Art, Artifacts, and the Deployment of Objects

Well, these past three weeks were supposed to have been spent in Part V of the textbook, Art, Artifacts, and the Deployment of Objects in the Museum. While I have read about 4 of the articles from this section, I haven't been reading them in a way that is conducive to my new thought structure about the course. I was reading slow as a sloth -- underlining as I went, taking notes on things I thought I could put in the blog. Of course that's not bad at all, but I wasn't getting anywhere. It's basically why I haven't been actually reading enough of them. Trying to get through 4-5 articles a week and steadily blogging on them felt like trying to wade across a river of molasses while being chased by an ugly, 8-foot vampire. I say ugly and 8-foot because I'm not talking about a sparkly, human sized Edward Cullen, I'm talking a stress-inducing, he's-got-longer-legs-and-is-really-going-to-eat-me kind of vampire.

As it turns out, I was crossing through the river of molasses when there really were a bunch of ropes hanging from trees that I could have been using to swing across on! Okay.... yeah that's not a super great analogy. But the point is, I didn't have to go so slow, and I didn't know it. The vampire wasn't really there, he was a figment of my imagination, and I'm actually allowed to skim the text book. I just have to read it. But maybe not INGEST it. This knowledge is very, very freeing.

Along with feeling liberated from the clutches of an ugly vampire, I now also understand the course in a more topical sense (like I mentioned in the previous post). My future blogs will stay within a certain topic for three weeks, switching to a new one with each "all-class meeting."

So! Now that I've been incredibly dramatic and ridiculous in establishing my thoughts about a new blogging/studying format, this will be my first post regarding OBJECTS in the museum.

Hopefully this will include standards for acquisition, philosophies, presentation and representation, among other things. Since I technically will only have 2ish days this week to work on this rather than what should have been 8 for the whole topic (9th day will always be an official meeting with Prof), I might revisit the first two sections in the following weeks, trying to round out my undertanding of museums. Not making any promises, but I think that research including topics of the first two sections will make its way naturally into my future blogs.

Phew. See, already this feels better.

Since I've already read some of these articles, let's discuss what they have to say.

First, principles and standards.

**Benjamin Ives Gilman
His article is almost completely about standards for object acquisition.
He is adament about the aquisition of works that "possess artistic quality." He seems to think that a work having artistic quality is one that can be understood by its message. Basically, appreciation = understanding and therefore usefulness.
His principles:
I. Simplicity - the museum itself should be designed simply so that the art will stand out.
II. Segregation - a museums should be organized into digestable/compatible sections.
III. Dual Arrangement - selected objects (displayed) vs. remaining objects (in storage but available).
IV. Quality - art should meet a certain standard of "responsible criticism."
                                 *Promote the art
                                 *Comprehensive collecting secondary to choice collecting
                                 *Duty to local artists
V. Harmony - objects should be installed in a way that they best aid each others' appreciation.
VI. Reality - reproductions should not be exhibited with originals.
VII. Service - the museum should be active in exhibition as well as aquisition.

I think all of those are very valid. There are some things I see that museums could do more often. In the last section he mentions holding concerts inside and outside the museum to attract visitors. This is something I have never even heard of a museum doing! DOMA did a theatre performance one time, but that's all I've seen in that vein. It's an interesting concept, although I don't think many modern day museums would hold concerts unless they were of a certain type, and only outdoors in the summer. The motivation behind it is good, though. Different types of people being drawn to the museum through different activities.

In this article and in the next one by John Cotton Dana, there is the pervading idea that museums should always be fluid and real as far as reflecting life and the changes in their collection. They both think it is important to continue improving the collection, instead of having something like a made-to-order museum.

Museums like University of Alaska's Museum of the North think it's most important for the works they accession to be educational, useful for research, and reflecting some value of Alaska in general.

Most museums' requirements are based on what type of museum they are. For example, the Peabody Museum of Archeology and Ethnology at Harvard only accepts work that has to do with the studies in their title.

I will continue exploring other aspects of object acquisition tomorrow during my Museum Studies block. I'm thinking reception and presentation. Until then!!