Subject: Conservation facilities and the public
I was asked once by my museum director whether I thought a lab visible to the public would be a good idea. I told her that on the whole I did not think so. These are the reasons I gave and I offer them to anyone who is dealing with the same issue: Productivity would drop. It would take longer to complete treatments in timely manner for exhibition deadlines, etc. Even if the public is separated by a window, the conservator(s) would need to be aware of their presence and alter their work flow accordingly. More effort would need to be made on lab set up, neatness, and processes to be sure they were appropriate for public viewing. One lab I know with a new public viewing window has placed posters and displays against the glass in an effort to reduce public viewing as they found it impractical to have public viewing on an ongoing basis. Stages of treatment require concentration that could be disrupted by public viewing, potentially lowering the quality of the treatments. Conservators work with chemicals, scalpels and specialized equipment that require focus and concentration to use safely near valuable works of art. Any distraction could pose a higher risk to the artwork. Potential added stress to the conservator(s) could lower morale. Imagine your own work space or office. How would you feel if the public were allowed to view you while you work all day? How would that affect your productivity and stress levels? Could there be any liability issues if a member of the public tried a treatment method at home, caused damage to a work of art and then claimed that they learned it from observing the museum conservators? On several occasions objects under purchase consideration come into the conservation lab for examination and analysis. The objects are often left in the lab for a period of time and may need to be moved about for examination purposes. These objects need to be kept confidential which can get very tricky if there were public viewing access. Moving objects around because they are "sensitive" to public viewing adds a greater risk to damage due to excess handling. On the plus side, it would be beneficial for the public to see more and learn more about conservation as this would help increase public awareness. This is a very important aspect of the conservation profession and should be encouraged. However, architecturally it might be more pragmatic to design a lab that can accommodate scheduled tours, rather than continual public viewing. I've also debated about an architectural plan that would allow only a small room or portion of a lab to be accessible for public viewing. The challenge with that scenario is, depending on which projects come into the lab, the use of the rooms can easily change. The space may be needed for some other purpose at any time that would not be appropriate for public viewing. Having a window curtained off at certain times can create more tension with the public as they may feel cheated out of access. It may be better not to even offer the window in the first place. Of course, I requested a lab with good natural lighting, preferably on an upper floor, easy access to art storage for large object movement, and easy access for public tours. We ended up with a lab tucked away in the sub-basement of the museum! *** Conservation DistList Instance 15:16 Distributed: Thursday, August 9, 2001 Message Id: cdl-15-16-002 ***Received on Thursday, 9 August, 2001