Museum Do museums over do weapons?

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

I understand what you are saying. You can't display everything. But from the donation point of view, especially since I'm a collector, if I donate something I want it displayed, not in storage never to see the light of day. I would rather just keep it.

That's the problem with many collectors: they demand everything they donate be displayed, which isn't realistic for 95% of museums. The ones that can accommodate are either just getting started so don't have many alternatives or they are amateur organizations who just cram ever bit of stuff they have into ever inch of display space they have.

Items held by a professional nonprofit or government museum will usually get better preservation care and be more accessible to researchers than what is held in a private collection. Temporary exhibits are also possible.

Already having the material in your posession also makes it much easier for an institution to design new exhibits because they know with certainty what is available. It's possible to find a donation or loan of specific Wish List items during an exhibit design, but it can delay the process and isn't guaranteed.

A good compromise for private collectors is to will your collection to an appropriate institution to you can enjoy it while you're around, or preferably donate it late in life but while still alive and mentally coherent to give more information about it.

The nightmare for historians and public history professionals is collectors who go to work collecting important material then they die and it scatters to the four winds, often by people who don't know and don't care. Photo albums and scrapbooks being sold on ebay a page or a photo at a time is particularly problematic as the seller has destroyed context and provenance, never to be restored.

Agree if a Museum had 80% of its items in storage not being used, perhaps they should sell some off so they could least be displayed in private museums or collections. Or donate them to other museums willing to display them. Makes little sense to hoard items to keep them from being seen.

State museums commonly loan items to other museums in their state.

All organizations go through periods of collection review and consider transferring items to more appropriate organizations. These are usually only going to reputable institutions (government or nonprofit).

Being in Storage is not always synonymous with "not being used". I had a researcher produce a presentation for a state anthropology conference based on an archaeology collection not currently displayed. I've had other researchers contact me about college research projects related to projectile points and sawfish rostrum spines.

Responsible museums rarely sell collection items. It's usually only after unsuccessful transfer attempts and of items without provenance. A Collection Management Policy will include a formal process for when and how items might be gotten rid of.

Where I work, we received a private collection a few years ago. It's one of the largest we have. The donor wanted it explicitly stated on the donation paperwork that under no circumstances would we ever sell any part of his collection, a condition we were happy to oblige.

 

[archieclement]

The average adult doesn't know much more about the American Civil War than their 4th grader. Most couldn't even tell you when it took place.

Actually 90% of adults over 25 have a H.S. education. Around 45% have associate degree or better.

Certainly some areas or demographics are far lower, but again if presentation isn't aimed at the adult majority, its not surprising adult visitation is very low.

 

[archieclement]

Sell off their collections? It is very obvious that you know absolutely nothing about how museums operate. Might I suggest that you read what the National Park Service has to say about museums and collections? https://www.nps.gov/museum/publications/handbook.html

Actually, disagreeing with a policy hardly means one is unaware of the policy they disagree with.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Actually 90% of adults over 25 have a H.S. education. Around 45% have associate degree or better.

That says nothing about what they know of history, especially a complicated topic like the American Civil War.

 

[archieclement]

That says nothing about what they know of history, especially a complicated topic like the American Civil War.

I suppose if your commenting on the state of education, thats another topic.

 

[Cavalier]

If I had donated an artifact I owned to a museum and they then turned around and sold it I would be irate. I can leave it to my family and they can sell it. The purpose of donating was to share that artifact with others who may be interested in it, not to add it to some millionaires collection where no one will ever see it but him.

If I go to a battlefield/military oriented museum I expect to see artifacts and if I don't I'm not coming back.

I do understand that all the artifacts may not be able to be displayed all the time. However I would expect that there would be some system in place to rotate them from the warehouse to the display area and vice versa.

As to bored wives, and speaking only for our family, she sometimes does things I like and I sometimes do things she likes. I don't think the museum is responsible for working that out.

John

 

[major bill]

I now have to wonder how many forum members have accually donated items to museums. Is so, did you expect your items would replace items already on display?

I will use glasses for an example. In the storage facility of the Michigan Historical Museum in a cabinet with 200+ pairs of glases from the 1800s to the 1960s. Should the museum attempt to display all 200 pairs of glasses? The are also drawers with hundreds of Boy Scout and Girl Scout patches and badges. Did everyone who donated a Boy Scout patch expect that it would immediately get put on display? The Museum did a small temp display for the birthday of the Girl Scouts but propably did not use half the Girl Scout items.

 

[archieclement]

If I had donated an artifact I owned to a museum and they then turned around and sold it I would be irate. I can leave it to my family and they can sell it. The purpose of donating was to share that artifact with others who may be interested in it, not to add it to some millionaires collection where no one will ever see it but him.

If I go to a battlefield/military oriented museum I expect to see artifacts and if I don't I'm not coming back.

I do understand that all the artifacts may not be able to be displayed all the time. However I would expect that there would be some system in place to rotate them from the warehouse to the display area and vice versa.

As to bored wives, and speaking only for our family, she sometimes does things I like and I sometimes do things she likes. I don't think the museum is responsible for working that out.

John

I agree, but to be shared with others ussually involves more then being chucked away to storage.

I think likely to many, being shared with others probally involved the thought it would be displayed.

 

[archieclement]

Deleted

The only arrogance is having a belief anyone not mirroring your opinion can't express their opinion in a forum.

If its a "huge part of the problem" perhaps should start recognizing its not an isolated view to be so dismissive of..........It makes little sense to ask the public here or elsewhere, what museums should do, if they don't actually want opinions.

 

[Kurt G]

I worked for a historical village about 40 years ago and as we were prepping to open for the season I sometimes went to pick up donations . These could be old tools , horse drawn sleighs , furniture , etc. The timeline of the village was 1860 to 1880 . I was surprised that some of the donations were sold as a source of income to make other purchases . Yet how many horse drawn sleighs can a village with limited storage capacity use ? Several were displayed but there was no room to store everything . This was not a museum but a living history village . I also picked up an old trunk that was filled with dozens of Harper's Weekly including the iconic Santa Claus issue . To my knowledge these were never displayed and I wonder whatever happened to them .

 

[Cavalier]

Actually, I do have an apple out of the donation barrel, sort of. The old museum at the Gettysburg Visitor Center had what they called I believe, The Wall Of Faces. It was photos of soldiers who actually participated in the battle. They wanted a 8" X 10" copy of the photo with any information you could supply them about the soldier. Having the photo of an ancestor who fought there I supplied them with the requested 8" X 10" copy and copies of all my ancestors records and sure enough on my next visit to the old museum there was "Unc", (actually my grandmother's uncle), among hundreds, (?), of others.

On my first trip to the new museum at the present Visitor Center there was a Wall Of Faces, presented differently but with the same idea, face of soldiers who actually fought there. Well, no Unc. When I enquired about this I was told they did not put all the photos on display, there were too many. That made sense to me. In the few times I returned to the new museum since then he hadn't shown up. Its been a few years since I was last there so I have no idea if Unc ever got his photo on the wall of the new museum or not. I don't go there any more. Not because of Unc's photo but because of what the museum now displays as opposed to the artifacts the old museum used to display.

John

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

If its a "huge part of the problem" perhaps should start recognizing its not an isolated view to be so dismissive of..........It makes little sense to ask the public here or elsewhere, what museums should do, if they don't actually want opinions.

There is a big gulf between what trained museum professions think a museum should be and what diehard history buffs, especially collectors and/or those whose historical interest is focused on a specific topic like the American Civil War, think it should be. Avocational archaeologists that have self-collected rather than buying historical items at trade shows and ebay especially.

A Civil War museum designed to cater to majority opinion of CWT forum users would fail because they represent only a very small portion of the population, even if you narrow it down to the kinds of people who visit museums.

I worked for a historical village about 40 years ago and as we were prepping to open for the season I sometimes went to pick up donations . These could be old tools , horse drawn sleighs , furniture , etc. The timeline of the village was 1860 to 1880 . I was surprised that some of the donations were sold as a source of income to make other purchases .

Some organizations distinguish between provenanced and unprovenanced items. In other words: a mass-produced item is basically just an antique unless it has a known association with a specific individual, especially a noteworthy individual (or perhaps a serial number that can provide additional specifics about the item). A living history village, where most everything is just a representative sample item than can easily be replaced by another like item when it wears out, would likely have a different collections policy than a more traditional museum.

When any organization does sell a collection item, it's normal (I daresay only proper) for the funds from the sale to be specifically allocated to support other collection items (either acquisition or preservation).

There are also situations where someone dies and their estate basically says "Here is their collection. Keep what you want; do whatever you want with the rest." They don't want to deal with evaluation and selective acquisition; it's just a bunch of stuff they want gone. That's a bit of a different situation than someone donating items with the expectation of them being kept forever.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

On my first trip to the new museum at the present Visitor Center there was a Wall Of Faces, presented differently but with the same idea, face of soldiers who actually fought there. Well, no Unc. When I enquired about this I was told they did not put all the photos on display, there were too many. That made sense to me. In the few times I returned to the new museum since then he hadn't shown up. Its been a few years since I was last there so I have no idea if Unc ever got his photo on the wall of the new museum or not.

It would be nice if they could digitize all the photos then have some digital displays that cycle through the images and identifications.

 

[archieclement]

There is a big gulf between what trained museum professions think a museum should be and what diehard history buffs, especially collectors and/or those whose historical interest is focused on a specific topic like the American Civil War, think it should be. Avocational archaeologists that have self-collected rather than buying historical items at trade shows and ebay especially.

A Civil War museum designed to cater to majority opinion of CWT forum users would fail because they represent only a very small portion of the population, even if you narrow it down to the kinds of people who visit museums.

Don't disagree there's a big gulf, it could also be why attendence had declined to primarily school groups of children who have little choice but to attend with school groups.

Any venture to be successful in attendence caters to public opinion, as that is where public attendence actually comes from, the public. And I have never suggested museums cater to just CWT members. However I certainly recognize the majority of the public is actually adult and has H.S. or better education, that would be the largest demographic of potential visitors. Increasingly focusing on children doesn't seem to have worked with the majority of public......who is adult.

If one wishes to think the role of public museums isn't to be publicly successful, and instead just subsidized by the state or federal government, memberships and donors, then the views of the public as taxpayers would also seem rather relevant. Also the public as donors or members would again be relevant. To view public opinion as a "huge part of the problem" certainly would indicate a problem, but not with the public.......it would be with administration or advisors.

 

[thomas aagaard]

also do not forget that the majority of CS soldiers ( AKA rifle toters) were not of the Planter Class

But 33% where from a slaveowning household.

The south seceded over slavery and then turned a political crisis into a war.
The loyal states fought against an armed rebellion against the constitution.

It is in no way abnormal for the different sides in a war to be fighting for different reasons... even allies having very different goals is common.

Oh, and under the constitution the states are very expressly not sovereign. Something the South Carolina political leadership knew very well... as is clear from their declaration of causes... even if you don't get it.

 

[major bill]

We keep getting back to the question of what a museum is supposed to do. Show artifacts or teach history? If the prime mission is to show artifacts then a large display of weapons with nothing more than a sign telling the official name of the weapon would be all that is needed. If a museum has 5 or 10 Enfields it should display all of them even if a couple are nearly identical.

If a museum is to educate, then the museum usually tries to use artfacts to tell a story or to inform visitors.

I have visited both types of museums. Some have a huge number of artfacts but almost no signage. Others have many story boards but limited artifacts.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

We keep getting back to the question of what a museum is supposed to do. Show artifacts or teach history?

Use artifacts to teach history.