Another post? So soon?
Yes! I came across this article in the NY Times about identity museums. The examples cited by Mr. Rothstein are instructive and I found his argument interesting.
I should add that I found the article only because of the great people at Global Museum, who send a fantastic e-mail once a week with lots of museum tidbits. They also have a very helpful job board. Check it out!
29 December 2010
27 December 2010
With Tired Eyes, Tired Minds, Tired Souls, We Slept
You may have noticed that I have slacked off a bit lately, especially when it comes to commenting on museums. The reason? I have not visited any museums or historic sites for quite a while.
Why, you ask? I have been pondering the same question. I have certainly not yet exhausted the list of possible sites. Philadelphia and the surrounding communities have many museums and historic sites that I have not yet visited. In fact, there are probably more than I even know about.
The reasons for my recent failures are several. The first reason is one shared by many individuals and it is financial. Sometimes visiting museums and historic sites is expensive. Between transportation, parking and admission costs, a visit can sometimes cost more money than I feel I can spare. But many historic sites in Philadelphia are very inexpensive, or even free. So why the absence of any visits?
I am ashamed to say it but lately I have just not been in the mood to visit museums. I spend most of my time in a very large museum smiling at people and letting them know where they can find the bathrooms. I often visit new exhibitions and walk through the galleries. Sometimes the last thing I want to do on my day off is visit another museum. Reading even more label text feels oppressive. My initial enthusiasm about being in a new city has worn off and I do not feel the same pressure to make the trip to Center City on a day when I do not have to do so for work. Combine this feeling with the craziness of the holiday season, with all of the extra shopping trips and time spent wrapping gifts and I just do not have the time.
Shameful, I know.
So I offer my New Year’s Resolution to you. I will strive to visit the sites I have been putting off and to rekindle my interest in other institutions. Wish me luck.
Why, you ask? I have been pondering the same question. I have certainly not yet exhausted the list of possible sites. Philadelphia and the surrounding communities have many museums and historic sites that I have not yet visited. In fact, there are probably more than I even know about.
The reasons for my recent failures are several. The first reason is one shared by many individuals and it is financial. Sometimes visiting museums and historic sites is expensive. Between transportation, parking and admission costs, a visit can sometimes cost more money than I feel I can spare. But many historic sites in Philadelphia are very inexpensive, or even free. So why the absence of any visits?
I am ashamed to say it but lately I have just not been in the mood to visit museums. I spend most of my time in a very large museum smiling at people and letting them know where they can find the bathrooms. I often visit new exhibitions and walk through the galleries. Sometimes the last thing I want to do on my day off is visit another museum. Reading even more label text feels oppressive. My initial enthusiasm about being in a new city has worn off and I do not feel the same pressure to make the trip to Center City on a day when I do not have to do so for work. Combine this feeling with the craziness of the holiday season, with all of the extra shopping trips and time spent wrapping gifts and I just do not have the time.
Shameful, I know.
So I offer my New Year’s Resolution to you. I will strive to visit the sites I have been putting off and to rekindle my interest in other institutions. Wish me luck.
09 December 2010
To Deaccession or Not to Deaccession?
According to this piece published in the New York Times earlier this week, the Philadelphia History Museum has been selling pieces from its collection to finance the first major renovations to the building since the 1940's.
The museum desperately needed to weed out some pieces from its collection. It did not have the space or the budget to care for a collection of that size. The building also needed to be renovated and updated. (Nancy Moses hints at the difficulties faced by the museum in her book Lost in the Museum: Buried Treasures and the Stories They Tell.) The museum would need to raise incredibly large sums of money in order to complete these upgrades.
I sympathize with the museum's argument that the money obtained from the sale of various historic objects goes entirely toward ensuring the preservation and safety of what remains in the collection, but the whole process leaves a sour taste in my mouth. This situation is different from other institutions making news recently for deaccessioning objects to pay for daily operating costs. I also recognize that the intentions of the museum's staff are very good. They are attempting to do what is best for the museum and its collection. But did no other options for raising money exist?
According to the "News" section on the museum's website, the museum has received various grants and other sources of funding. I find it hard to believe that these sources, as well as individual donors, were tapped before resorting to auctioning off parts of the collection to the highest bidder.
I fear that deaccessioning has become, for many museums, an easy way to fund projects that might otherwise be hard too expensive or difficult to finance rather than a means of acquiring better or more representative pieces for the collection. Deaccessioning should not be the means by which a museum funds its daily operations or its renovations.
The museum desperately needed to weed out some pieces from its collection. It did not have the space or the budget to care for a collection of that size. The building also needed to be renovated and updated. (Nancy Moses hints at the difficulties faced by the museum in her book Lost in the Museum: Buried Treasures and the Stories They Tell.) The museum would need to raise incredibly large sums of money in order to complete these upgrades.
I sympathize with the museum's argument that the money obtained from the sale of various historic objects goes entirely toward ensuring the preservation and safety of what remains in the collection, but the whole process leaves a sour taste in my mouth. This situation is different from other institutions making news recently for deaccessioning objects to pay for daily operating costs. I also recognize that the intentions of the museum's staff are very good. They are attempting to do what is best for the museum and its collection. But did no other options for raising money exist?
According to the "News" section on the museum's website, the museum has received various grants and other sources of funding. I find it hard to believe that these sources, as well as individual donors, were tapped before resorting to auctioning off parts of the collection to the highest bidder.
I fear that deaccessioning has become, for many museums, an easy way to fund projects that might otherwise be hard too expensive or difficult to finance rather than a means of acquiring better or more representative pieces for the collection. Deaccessioning should not be the means by which a museum funds its daily operations or its renovations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)