Jane is correct about SITruth; that page also links (bottom left) to two
pages hosted by a group called CRC forever that support both SCMRE and CRC.
In addition, the National Council of Public History (www.ncph.org) has put
out a statement, as has the American Anthropological Association
(www.aaanet.org).  I think Organization of American Historians has also
taken a stand but I'm not so sure on that.

Thanks,
Kathy

On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 10:19:42 -0400, Jane Glaser <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I am told that you may write to: http://www.sitruth.freeservers.com for
information on who to write to.
>
>>>> [log in to unmask] 06/13/01 08:40AM >>>
>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).
>
>========================================================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).

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