an insight into museums and collections

BluErf · 28th May 2005, 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolviex

Dear BluErf, in the light of ICOM statute and passion of so many people to survive in hard museum conditions, your words seems to be a little harmful. In the light of all of this, Museums should be the ONLY place to keep objects (of course it is not so in reality). Museums definitely are not "orphanages". I feel the same passion as you, and I love "my" objects with the same love as you, and I'm not the only one. Among the collectors and museum workers you will find the same passion but ignorance as well, so I don't think that discussion: what is better - Museum or collector's house, is really necessary!.

I apologise for unwittingly hurting curatorial staff who are passionate about what they are doing. A very sorry.

Though my post may seem anti-Musuem, it is actually not. I was trying to put forth a balanced view. I agree pieces fall apart while in Museum collections and in private collections. As Ariel points out, both paths have advantages and disadvantages. We might also say if not for the private collectors, where would the Museums get their pieces (or donated collections).

The last para from my previous post -

" All things are impermanent; all things that are made will eventually be unmade. It is the natural way of things. Clinging on otherwise is probably not going to change much, but it would certainly add more worry lines and white hairs to ourselves. We do what we can and let the rest take its natural course. "

- is actually meant for both private collectors and curatorial staff. The gist of the message is "do our (collectors and curatorial staff) best with what we have and let it be", and of course be happier. That's the most important part.

Hope this clarifies.

tom hyle · 28th May 2005, 09:34 AM

Sorry, Wolviex; I think the orphanage comparison was very accurate. Museum curators may (I say "may"; it is certainly not required) be passionate, concerning usually only a certain specialized area, and not usually every thing under their care. Moreover, the importance of that passion is considerably diminished, as, acting within a social institution, they are not allowed to act upon that passion, but must act according to rules and plans laid down by the group. This takeover of human activity from politics to production to interpersonal relations by the concepts and institutions of specialization/professionalism is not a minor issue, nor is there a single area of our lives to which it is not relevant. If you have a doctor in your family and one not, otherwise equal, who do you go to? Right. Why? Because he cares; the other is merely making a rules-bound social/economic transaction. Yes, people can care about their jobs and the affects on others/the world, but they don't HAVE to, and many don't. In a good orphanage the kids always get all their shots and plenty to eat, which is more than they'd get in many poor families, but (even assuming all orphanages being good ones) is that a substitute for love and family? Most would not say so. So the care and preservation of musea staff with, as has been pointed out, more to take care of than they properly can and impersonal rules about how to do it, is not the same as that of a loving individual. Heck, the ideal situation for a sword, where it most fulfills its spirituality and functionality, where it most interacts as it was meant to, and the only place where truly proper care is available, is to be owned by a person whose only sword it is, and who loves, respects, and depends upon it.......
Also, as usual when promoting control by social institutions, the wealth and power that can be brought to bear that so exceeds that of the individual is the promoted value, but there is inevitably (INEVITABLY) a loss of the personal, the passionate, and indeed, the real. It is only people who live with swords, for instance, as swords, who can really know them. In a museum you cannot do this. Try sharpening up one of the swords to do some test cuts (let alone because it wants to be sharp and ready to kill); how would your boss like that? Now, maybe if you could submit a paper, before and after, with all the proper tribal seals and such, and measure and quantify everything until you strip it of all spirit and feel, then maybe you'd be allowed.........as for private owners being less able to care for swords A/ that's known as life; some would rather live life in the world than in the various prisons of safety offered by society.....and B/ private owners are MORE able to properly care for swords, because we are able to treat them as swords, something musea and academic collections very rarely do, and indeed, try to prevent.
Don't take it like a personal insult; to say many professionals don't care and that the forces of professionalism and social institutionality can be counter to passionate stewardship are just facts of the world. These facts do nothing to discredit the good workers, though I can see where they might dishearten one somewhat. Social institutions, for good or ill, or whatever combination, are what we're stuck with, and will be increasingly stuck with: That much is clear. So I do not argue for stripping and destroying social institutions, but they have a condemnable way of making their way the only way, and of shutting out the individual, and I don't care to stand by and watch that justified.
And I will never get over those humans in England throwing the rennaissance swords into the melter because they'd studied them enough and had no room for them. That was not love.....I bet they'd say they hated doing it. I bet they'd say they hated HAVING to do it, but we don't have to do anything but die, and it's when we let Master/social institutions tell us how to live we somehow forget that.

Rick · 28th May 2005, 03:29 PM

I'm enjoying the passion of the responses here but please let us not turn them upon one another .

wolviex · 28th May 2005, 03:51 PM

Tom: I wanted to polemic with you, but decided not to do it, because of one reason. We have just started pointless discussion which I wanted to avoid. One thing that amused me, is that we both have right - you have yours, I have mine. Every has its pros and cons, and the result would be a close thread

. You have a lot of right, but on the other hand there is too much generalise, I think. So I hope you'll forgive me if I discontinue just here

. You and BluErf have your opinion, you'll share it with other people as well, and I appreciate it. Anyway, this won't change the world we're living in, will it?

Regards

B.I · 28th May 2005, 05:51 PM

hi,
i feel bad that this post may border into territory i wanted to avoid.
toms post is completely valid and his opinion has good merit. but, you must consider that people see swords in a different way. i am a collector, and my collection has passed the original purpose of 'weapon' and, to me, they are works of art. because this is how i see them, i would not dream of sharpening them, not swinging them around to feel the weight and balance. and so, i treat my collection as a museum would treat theirs (very carefully :-)
the museum i mentioned had a large collection donated to them. what they do with it is entirely down to them. they may as well have been a collector buying swords and not restoring/conserving them as another collector would.
it is no different to a father passing his collection down to his son and his son not looking after them as he would have done.
i must stress that i know many museums here, and know each ones reserves and this case is an exception. the main institutions are well looked after and there is no better place for these weapons.
they are they for the collector to see and study, and so serve a greater purpose than if in a private collection. collectors, by there very nature, are anti-social. this obviously doesnt apply to forum members as if you were anti-social, then you wouldnt know each other :-) if you go to regular fairs or auctions, you see many old friends and old faces to chat to. but, there are many that you see each time, with their heads down and come in and run out and you've no idea who they are.
i am aware of all the sales over here, and know that many good pieces are sold to a private collection, never to be seen again. these people dont share their collection with anyone, and so any possible knowledge gleaned from these pieces will never be known.
you can argue against this, in saying that most museums hold their collections in reserves, but this is meaningless. if the collection is not on display, its due to space and funding. as a collector, all doors will the thrown open for you to see and study what ever interests you.
michal has shown his passion, and the posting of images from his museum show that his doors will always be open to the collector. in all the institutions i know, michal's attitude is typical of that of the staff, and so a museum cannot be compared to a collector in that it plays a completely different role.
i know of 3 major collections here, of great importance in the study of arms by example, that are inaccessable to all. i have seen snatches of pieces, but the owners are not forthcoming with other collectors, nor museums, nor anyone else for that matter.
the forum itself gives a false impression of the collecting world, for by the very nature of your participation, you show yourselves as willing to share your collections and knowledge with others. unfortunately there are many that dont, and even more unfortunately, many of them have the funds to buy the serious pieces and lock them away forever. i would rather them in a museum than lost forever. ok, as the original post showed, you run the risk of them being uncared for.
but, there is one big difference. if you were aware of a piece in a private collection that was not being looked after, you can offer your advice but its down to the owner to take it or tell you where to stick it. but, in a museum, the pieces are there for you and you have every right to complain and push for more care to be taken. your opinion will never be ignored and will always be taken seriously. they are there to look after these pieces for your benefit, and you the opportunity to observe and make sure its being done right.
in the case of the museum i mentioned, i know from the conversation i had with the curator that they will be looked into. ok, its not of importance to them, but if i went in again and began to look seriously into it and made a case, it will be listened to. you can argue that it isnt down to you or me) to do this but i disagree. i think that we are just as responsible as the museum, and as collectors we oughtto participate. the staff are all doin gthere jobs well, but the situation is the way it is and can only be changed by everyone working together and giving time where necessary.

wolviex · 2nd June 2005, 07:34 PM

First of all I would like to apoligize for sneaking out for a while, but I didn't want to get the discussion hotter then it was needed. I hope that Tom and BluErf will forgive me, and won't treat me as a man from the other side of barricade. All in all, we are doing the same and we both have the same passions.

Brian: I would like to thank for your reply, because you are here as an arbiter representing both side of discussion. Being private collector, you are also very well informed what is inside the museums, and what problems both sides are dealing with. It's valuable.

You have absolutely right about treating objects as a an art and not only as usable ones. Of course there is a big difference between i.e. 19th c. Austrian military sabre and medieval sword or 18th c. parade karabela. With Austrian sabre you can do almost what you want and test it in many ways (of course with purport) while with the other ones you must be careful as with the baby. Brian is right, we all are, museums and collectors, responsible for these objects, but if the private collector will destroy his weapon, because of stupidy or anything else, he can be only sorry or mad, while museum worker is responsible and will be probably accountable for it with very serious consequences.
On the other hand. There are many sins of the museums, which I don't like and I would like to fight with. Access to the collections is not always easy. Of course, common man just from the street will have to pass more problems than scholar or known collector, but even they are sometimes in hard situation. Many depends on the museum worker's mood. Sometimes you have to wait very long time for simple answers. There are museums which are almost closed even for other museums workers - just because. After the political changes in my part of Europe, musuem are trying to adapt theirselves to hard market rules. This mean bureaucracy, expensive photos, and many many stupid paper-work. Expensive photos are most annoying. Museum and archives are treating objects like private property and not as national good. It is clear for some reasons, beacuse of costs of preservation, care etc. but there are some limits also. Ironicaly this hit only scholars. First of all, they are very bad pay; second they'are writing books often for free; third - often have to find sponsors on their own; fourth - they are paying for archives or museums, "friendly" institutions, big money they practically don't have, just for the basic sources; fifth - at the end the state will rober them because of printed book (taxex

). And then you are witness of hot TV discussion between politics how bad science here is. Sorry if I run too far, back to the museums and collectors

.
Good and friendly cooperation between museums and collectors is possible, even in wide range. If you want an example, I'll give you one. In Poland, in my Museum is existing 50 year old society: Association of Old Arms and Uniforms Amateurs. It have many other departments in the biggest cities of Poland, and these departments are working beside local musems as well. Today you can find there over 300 members. During last 50 years you can count thousand of people, which were passing by. Great majority of the members are private collectors, which monthly meet each other in Museum on prelections, they are cooperating with museum on exhibitions, they are helping museum workers and museum workers are helping them, Associtation and Museum are publishing together periodical Studies in history of Old Arms and Uniforms (lately 12th tome was printed)

. Isn't it optimistic conclusion my friends?

All the best
Michal

Aqtai · 5th September 2005, 12:26 PM

This reply follows my earlier thread about the V&A. Just how easy is it for a member of the public, who has no connections to any museums, who is not a collector or a professional or an academic, but who just happens to have an interest in Islamic arms to view the contents of a museum's reserves?

28th May 2005, 09:34 AM	#2
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Sorry, Wolviex; I think the orphanage comparison was very accurate. Museum curators may (I say "may"; it is certainly not required) be passionate, concerning usually only a certain specialized area, and not usually every thing under their care. Moreover, the importance of that passion is considerably diminished, as, acting within a social institution, they are not allowed to act upon that passion, but must act according to rules and plans laid down by the group. This takeover of human activity from politics to production to interpersonal relations by the concepts and institutions of specialization/professionalism is not a minor issue, nor is there a single area of our lives to which it is not relevant. If you have a doctor in your family and one not, otherwise equal, who do you go to? Right. Why? Because he cares; the other is merely making a rules-bound social/economic transaction. Yes, people can care about their jobs and the affects on others/the world, but they don't HAVE to, and many don't. In a good orphanage the kids always get all their shots and plenty to eat, which is more than they'd get in many poor families, but (even assuming all orphanages being good ones) is that a substitute for love and family? Most would not say so. So the care and preservation of musea staff with, as has been pointed out, more to take care of than they properly can and impersonal rules about how to do it, is not the same as that of a loving individual. Heck, the ideal situation for a sword, where it most fulfills its spirituality and functionality, where it most interacts as it was meant to, and the only place where truly proper care is available, is to be owned by a person whose only sword it is, and who loves, respects, and depends upon it....... Also, as usual when promoting control by social institutions, the wealth and power that can be brought to bear that so exceeds that of the individual is the promoted value, but there is inevitably (INEVITABLY) a loss of the personal, the passionate, and indeed, the real. It is only people who live with swords, for instance, as swords, who can really know them. In a museum you cannot do this. Try sharpening up one of the swords to do some test cuts (let alone because it wants to be sharp and ready to kill); how would your boss like that? Now, maybe if you could submit a paper, before and after, with all the proper tribal seals and such, and measure and quantify everything until you strip it of all spirit and feel, then maybe you'd be allowed.........as for private owners being less able to care for swords A/ that's known as life; some would rather live life in the world than in the various prisons of safety offered by society.....and B/ private owners are MORE able to properly care for swords, because we are able to treat them as swords, something musea and academic collections very rarely do, and indeed, try to prevent. Don't take it like a personal insult; to say many professionals don't care and that the forces of professionalism and social institutionality can be counter to passionate stewardship are just facts of the world. These facts do nothing to discredit the good workers, though I can see where they might dishearten one somewhat. Social institutions, for good or ill, or whatever combination, are what we're stuck with, and will be increasingly stuck with: That much is clear. So I do not argue for stripping and destroying social institutions, but they have a condemnable way of making their way the only way, and of shutting out the individual, and I don't care to stand by and watch that justified. And I will never get over those humans in England throwing the rennaissance swords into the melter because they'd studied them enough and had no room for them. That was not love.....I bet they'd say they hated doing it. I bet they'd say they hated HAVING to do it, but we don't have to do anything but die, and it's when we let Master/social institutions tell us how to live we somehow forget that. Last edited by tom hyle; 28th May 2005 at 09:50 AM.

28th May 2005, 03:29 PM	#3
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,365	Good Thread I'm enjoying the passion of the responses here but please let us not turn them upon one another .

28th May 2005, 03:51 PM	#4
wolviex Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Poland, Krakow Posts: 418	Tom: I wanted to polemic with you, but decided not to do it, because of one reason. We have just started pointless discussion which I wanted to avoid. One thing that amused me, is that we both have right - you have yours, I have mine. Every has its pros and cons, and the result would be a close thread . You have a lot of right, but on the other hand there is too much generalise, I think. So I hope you'll forgive me if I discontinue just here . You and BluErf have your opinion, you'll share it with other people as well, and I appreciate it. Anyway, this won't change the world we're living in, will it? Regards

28th May 2005, 05:51 PM	#5
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	hi, i feel bad that this post may border into territory i wanted to avoid. toms post is completely valid and his opinion has good merit. but, you must consider that people see swords in a different way. i am a collector, and my collection has passed the original purpose of 'weapon' and, to me, they are works of art. because this is how i see them, i would not dream of sharpening them, not swinging them around to feel the weight and balance. and so, i treat my collection as a museum would treat theirs (very carefully :-) the museum i mentioned had a large collection donated to them. what they do with it is entirely down to them. they may as well have been a collector buying swords and not restoring/conserving them as another collector would. it is no different to a father passing his collection down to his son and his son not looking after them as he would have done. i must stress that i know many museums here, and know each ones reserves and this case is an exception. the main institutions are well looked after and there is no better place for these weapons. they are they for the collector to see and study, and so serve a greater purpose than if in a private collection. collectors, by there very nature, are anti-social. this obviously doesnt apply to forum members as if you were anti-social, then you wouldnt know each other :-) if you go to regular fairs or auctions, you see many old friends and old faces to chat to. but, there are many that you see each time, with their heads down and come in and run out and you've no idea who they are. i am aware of all the sales over here, and know that many good pieces are sold to a private collection, never to be seen again. these people dont share their collection with anyone, and so any possible knowledge gleaned from these pieces will never be known. you can argue against this, in saying that most museums hold their collections in reserves, but this is meaningless. if the collection is not on display, its due to space and funding. as a collector, all doors will the thrown open for you to see and study what ever interests you. michal has shown his passion, and the posting of images from his museum show that his doors will always be open to the collector. in all the institutions i know, michal's attitude is typical of that of the staff, and so a museum cannot be compared to a collector in that it plays a completely different role. i know of 3 major collections here, of great importance in the study of arms by example, that are inaccessable to all. i have seen snatches of pieces, but the owners are not forthcoming with other collectors, nor museums, nor anyone else for that matter. the forum itself gives a false impression of the collecting world, for by the very nature of your participation, you show yourselves as willing to share your collections and knowledge with others. unfortunately there are many that dont, and even more unfortunately, many of them have the funds to buy the serious pieces and lock them away forever. i would rather them in a museum than lost forever. ok, as the original post showed, you run the risk of them being uncared for. but, there is one big difference. if you were aware of a piece in a private collection that was not being looked after, you can offer your advice but its down to the owner to take it or tell you where to stick it. but, in a museum, the pieces are there for you and you have every right to complain and push for more care to be taken. your opinion will never be ignored and will always be taken seriously. they are there to look after these pieces for your benefit, and you the opportunity to observe and make sure its being done right. in the case of the museum i mentioned, i know from the conversation i had with the curator that they will be looked into. ok, its not of importance to them, but if i went in again and began to look seriously into it and made a case, it will be listened to. you can argue that it isnt down to you or me) to do this but i disagree. i think that we are just as responsible as the museum, and as collectors we oughtto participate. the staff are all doin gthere jobs well, but the situation is the way it is and can only be changed by everyone working together and giving time where necessary.

2nd June 2005, 07:34 PM	#6
wolviex Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Poland, Krakow Posts: 418	First of all I would like to apoligize for sneaking out for a while, but I didn't want to get the discussion hotter then it was needed. I hope that Tom and BluErf will forgive me, and won't treat me as a man from the other side of barricade. All in all, we are doing the same and we both have the same passions. Brian: I would like to thank for your reply, because you are here as an arbiter representing both side of discussion. Being private collector, you are also very well informed what is inside the museums, and what problems both sides are dealing with. It's valuable. You have absolutely right about treating objects as a an art and not only as usable ones. Of course there is a big difference between i.e. 19th c. Austrian military sabre and medieval sword or 18th c. parade karabela. With Austrian sabre you can do almost what you want and test it in many ways (of course with purport) while with the other ones you must be careful as with the baby. Brian is right, we all are, museums and collectors, responsible for these objects, but if the private collector will destroy his weapon, because of stupidy or anything else, he can be only sorry or mad, while museum worker is responsible and will be probably accountable for it with very serious consequences. On the other hand. There are many sins of the museums, which I don't like and I would like to fight with. Access to the collections is not always easy. Of course, common man just from the street will have to pass more problems than scholar or known collector, but even they are sometimes in hard situation. Many depends on the museum worker's mood. Sometimes you have to wait very long time for simple answers. There are museums which are almost closed even for other museums workers - just because. After the political changes in my part of Europe, musuem are trying to adapt theirselves to hard market rules. This mean bureaucracy, expensive photos, and many many stupid paper-work. Expensive photos are most annoying. Museum and archives are treating objects like private property and not as national good. It is clear for some reasons, beacuse of costs of preservation, care etc. but there are some limits also. Ironicaly this hit only scholars. First of all, they are very bad pay; second they'are writing books often for free; third - often have to find sponsors on their own; fourth - they are paying for archives or museums, "friendly" institutions, big money they practically don't have, just for the basic sources; fifth - at the end the state will rober them because of printed book (taxex ). And then you are witness of hot TV discussion between politics how bad science here is. Sorry if I run too far, back to the museums and collectors . Good and friendly cooperation between museums and collectors is possible, even in wide range. If you want an example, I'll give you one. In Poland, in my Museum is existing 50 year old society: Association of Old Arms and Uniforms Amateurs. It have many other departments in the biggest cities of Poland, and these departments are working beside local musems as well. Today you can find there over 300 members. During last 50 years you can count thousand of people, which were passing by. Great majority of the members are private collectors, which monthly meet each other in Museum on prelections, they are cooperating with museum on exhibitions, they are helping museum workers and museum workers are helping them, Associtation and Museum are publishing together periodical Studies in history of Old Arms and Uniforms (lately 12th tome was printed) . Isn't it optimistic conclusion my friends? All the best Michal

5th September 2005, 12:26 PM	#7
Aqtai Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Merseyside, UK Posts: 222	This reply follows my earlier thread about the V&A. Just how easy is it for a member of the public, who has no connections to any museums, who is not a collector or a professional or an academic, but who just happens to have an interest in Islamic arms to view the contents of a museum's reserves?