In a message dated 00-09-18 13:31:51 EDT, Ron Twellman wrote:

<< First off, what is an "obscure donor"??? An obscure artifact in a donation
 possibly, but not its donor! I'll assume that was inadvertent phraseology
 but it did set off my elitism alarm.

 How do you know that "many people are interested in KNOWING that an
 institution cares enough to credit even obscure donors."  Maybe not "many"
 but "some" because they've told me so by inquiring about how we credit
 things before they agree to make their donation and, somehow, they do seem
 to be the ones with the more obscure artifacts in their donations. >>

Well, one of the dictionary definitions of "obscure" is "relatively unknown",
and it was in that sense that I used the word, contrasting "obscure" vs.
famous names.  My point was that relatively unknown donors deserve
acknowledgment as much as famous or wealthy benefactors.  I think any policy
which would publicize only famous, wealthy donors, but not Joe Sixpak-type
donors, is inherently elitist.  There's nothing wrong with being "obscure"
and I don't think it's an inherently pejorative term--even if some people
seem to use it that way--as in the case of the remarks some days ago about
"obscure" papers published in "obscure" journals, read by comparatively few
people, in comparison to the hordes of people who might view a blockbuster
exhibit.  Some folks (well, one) thought I took unnecessary umbrage, but I
didn't object to the word "obscure" as much as the implication that
popularity was somehow superior to specialized, hence obscure, scholarship.

Anyway, there's nothing wrong with being an obscure person.  I'm pretty
obscure myself.  (Humble and proud of it.)  As far as donors are concerned,
they can be famous, noteworthy, notorious, or relatively unknown, often
totally unknown except to family and friends.  Famous people can donate
either well-known or obscure artifacts, and "obscure" or relatively unknown
people conceivably could donate either obscure or high-profile objects.  I
feel that all donors of either ilk deserve credit.  One reason I favor a
blanket policy of acknowledging all donors is that sooner or later you may
have a prominent donor demanding a credit or you'll want to display an object
given by someone so famous that it would be almost unthinkable not to credit
the donation--and then you'll appear elitist or publicity-conscious if your
normal policy is to omit credits.  To avoid an appearance of favoritism if
such an occasion arose, you'd be better off to have a blanket donor-credit
policy in place to begin with.  That might seem far-fetched, but do you
really want to tell a celebrity, "Oh, we never give donor credits," or to
tell Joe Sixpak, whose family treasure you're displaying, that you don't
normally give donor credits, but you had to make an exception for the famous
donor whose gift is in the adjacent exhibit case?

As far as how I know "many people" are interested in knowing that an
institution cares enough to credit even obscure donors, you've got me there.
I just made that up, based on my astute knowledge of human nature.
Admittedly, I haven't taken any surveys and I have no statistics.  But this
is more than mere opinion.  I have a hunch, even though SOME people think I'm
just round-shouldered.  Many?  Some?  Who's counting?  Quibbles aside, it's
clear that SOME people, if not many, agree with me, and I find that
encouraging.

David Haberstich

P.S.  I also agree with the message about including identification numbers,
in addition to donor credits, in labels and reproduction captions.  I've
argued with editors and designers about this, but think it's very practical.
Obviously, avoiding visual clutter in a label is important, and that's part
of a designer's job.

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