SMP Logo
SM Publications
Silver Salon Forums - The premier site for discussing Silver.
SMP | Silver Salon Forums | SSF - Guidelines | SSF - FAQ | Silver Sales

The Silver Salon Forums
Since 1993
Over 11,793 threads & 64,769 posts !!
A Curator's Viewpoint Forum
How to Post Photos REGISTER (click here)

customtitle open  SMP Silver Salon Forums
tlineopen  A Curator's Viewpoint
tline3open  Why donate just for storage?

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

ForumFriend SSFFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Why donate just for storage?
Ulysses Dietz
Moderator

Posts: 1265
Registered: May 99

iconnumber posted 10-02-2006 11:59 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ulysses Dietz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Following up on my previous topic, where I recalled overhearing that a major donor refused to give objects to a major museum without a promise of permanent exhibition.

I totally understand a donor's desire that objects donated to a museum be viewed--after all that is the reason to give.

But is it? What is the purpose of a donation to a museum? If a donor gives books to a library, or funds for the purchase of books, is he angry if the books aren't checked out constantly? Why (reasons the curator) should a donor of objects feel any differently? No museum, or almost no museum, has room to show every single object all the time. But the prime mission of museums is NOT to display objects, but to preserve, study, and conserve objects. Exhibition of objects is part of the museum's role, but not its PRIMARY role. An ART GALLERY'S primary role is to exhibit objects.

There are many objects I collect because they are meaningful for one reason or another--historical, local maker, etc. Often I realize that I may never see these objects on display in my galleries, because their primary purpose is as a document, which I feel the museum must preserve to keep the information it holds from disappearing.

I have on occasion, if the gift was important enough to me to justify it, allowed donors to affix a condition to a gift that the museum will never deaccession it(unless to another museum). This is the only sort of conditional gift I will accept,and only if the gift is of tremendous importance.

Comments?

IP: Logged

Clive E Taylor

Posts: 450
Registered: Jul 2000

iconnumber posted 10-02-2006 01:25 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Clive E Taylor     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
This is a very pertinent subject. What is the purpose of a museum ? In England the object WAS to collect, preserve, display and make available for study objects. Mainly for the already well informed . To educate and amuse was a secondary purpose. Today political correctness appears to have taken over and the orginal purpose is regarded as elitist. Interpretation of a few objects has replaced display of many . The more "touchy -feely " the better. The careers of the staff mainly depend, not on their scholarship but on their ability to raise the awareness of the MUSEUM , not its exhibits, to the mass of people, not to the specialist. Part of "Democratism" if you agree, "dumbimg down if you disagree". As usual funding plays a strong part. A museum management that raises funds well is regarded as successful, even if the service to the specialist suffers.
We have several shoe buckle collections in the UK whose donors would be horrified to see how few of their donations are ever seen.
And unless a public catalogue is available are virtually locked up (practically lost ) for ever. To be fair they are usually accessable on request, but it often takes some effort to get permission, especially as storage conditions can be less than ideal.
The answer in the long term is undoubtedly the internet and digital availability. Which begs the question - if you spend the money on digitalisation and good computer display - do you still need the objects themselves ?

As the owner of probably the largest active collections of English silver shoe buckles in the world, I intend that my collection will be sold at auction on my death, with a very comprehensive sale catalogue to act as a reference work. The extra cost of the catalogue , by agreement with the auctioneers, will to be subsidised from the sale proceeds. This means I do not intend the objects which have given me much pleasure ( and poverty ) to be locked away in a museum , but to enable other people to enjoy them, and creating new experts - who will probably dispute all my findings !

IP: Logged

Ulysses Dietz
Moderator

Posts: 1265
Registered: May 99

iconnumber posted 10-02-2006 01:37 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ulysses Dietz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Aha, a challenge right away! Of course all your points are well taken, and you put your finger on the dilemma faced by curators all over America--even in the big, rich museums. However, I'll focus more on the donation/storage issue.

Of course, I cannot speak for shoe buckles in museum collections in England, but I'd wager there are quite a few socked away. In fact, my own little Newark museum has just two rather nice English shoe buckles (and another that I think is a knee buckle) with local histories--documenting nicely that these pieces were in fact sold to colonists (not that it's a surprise, but one likes to know).

So, my question would be, wouldn't it be nice to donate some of the shoebuckles to museums in various parts of England, assuming they really wanted them and could at least imagine how they might display them (as I am displaying my shoebuckles right now)? Then your or your executors could go ahead and sell the majority of the collection, creating the documentary auction catalogue, and including these donated buckles as part of the foreward to the catalogue. That way all sides are served.

As a final note, I agree totally that if museums are going to keep scads of stuff stashed away in vaults, then it is truly their moral imperative to make that material accessible to scholars and collectors. That means minimal red tape to get into a collection, and (a more difficult task, sadly) adequate staff to deal with such requests and all the additional work they demand. This was the motive behind the creation of the Ratti Textile center at the Metropolitan Museum--accessibility.

A digital image is never as good as a real object, because you can't feel it. That's why I'm against microfilming old periodicals and then discarding the originals.

More, more!

IP: Logged

Clive E Taylor

Posts: 450
Registered: Jul 2000

iconnumber posted 10-02-2006 04:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Clive E Taylor     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Points well made and taken.

But to give three examples from my own field. I have deliberately not been matched the data so one cannot indentify which museum is which.
All three museums have major, important collections, all given by three major donors. One has about one third of the collection on display. One has only two pairs on show, the third has only one (out of several hundred ). One has a very good catalogue , one originally had a good booklet but sold them all off cheaply some years ago - so nothing now available - although a card index can be used if requested a few days in advance . The other has nothing other than a poor unillustrated list not easily available to the public . One was supposed to organise a loan system for other museums to show all the buckles on a rota system - this has never happened. One keeps their collection very quiet.
In all cases access is allowed without problem . However one of them has very poor unorganised storage , does not insist on cotton gloves , and does not properly supervise viewings. In view of this I will not access this collection. Having being left alone unattended with the collection for nearly twenty minutes on the last occasion I was there I feel unhappy that if anything goes missing I could be a suspect. In view of their frankly chaotic storage the likelihood of items being mislaid is high.

All three donors would , frankly, be appalled at what has happened to their collections. At least donor had stipulated that the entire collection be on view for most of the year - which has not been the case for years.

So I would much prefer to sell my entire collection and allow the museums to buy any they really want.

I think many people have fairly strong views on this and when I get back in a weeks time I will be most interested to see other views .

[This message has been edited by Clive E Taylor (edited 10-02-2006).]

IP: Logged

DB

Posts: 252
Registered: May 2006

iconnumber posted 10-02-2006 06:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for DB     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
To donate or to sell is of course a choice which is a collector's perfect right to make. Most of the time a curator/collector relationship is built up over years and donations are made built on this trust. Case in point is the Royal Ontario Museum,Toronto, where the silver collection has been increased by about 70% under the curatorship of Dr. Peter Kaellgren. And I might add: all donations have been of the highest standard. Of course not everything can be displayed at all times, but collections are accessible to scholars and collectors upon request. Accessibility is not so much a staff problem (all museums are understaffed) but a "make it possible" attitude, which makes a difference. (I had equally good experiences being able to look at silver at the V&A, London). Just recently remarks and correspondence with an American museum mentioned in another thread about the inaccessibility of collections, high photo fees and red tape to even upload a picture of an item on this site illustrate the unco-operative attitude of some museums, which seem to ignore their educational function and responsibility to their collection and their donors.

------------------
Dorothea Burstyn

IP: Logged

Kayvee

Posts: 204
Registered: Oct 2004

iconnumber posted 10-02-2006 10:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Kayvee     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Your question has really struck a nerve. I heartily endorse Clive’s observations about the state of modern museology in the decorative arts. Based on personal experience and on posts in several Forums, I have the perception that depleted, downsized and depressed museum curatorial staff are so busy drumming up sponsorships, writing funding proposals, and courting major donors in the fine arts, that there is no time or interest left in discovering private decorative arts collections or individual objects. With of course some notable exceptions, such as Newark and Toronto, curators seem no longer interested in what decorative arts collectors might have to show them, nor do they keep abreast with what the market has to offer. On the flip side, museums make it nigh near impossible to study objects not on display. I have asked to see objects in storage at museums in England, France, Canada, Australia, and the United States, and the composite drill goes like this in most cases: write a request justifying why you want to see the object in question. Requests are reviewed by a museum committee that meets quarterly for 3 hours, so your request might have to go through several review cycles. Once approved, you must make an appointment to visit a remote storage facility usually located in a bad part of town. Your visit is supervised by a display technician whose salary plus a premium you are paying for the day. Travel time to and from the storage facility is deducted from the time available. At the storage facility you wait around for the object to be prepared. As you cannot be left unsupervised with the object, you are required to take lunch and coffee breaks at the same time as the technician. Total time spent studying the object is thereby substantially diminished. Ten years ago my siblings and I donated two of our mother’s decorative arts collections (not silver) to two museums, one in the United States and one in Canada. We wanted to have the objects that she collected with such knowledge and passion made available to interested researchers or members of the public. Based on my subsequent personal experience accessing non-displayed decorative arts in museums world-wide, I’d never make such a donation again, and if ever any of the silver I’ve collected is deemed “museum quality,” I’d instruct my heirs to sell it, as Clive has done.

IP: Logged

Dale

Posts: 2132
Registered: Nov 2002

iconnumber posted 10-02-2006 11:23 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dale     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
My experience with museums has been rather sad also. Found years ago in Chicago that there was no interest in silverplated goods, even those made in Chicago. Got a very sniffy reply that only sterling and coin had historical interest.

And once in a museum saw a table set with 1847 Rogers Vintage Grape, part of the original furnishings of the house. Remarked about it to the curator who immediately lectured me that this was sterling and mid 1870's. Decided to just shut up. This was a house made into a museum.

Have also observed first hand the rather cavelier way the Chicago Art Institute lets employees 'borrow' art works not on display. They would take them home and decorate with paintings they kept for decades.

I'm with the rest on selling collections off so others may enjoy them. Already pretty much done that.

IP: Logged

Ulysses Dietz
Moderator

Posts: 1265
Registered: May 99

iconnumber posted 10-03-2006 09:44 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ulysses Dietz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
My head whirls with all the disappointment and anger in these posts. It makes my heart sink. But I ask, where is the charity here? I must begin with a scold that collectors seem to have a problem with grasping the "big picture" of what it means to be a curator. If the English museums in question have large collections of shoe buckles, it may well mean that they don't need (and perhaps don't deserve) any more. As a decorative arts curator I collect hundreds of different kinds of objects. I have collectors in every possible decorative arts medium contacting me every year about something in my collection. I feel it is my job to accomodate them as best I can, and I do not create red tape needlessly. But there are days when I dread answering the phone, because I am so stressed out by something I have to do that I can't lose my focus. A collector's visit can take an entire day out of my schedule. For many curators across the country, the luxury of actually doing research, much less reading the latest books or visiting galleries, auction houses and other museum exhibitions, is difficult.

However, if a museum (in Chicago or anywhere) has decided that it doesn't care about eletroplated silver, then that's their right. Of course there's no excuse for bad manners, but no institution can collect everything. However, I share in the expressed frustration that museums do seem to make snobbish and short-sighted choices as to what is and what is not "museum quality." Curators are, after all, human (more or less). But every museum has its own distinct personality, and "museum quality" is an extremely vague term. I actively purchase things for Newark that the Metropolitan Museum wouldn't accept as gifts, and yet we also collect some of the same sorts of things. Many museums are driven by the "masterpiece" syndrome, while others paint with broader brushes.


I'd also follow up with an affirmation that the mission of a museum THAT GETS PUBLIC FUNDING is to serve the public, even if that public isn't wise or even interested. Collectors are NOT the public, but a portion of the public. I personally believe that museums who turn their backs on collectors are failing in their duty as institutions of learning and intellectual exploration; but museums who do not seek to engage the public are also failing in their duty. A museum's role--at least my museum's founding mission--is to engage people who might not care about what we have, and to MAKE them care.

Conversely, I will agree that the race to seek public funding and to get bodies in the door by any means necessary has diluted the museums in America as cultural beacons, and has demoralized curators all across the country.

But, when you all see a museum behaving badly, and you see curators overworked and under-supported, your response is to take your toys and go home (metaphorically speaking). Again, where is the charity? What might a collector do to help the museum stop behaving badly?

Let's see where this goes.

IP: Logged

Dale

Posts: 2132
Registered: Nov 2002

iconnumber posted 10-03-2006 10:18 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dale     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
'However, if a museum (in Chicago or anywhere) has decided that it doesn't care about eletroplated silver, then that's their right.'

This was in the context of an exhibit or whatnot on the topic of silver made in Chicago. With a particular emphasis on Chicago products sold nationwide. By and large, the only Chicago sterling is the Arts and Crafts which was a very elite, small production high end sold only in the immediate environs.

On the other hand, Chicago and surrounding areas had 3 major silverplate makers whose wares were sold nationwide: Rockford/Racine, Yourex and Aurora. These also had major private collections and inventories which were available to the exhibit. The curator managed to alienate each and every collector in one way or another. It did not seem to dawn on him that many of the dealers with the plate also had access to and some stock of Chicago silver. Which would have been handy for the exhibit also. Instead AIR it became yet another tour of one certain dealer's inventory.

The museum turned down items that meet its published criteria. It excluded the only items that had been 'sold nationwide'. It managed to alienate a signifigant portion of the silver buying community.

As usual in the upper midwest there was an ethnic dimension. The curators and museum staff tended to be sort of WASPish. And the collectors etc were generally from ethnic type backgrounds. Someone remarked that they had shown no interest in Swedish silver made in Chicago, which does exist. Only in things made for the rich WASPs.

So, in terms of charity, I tend to think of major museums as places where WASPs run things. And where ethnic or mass produced items have no place. I enjoy going there on occassion, but feel no real connection. It is truly a foreign country, about which I care little.

IP: Logged

Ulysses Dietz
Moderator

Posts: 1265
Registered: May 99

iconnumber posted 10-04-2006 09:29 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ulysses Dietz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well, all I can say is that some museums are stupid and curators are sometimes too narrow-minded to understand their own best interests. Sadly, the unwritten mission of many museums is to "desperately imitate the Metropolitan Museum" even if that means ignoring the immense power of regional stories.

Mind you, I embrace all American silver, and everything produced in Newark in addition to that. It appalls me to see museums being narrow minded--but sometimes that's their mission. If they have the right to be dimwitted, you have the right to ignore them.

So, why do people ignore my museum, when we're neither narrow-minded nor snobbish? The old catch-22.

IP: Logged

swarter
Moderator

Posts: 2920
Registered: May 2003

iconnumber posted 10-04-2006 04:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for swarter     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
So, why do people ignore my museum, when we're neither narrow-minded nor snobbish? The old catch-22.

It sounds like you have the old "What if you gave a party and nobody came" feeling. I know it well, as I too have had that experience of preparing presentations and exhibits to which few people came.

I assume the above is a rhetorical question, but I have to ask whether you depend of a local newspaper to find something newsworthy in the exhibit or just let them bury a notice in the week's events section? After all:

"The codfish lays a million eggs,
and the helpful hen but one,
Yet the codfish never cackles
to inform you what she's done.
And so we scorn the codfish
and the helpful hen we prize,
Which indicates to thoughtful minds
it pays to advertise."

Even with good advertising though, it may be just that there are not that many people out there interested enough to go out of their way (or to pay admission, if any)- a disturbing thought when the expense of an exhibit (or even a collection itself) has to be justified to the "bean counters."

quote:
My head whirls with all the disappointment and anger in these posts. It makes my heart sink.


I, too, as a museum person myself, find the negative opinions expressed by others in this thread disturbing, and yet I have encountered them repeatedly myself. While I would consider donating a valuable object to a museum where I would hope it could be preserved and made available for study rather than see it go to a private collector who might effectively hide it for the duration of his lifetime, just about every collector and dealer I have encountered (be it of silver or scientific instruments) has said the same thing - "I don't want it to go to a museum where no one will ever see it (and/or it won't be properly curated because of short budgets) I would sell it so someone else can enjoy it." The latter should be a perversion of logic, and yet, from the experiences (or hearsay impressions?) voiced above, it seems like a choice between the proverbial "devil and the deep blue sea."

[This message has been edited by swarter (edited 10-04-2006).]

IP: Logged

Dale

Posts: 2132
Registered: Nov 2002

iconnumber posted 10-04-2006 11:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dale     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thinking about my museum attendance, it seems to have been something that happened while traveling. Once in Hays KS we decided to check out the local museum. Turns out the second largest fossile collection in the world is in Hays KS. Fascinating stuff, with a Vintage Grape punch ladle also on display.

Other than that I have toured some quirky little ones. Like the Lizzadro Museum of Lapidary. Large ones tend not to intrigue me much. The Denver museum was always such a zoo that I came to avoid it. Except when friends visited from out of town.

Maybe you are just not in a tourist spot which seems to provide loads of museum goers. It seems people prefer to visit out of town museums instead of local ones.

IP: Logged

Ulysses Dietz
Moderator

Posts: 1265
Registered: May 99

iconnumber posted 10-05-2006 06:27 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ulysses Dietz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well, Newark is hardly a tourist spot, and we have our slow days (sound of crickets and tumbleweeds rolling through the galleries), but VISITATION isn't what I worry about. We get about 350,000 visitors a year. Not everyone we'd wish, in a densely populated are where we are (nine miles from NYC)...but enough, for now.

But what my rhetorical flourish meant was to ask why COLLECTORS still seem to ignore us, in spite of the fact that we do care for our collections well and interpret them well. I won't flatter us unnecessarily, because we suffer the same silliness that many museums suffer. We do in fact pay huge amounts of money for advertising each year now, because we cannot rely on the newspapers to cover us. We are routinely ignored by the NY Times, in spite of advertising, except in their suburban section--because of course no Manhattanite (or Brooklynite) would ever come to Newark (nine miles away and easily accessed by public transit).

The bottom line is that collectors seem to believe that museums make their treasures inaccessible, while selling them at auction makes them accessible. Well, at least while the auction is going on, people can actually TOUCH things, which is pretty neat. But then they disappear. In 1998 I bought a great Tiffany sideboard dish from the Centennial exhibitio that had been hidden in some family's silver vault since 1886. So it only took four generations to get that back into the public view.

Bottom line (and I'll be snarky): give a museum second-rate material, and it'll stay in the basement. Give them stuff that's better than what they have now, and they'll find a place to show it, publish it or otherwise show off.

IP: Logged

Dale

Posts: 2132
Registered: Nov 2002

iconnumber posted 10-05-2006 11:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dale     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
By and large, I feel collectors, and their dealer friends, have all had bad experiences with museums. And also there is the experience of dealing with pretentious people who apparently know less then the dealer herself.

I regard myself as knowlegable in a narrow range of silver; plated wares. And when I have seen plated silver in museums I have never seen it correctly identified. Nor have I ever had any luck in correcting a misidentification. Just rolled eyes and waving hands.

Perhaps what is needed is for museum people to learn that any dealer who has dealt in something for a length of time is almost always a knowlegable person. I once visited at a show with a curator. He told me his museum had 'buckets of silverplate', that no one there knew anything about it. I asked to see it, offering to do some elementary id's for them. He just dismissed that out of hand.

Very sad experience. I feel an attitude adjustment is needed.

IP: Logged

swarter
Moderator

Posts: 2920
Registered: May 2003

iconnumber posted 10-06-2006 12:08 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for swarter     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
And when I have seen plated silver in museums I have never seen it correctly identified. Nor have I ever had any luck in correcting a misidentification.

And I have experienced the same thing with dealers - so often that I quit bothering.

What we are dealing with here is basic human nature - there is a natural clannish/elitist attitude in any group of people who specialize in anything. With few exceptions they (we) always think they (we) know more about their (our) subject than anyone else - particularly when they do not know or know of you.

If you stop to think about it, it is perfectly understandable. smile

Annoying, but understandable. cool

Very annoying. frown

Who do they think they are, anyway? mad

[This message has been edited by swarter (edited 10-06-2006).]

IP: Logged

Ulysses Dietz
Moderator

Posts: 1265
Registered: May 99

iconnumber posted 10-06-2006 11:00 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ulysses Dietz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I cannot imagine not responding gratefully, even if I disagreed, to someone's polite note pointing out an error in my labels. Even if it wasn't an error.

But sometimes curators are just small minded and resent being corrected. What I resent is people who snipe at you behind your back instead of coming forward and saying "I think you might have made a mistake here..."

IP: Logged

Silver Lyon

Posts: 363
Registered: Oct 2004

iconnumber posted 10-06-2006 11:31 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Silver Lyon     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
There are two outstanding collections of Old Sheffield Plate that I know of in USA. The first is at the de Witt Wallace museum in Williamsburg, where most of the best pieces are out on display and really well captioned.
The second, a propos of this thread, is at the Minneapolis Institute of Art - viewable by appointment - mostly kept in storage or dotted around period rooms; a really good educational reference collection with some star pieces all ready for the odd special exhibit. A perfect example of just how good and useful and also how valuable a resource 'just for storage' can be!
I am sure that there must be others too...?

IP: Logged

FWG

Posts: 845
Registered: Aug 2005

iconnumber posted 10-12-2006 01:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for FWG     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Re-emerging from a conference.... It's probably worth noting that there are advances in what might be called accessible storage. The anthropology museum at the University of British Columbia uses for part of its storage drawers that are mounted under display cases, so visitors can open them and see many more examples (under polycarbonate, but at least they can be seen). They do also have behind-the-scenes storage, but that at least increases access. And as I recall the Heard Museum in Phoenix, AZ, uses some similar drawers, plus there are areas where storage and work can be observed through glass or polycarbonate panels. This kind of opening up of the workings of a museum is something of a trend in the past decade or so, although there are also counterarguments.

IP: Logged

doc

Posts: 728
Registered: Jul 2003

iconnumber posted 10-12-2006 01:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for doc     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I saw a similar innovative storage/display technique this summer at a castle in Ireland. The display was set up in vertical file cabinets, which were clustered together. Each file cabinet cluster represented a period of time, and the file drawers progressed chronologically. Each drawer either contained an item or a display board, some with audio that played when the drawer opened. A very inexpensive storage/display, and it was absolutely fascinating to explore. It certainly kept the children amused!

IP: Logged

adelapt

Posts: 418
Registered: May 2003

iconnumber posted 10-12-2006 05:27 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for adelapt     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have to confess to a sneaking sympathy for curators. Firstly, I suspect many collectors are closet curators themselves, especially those of us who record and classify and similarly cosset our "finds". We concentrate on our own little corner of the world (yes - that's me too) and can develop quite a body of knowledge about it. The curator will usually be responsible for a much wider field, for schmoozing possible donors, for trying to maintain an academic career, and for trying annually to do more with less. How many of us would enjoy having to run our every acquisition past a committee or two? And likely every collector the curator runs up against will either know more than the curator about that little corner, or think it so. And let's not even get started on why my bottle collection is more important than your barbed wire assemblage, or somebody else's Hester Bateman teapot. There the poor curator stands, caught in the crossfire. Stick with it Ulysses!

IP: Logged

Ulysses Dietz
Moderator

Posts: 1265
Registered: May 99

iconnumber posted 10-13-2006 09:45 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ulysses Dietz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I don't know if I've ever made it clear exactly of what I am curator (does that make sense?). Aside from curator of silver, I am also in charge of and have collected for The Newark Museum over the past 26 years: American furniture (17th c. to present); ceramics (16th c. to present); glass (ditto); jewelry (15th century to present); base metal; costumes, textiles (quilts, needlework, fiber art), dolls & toys. I have never had an assistant, other than the occasional summer intern. I can say without question that 99% of the IMPORTANT objects acquired in my tenure here for my department were purchased. Although every year has resulted in gifts of many interesting objects, most of them would not fall into what I would call the important category. There are a great many gaps in our holdings in various areas that I would love to acquire, but have restricted my own purchasing to better husband the resources I have. I am blessed with trustees who support my acquisitions, but do not, in fact, help pay for my acquisitions. The competition with larger NY museums is such that we almost always lose (unless I am buying things). The satisfaction has been great, as have the frustrations. But that's what being a curator is.

IP: Logged

swarter
Moderator

Posts: 2920
Registered: May 2003

iconnumber posted 10-16-2006 12:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for swarter     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
I would consider donating a valuable object to a museum where I would hope it could be preserved and made available for study rather than see it go to a private collector who might effectively hide it for the duration of his lifetime

I cannot think of a better example than this one of why rare items belong in museums, by donation, sale, or long term loan. Evidently, since the alert for this national treasure was issued, there has been no response from its secretive owner. One would think a responsible owner would make its existance known.

IP: Logged

salmoned

Posts: 336
Registered: Jan 2005

iconnumber posted 10-16-2006 05:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for salmoned     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You're assuming it's currently privately owned and not just 'lost' or neglected in some museum's collection, I gather.

IP: Logged

swarter
Moderator

Posts: 2920
Registered: May 2003

iconnumber posted 10-16-2006 06:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for swarter     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If, as believed, it was sold at auction in the 1920's.

If it were held by a museum, it would almost certainly be known - and I cannot imagine that a curator would not have responded to the alert.

IP: Logged

Ulysses Dietz
Moderator

Posts: 1265
Registered: May 99

iconnumber posted 10-17-2006 01:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ulysses Dietz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'd venture to say that the only time a proper museum loses an important object is the time when that object is no longer seen as important (temporarily until tastes change, although temporary might be two generations). There are many examples, I'm sure, of great Victorian silver being abused or neglected by museums, until Victorian silver became fashionable ( in the U S it was following the 1970 exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum, "19th Century America"). I'm sure that the "Saxon Ashtray" would not have been so obscured in a museum collection, given its notoriety and fame--but in a family collection (especially a country family where grandpapa collected great things, but ever since he died all they've done is hunt foxes) it could well have disappeared into a cupboard and been forgotten. Fortunately the English tend to sell off things rather than destroy them, so it may turn up!

IP: Logged

Ulysses Dietz
Moderator

Posts: 1265
Registered: May 99

iconnumber posted 10-17-2006 01:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ulysses Dietz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Am I insane if I answer my own posts?

But I suddenly thought of a piece of silver that we in fact "lost" for many years. But, is it important? What we have is an electro-plated folding toast rack, English, from the 1860s or 70s. Perfectly plain, and in fact missing one of its little ball feet. It was given to us in 1924 (accession number 24.1834--meaning it was the 1,834th object acquired in that year) by Susan Runyon Cheney Watson, a trustee. But, when given to us it made the papers, because it was owned by the famed English explorer of Africa, Dr. David Livingstone. Mrs. Watson's first husband was the U.S. minister to Zanzibar, and hence a friend of Livingstone's as well as his executor. This venerable toast rack was, I confess, missing in storage for years until we located it, sitting right where it should be with the rest of our collection of English silver. Thank God it was an internal question that set us off looking for it, not an outside query. It was, by the way, sitting right next to the little silverplated collapsible traveling cup that was supposed to have been the last thing that touched Dr. Livingstone's lips before he died in the jungle in Africa. But, while these are curiosities, they are not, really, important. Only in light of the other, really important, gifts that Mrs. Watson gave us, do they become "important." Of course, with computer databases, it is much easier to keep track of things. We only have a 30,000 object backlog to get into our database now.

IP: Logged

All times are ET

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a


1. Public Silver Forums (open Free membership) - anyone with a valid e-mail address may register. Once you have received your Silver Salon Forum password, and then if you abide by the Silver Salon Forum Guidelines, you may start a thread or post a reply in the New Members' Forum. New Members who show a continued willingness to participate, to completely read and abide by the Guidelines will be allowed to post to the Member Public Forums.
Click here to Register for a Free password

2. Private Silver Salon Forums (invitational or $ donation membership) - The Private Silver Salon Forums require registration and special authorization to view, search, start a thread or to post a reply. Special authorization can be obtained in one of several ways: by Invitation; Annual $ Donation; or via Special Limited Membership. For more details click here (under development).

3. Administrative/Special Private Forums (special membership required) - These forums are reserved for special subjects or administrative discussion. These forums are not open to the public and require special authorization to view or post.


| Home | Order | The Guide to Evaluating Gold & Silver Objects | The Book of Silver
| Update BOS Registration | Silver Library | For Sale | Our Wants List | Silver Dealers | Speakers Bureau |
| Silversmiths | How to set a table | Shows | SMP | Silver News |
copyright © 1993 - 2022 SM Publications
All Rights Reserved.
Legal & Privacy Notices