye grows weary at seeing bronze plaques listing
all the people who contributed to a museum's construction or restoration of
an historic house -- and in the case of government museums, all the
politicians who were on the committee to approve the project.

We too easily forget the kindnesses and philanthropies that made our
museums possible to begin with.  And there are those instances which we'd
all very much like to forget, I'm sure, of objects given in the past that
are just not appropriate nowadays.

Thanking people and recognizing them in doing so is to operate on the side
of professional humility and gratitude, the opposite of fussiness and
stand-offishness.

Clem Conger, when curator of State Department Reception Rooms, accumulated
just the right collection of furnishings by his constancy in giving thanks.
 Marvelous historical furniture and decorative items, each once in the
possession of early American presidents and statesmen, now greet
dignitaries when state functions are held in these rooms.  The donor of
each is identified.

One such donor began adult life as a simple and quite self-effacing printer
-- and as he had the wherewithal, he acquired worthy antiques for his home.
 His printing business grew in quality and stature to the point that all of
Washington's finest printing work was coming off his presses.  His
collection of antiques is now part of the Dewitt Wallace gallery at
Colonial Williamsburg, and he built a retirement home adjacent to the
historic area.  Colonial Williamsburg will own this fine home, what's in
it, and his millions, in a few years.

I believe that his first gift of an object to Clem Conger was of a small
decorative item.....and I wonder, if there had not been perpetual
recognition, whether he would later have acquired other more substantial
furniture for the Reception Rooms and whether he would have taken an
interest in Colonial Williamsburg.


Lucy Skjelstad wrote:
>.......it seems preferable in history and natural history
museums to have a policy that you do *not* give donor credit with each
exhibited item......

> Another perhaps less critical reason for a 'no donor label'
policy is that exhibit labels are read by hundreds or thousands of
people, of whom all but a few couldn't care less about who the donor is.
It's extraneous information that distracts from the message of the
exhibit.

> I see no purpose what-so-ever in having our name on the items when they
are exhibited, and in fact would prefer that they did not, for security
reasons. Additionally, in the case of a different donation, the name of the
previous owners (my parents) of the donated items would be vastly more
likely to be meaningful to some
visitors than my own name as donor.

Of course, a donor who prefers anonymity ought to have that prerogative.
The identification would simply be "Anonymous Donor" -- again bringing to
everyone's attention that the museum relies on its donors for its objects.

Ross Weeks Jr.
Tazewell VA