Oh Deb - I was writing/posting before I read this and my thoughts are in step with what you've written here. Also, an interesting issue arose regarding one of the justifications for the deaccession of the material -as mentioned by the original poster and other posts..about the questionable historical accuracy of the work.

 

It's difficult to comment on this without knowing more details...but it seems this justification may disregard an individuals' interpretation, and that the work may be a 'rendition'. Also, that the 'historical accuracy could not be verified' would not be a substantial justification I would use when considering deaccessioning something. Just because it can't be verified at this point in time doesn't mean that it couldn't be in the future...is what I would keep in mind. I also would not consider the fact that other museums have the same and/or similar materials in their collections as a deciding factor.

 

I really don't mean to criticize the actions/factors that the museum in considered for the deaccesion to begin with, but all the justifications that had been mentioned in doing so, aren't one's that I would consider. Therefore, I can see where the volunteer may have thought the same.

 

Pam

 

 

In a message dated 11/1/2006 9:34:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask] writes:

Dangit. My laptop went wiggy and sent the message before I was finished.

On 11/1/06, Reine Hauser <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Can you arrange for other volunteer duties for this volunteer that do not
> permit him access to the trash, or other areas that may be problematic?
> Such as staffing a booth at a community fair or festivals outside the museum
> itself, that promote the institution, or something like that?

As the old saying goes, "one man's trash...."

Personally, I think if you throw stuff away in the trash, you have no
right to tell people not to take it. You have clearly demonstrated
that you do not want said items, regardless of their value. Putting
them into a trash bin to be dumped at a public dumpster is a pretty
clear signal that the items are fair game. It is a far cry from
putting them in a bin to be shredded or a burn bag for classified
materials.

And I think legally, if the trash is on a public street or if someone
has legal access to it (like a museum volunteer who is allowed to go
"behind the scenes") you have no right to restrict people from your
trash bins. If they were locked away or on your property and someone
trespassed to get to it, that's a different story. Or at least that is
what I have gathered from watching countless episodes of Law & Order.
:)

Now donating them to another museum is a little weird but if I was a
volunteer and not a museum professional and saw some "art" tossed in a
trash bin behind a museum, I'd probably be tempted to rescue them and
find them a good home. Thus I'd give the volunteer the benefit of the
doubt and explain the museum policies to him.

He did donate it to another museum instead of trying to hawk it on
eBay so it seems like he was genuinely trying to find the art a good
home and not trying to make a buck off of it. It also sounds like the
museum in question was a little careless in tossing out deaccessioned
materials. Perhaps next time, the curators could show the volunteers
the materials and ask if anyone wants it before it is chucked in the
bin or at least mangle the art ifacts enough so that people won't want
to fish them out of the trash.

deb