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).