Sadness in the SF Asian Art Museum

[David]

Well i check out the on-line collections and this museum has a fair amount of keris, most of which are not, of course, currently on display.
http://67.52.109.59/code/emuseum.asp...icksearch=kris
Here's just a few from their collection. Most look like they need attention.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, we can see similar attendances at the special exhibitions staged by museums and art galleries here in Australia.

We even see such attendances when people have to pay substantial entry fees.

But you need to convince the general public, ie, the tax payers, that XXXX amount of dollars is better spent on a museum than on hospitals, roads, education, child care facilities, or on "saving the trees".

Try telling Johnny Average who works 50 hours a week in an un-airconditioned factory that he needs to pay 75 cents extra tax every week to look after a bunch of old daggers, or old china, or native wood carvings.

There's not a single politician out there anywhere who is either so brave, or so stupid.

Its not the museum staff that need convincing.

They only operate in accordance with the advice received from departmental bureaucrats, who in turn get their direction from politicians.

The pollies get their ideas from the people who elect them to office.

If we want change there is only one way to do it, and that is to educate an entire community in the value of artifacts from bygone ages.

Regretably most of that community anywhere in the world is more concerned with keeping food on the table, or when they can replace the ten year old clunker that's standing in the driveway.

[David]

I am not so sure that major museums receive all that much of there money from the good graces of politicians votes or tax levies, at least not in the USA. Sure, there is some government support, but a good deal of museum money comes from rich supporters, membership, grants, admission prices, etc. Here's a little something on the Met. I don't think that it's collections are competing with roads, child care and tree conservation.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art ("The Met") is the non-profit organization that is responsible for the operation of one of the world's largest and most comprehensive art museums, visited by approximately five million people each year. Located in Central Park, the Met's two-million-square-foot main building is owned by the city of New York, while the collections are held for the benefit of the public by the corporation's trustees. In addition, the city pays for the museum's heat, light, and power, as well as funding a portion of the costs of maintenance and security. The corporation is responsible for its share of maintenance and security, plus the costs of acquisitions, conservation, special exhibitions, scholarly publications, and educational programs. The Met also receives an annual grant for basic operating expenses from the New York State Council on the Arts. Moreover, it receives funding through gifts and grants, endowment support, paid admissions, the selling of memberships, as well as ancillary income derived from merchandising, parking garage fees, auditorium admissions, and the museum's restaurants. Aside from its Central Park location, the Met owns and operates a branch museum, The Cloisters, located in northern Manhattan, one of the sites of the museum's Department of Medieval Art. Supplementing the Met's gift shop income are 13 satellite retail operations in the United States (with sales from the shop at Rockefeller Center ranking second to the museum itself) and 11 licensed shops around the world. Aside from the usual souvenirs of tee-shirts and postcards, Met merchandise includes expensive reproductions of the artwork found in the museum.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes David, in respect of this particular museum, and perhaps other public museums in the USA, you are correct.

Here is a link to the the Met's balance sheet,. It is a very superficial balance sheet and we do not have access to how it was compiled, but even so, we can see that the bulk of funding is not coming from any government base.

http://www.guidestar.org/pqShowGsRep...e&npoId=390161

However, wherever that funding is coming from there is one thing that is still true, and that is that any museum will only function in accordance with the wishes of the community in which it exists.

In a community that funds its museums from public money, those funds are inextricably linked to public perception of political endeavour.

Perhaps the Met and other museums in the USA do not have this same political agenda with which to comply, but they must still satisfy public demands. If they do not, it is inevitable that they become irrelevant to the community and they gradually spiral down into non-existance.

Here with the Met we can see my second reason for non display and non maintenance of weaponry taking a dominant role in the decisions made by the museum's administrators:- current societal attitudes.

Those attitudes dictate the way in which any organisation will function, be it an organisation formed to collect garbage, or an organisation formed to conserve heritage.

Ultimately society itself makes the decisions on what is important to society at any given time in its existence. As a body, society can make its wishes felt in many ways, and those wishes are reflected in the nature of a society's organisations.

With the Met, it may not be as simple as an insufficiency of funds linked directly to taxation, but the money trail will be there somewhere, even if it is not immediately obvious, and that money trail will be linked to the attitudes, standards and desires of the community that permits the Met to exist.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

With the Met, it may not be as simple as an insufficiency of funds linked directly to taxation, but the money trail will be there somewhere, even if it is not immediately obvious, and that money trail will be linked to the attitudes, standards and desires of the community that permits the Met to exist.

You are no doubt correct in this, though it still must be pointed out that attitudes and political correctness aside, the Met has a seriously nice and large arms and armor section. Strangely enough, they don't seem to have any keris. http://www.metmuseum.org/works_of_ar...1=4&dd2=0&vw=1

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes indeed, seriously nice stuff.

Which might indicate that the community that supports the Met is OK with things that kill, provided that those things are also art of a form and standard that is in compliance with that community's ideas of art.

[fearn]

Hi Alan,

I think there's a slippery slope when one talks about weapons that are also art, and it's one that plays into the hands of people who focus on ridding the world of weapons as a cure for violence.

The museums of the world have many objects that are, by the standards of their makers, mishandled. Let's ignore the literal skeletons in the closet and focus instead on the SF Asian Art Museum.

Many of the oldest pieces obviously came from tombs, and much of the Southeast Asian religious art was obviously torn from temples and temple walls, some time in the last 50-100 years.

What saddens me about all of this is the lack of respect. It's really as sad to see a deities' statue quietly corroding away in a corner as it is to see an unplayed drum rotting to silence, or an unstained, rusting keris, depending on where your sympathies lie.

In the particular case of the Asian Art Museum, they appear to be taking good care of their Japanese weapons and largely ignoring their keris. To me, this says that the curators can be educated, and that if someone is willing to take the time to work with them, the curators might be willing to care for their keris collection better.

As for other museums, it depends on the staff and funding, as you've rightfully noted. Many museums don't seem to know or particularly care about weapons. That is sad, but it isn't universal.

Best,

F