Suzanne,
Wow...you really opened up a great can of worms! As a staff member in
a U.S.-based, state government run museum, I can assure you you're in
good company. The issue you've raised can't be answered on one level
because it transcends many levels, including education, conservation,
research, space allotted for exhibitions, etc. Here are a few of my
thoughts on the matter of justifying the storage of collections.
1. Scientific collections are often systematic in content: that is, the
specimens represent the full range of taxonomic diversity, plumage
variability (due to age, gender, season, breeding/nonbreeding, species
variants etc.). Exhibition space is so precious that multiple
specimens of a object that illustrate the full range of physical
characteristics are rarely shown, yet the research value of these
specimens is incalculable.
2. Multiple scientific specimens are often collected as voucher
specimens for specific localities. These are useful historically as
species ranges expand or contract. Representative assemblages of
biologic or paleontologic objects are often collected from multiple
localities even if the species overlap, because analyses of species
over time and geography may reveal habitat loss, environmental change,
human impact, extinction patterns. In archaeological or historic
contexts, trade routes or patterns of human interaction are theorized
after reviewing many site inventories.
3. Even the very best orchestrated exhibition spaces can have
long-term deleterious effects on certain objects (textiles, prints,
feathers etc.) which is why some objects have to be exchanged for others
after an appropriate period of time. Theoretically, our job is to
preserve objects for future generations - so we have to have materials
in storage in order to accomplish twin objectives of "revelation" and
preservation.
4. Museum collections serve many masters - researchers, educators, the
"public" (of which there are many subgroups), preservationists,
artists/illustrators - and exhibitions alone do not serve all their
needs.
5. Exhibitions are "vignettes" of a particular theme or topic. Even
retrospectives can rarely accommodate all the works of an artist due to
unavailability of individual works or restrictions of space. The
selection of a particular object to be included in an exhibition is
based upon many factors - factors which can change from exhibition to
exhibition depending upon the targeted audience, the complexity of the
subject, the completeness of a museum's holdings, etc.. I'd wager that
different curators, given a topic and a list of potential objects, could
both construct very different exhibitions with little overlap....yet who
is to say which exhibit will impact the viewer the most?
6. Usually only the "best of the best" is/are exhibited. Behind the
scenes are objects awaiting preparation, conservation, identification,
authentication or - in the case of extremely large institutions -
rediscovery. Objects not on view need to be stored. In smaller
institutions with limited staffing, certain subcollections may not be
exhibited for many years because the specialties of the staff dictate
the content of exhibitions. For example, a small natural history
institution with 1 botanist on staff would hardly mount an exhibition
about dinosaurs unless money for a guest curator was procured - or the
botanist was replaced by a vertebrate paleontologist. Sometimes I envy
the larger institutions with a position for every specialty because each
subcollection receives a measure of priority by virtue of the specialist
who curates and makes the objects accessible to others.
7. Space....the final frontier. There's never enough of it - not for
exhibitions, offices, educational activities, visitor conveniences, etc.
etc. etc. And everyone - not just curators and collection management
staff - are constantly competing for more of it. Eventually,
something has to give. Unfortunately, it is often the nonpublic
aspects of a museum that get curtailed. If it's visible (as
exhibitions are!), there is often very little thought given to the
processes that gave rise to that exhibitions (research, preparation,
information gathering, object review, incoming loans, PR, docent
training, fundraising, ad nausea). Exhibitions are like children:
they need a community to be raised to adulthood - and all those people
and objects need space.
8. The objects seen on exhibition are just the tip of a huge
iceberg. The challenge is proving to our funders and donors that
unexhibited objects have meaning and power and, perhaps, contributions
to human culture or personal fulfillment or further understanding of the
natural world that have yet to be realized. The potential of
discovery is immense. One need only look at the vast store of
knowledge that has come unearthed as new technologies have been used to
reinvestigate objects that have been in repository in institutions
around the world to be humbled by the possibilities.
I guess you can tell where I stand on this matter! I could say more,
but I'll give this subject over to my colleagues. I really hope you'll
be able to find some substantive way to quantify your arguments. Just
as all of us are wrestling with quantifying insurance values of our
collections after 9-11, I'm sure more of us are going to be asked to
quantify our reasons for increasing storage facilities. You can be
certain I'll be saving whatever bits and pieces of discussion arise from
your query. Thanks a bunch for bringing it up!
Shirley Albright
New Jersey State Museum
S.Keene wrote:
>[Apologies to INTERCOM members who have previously had this message]
>
>Dear colleagues,
>
>I would like to ask your assistance. I am researching and writing a book on
>the usefulness and justification for museum collections that are not on
>display.
>
>This is seen as a problem in the UK at government level, and in the
>Netherlands, too. It is felt that museums have too much stuff in store that
>they don't use.
>
>In other countries it seems that many people feel uneasy about how to
>justify the collections. For example, it is difficult to convince local
>legislaters that there needs to be proper funding for storing collections.
>But it is not an issue at government level.
>
>In your experience, are you expected to justify the existence of the
>collections, or is it accepted that they stay in store?
>
>I would welcome any information you can give me.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Suzanne Keene
>
>
>
>
>EVA London conference July 2005: Call for Papers
>The Foremost European Electronic Imaging Events in the Visual Arts
>http://www.eva-conferences.com/eva/london/london2005/
>
>% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
>
>Dr Suzanne Keene
>Culture Heritage
>University College London Institute of Archaeology
>31-34 Gordon Square
>London WC1H OPY
>
>Tel: 020 7679 4935
>
>http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology
>http://www.suzannekeene.info
>
>% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
>
>=========================================================
>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).
|
