General Sessions – Page 8 – AIC Blog Archives: Conservators Converse

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting- “Assessing Risks to Your Collections” Workshop with Robert Waller, May 8th, 2012

I had the wonderful opportunity to participate in a workshop at the beginning of the 2012 AIC Conference with Robert Waller entitled, “Assessing Risks to Your Collections”. I decided to attend this particular course because many museums struggle with creating preservation priorities for their collections and this task is daunting to both small and large museums. Risk assessment tools can assist in identifying priorities for collections care and a museum can in turn invest strategically in projects to protect collections from hazards both in the present and future. I hoped to gain an understanding of risk management tools to better assist future preservation planning in my own museum and to relate the information I gained to the members of the Museum Association of Arizona, a museum organization that helped support my registration.

The workshop began at 9am and, in regular workshop fashion, participants began to introduce themselves to the group. This, of course, enabled participants to get comfortable with one another in order to start the business of learning about risk assessment. There was a large constituency of Latin American Scholars present at the workshop, as well as other international attendees from places like Haiti and Korea. Attendees were also diverse in specialties which included photographs, objects, paintings, textiles, as well as different levels of education including some pre-program students, but all of course had an interest in the preservation of cultural heritage. I was fortunate to have been in a group of both intelligent and friendly people that were willing to discuss and work together on all of the exercises.

Robert Waller introduced the overall objective and methods he would be using in order for participants to quickly learn the materials in this intense one day workshop. He was patient in describing each step, but also moved the workshop along to get in as much information as possible in such a short amount of time. The main goal of the workshop was to demonstrate the Cultural Property Risk Analysis Model. By identifying risks to collections using this tool, museums can target resources more efficiently through strategic planning. More specifically, the workshop enabled participants to:

Identify risks – by ”agent of deterioration” and “type of risk”.
Define risks clearly.
Assess the magnitude of defined risks.
Evaluate data and present information to stakeholders.

Systematically plan risk mitigation strategies by:

Identifying means of control – methods and levels.
Evaluating costs/risks/benefits of mitigation strategies.

The workshop was extremely interactive(not for the shy)and participants learned through a variety of means including lectures, demonstrations, brainstorming in small groups, group presentations, exercises, practice, and discussions. Small prizes were utilized to further motivate the groups (my group got chocolate!!). A well composed manual with a shiny protective cover was given to all participants. The manual consisted of all the course content exercises, references and a glossary of terms which I know will be a good resource and was much appreciated.

One of my favorite exercises was estimating the magnitude of risk to the display cases at the Albuquerque convention center. Each group was assigned their own case which encompassed a variety of materials and preservation issues. The groups worked together to calculate the magnitude of risk by using all of the steps worked out in class. We had to define the specific risks in our case, determine the fraction of susceptibility, the loss in value, the probability of occurrence, and the extent to which the susceptible is affected. This exercise really helped me put together all of the components discussed in the workshop lectures. Working with the other participants was also very valuable as they had differing opinions and it was necessary to work together to come to a consensus, much like in a real life scenario working with other museum colleagues. This gave participants a realistic view of what is involved in performing a risk assessment and gave a level of comfort in using what was learned.

In the end, I feel like I have a much better grasp of assessing risks to collections and will be able to more effectively communicate these risks in a way that will be useful to facilitate strategic preservation planning. This model of comprehensive analysis of risks can provide a guide for appropriate actions in order to effectively mitigate the rate of loss to a collection. All of the information provided during the workshop will be very useful to me and I hope to use these strategies in the near future and share them with my colleagues.

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting-Working With Artists Luncheon

Moderated by Nancy Odegaard, this lunch session featured three speakers, Landis Smith, Charles Stable and Glenn Wharton, who gave presentations about their experiences working with artists-from specific case studies to broad approaches-to carry out conservation work in museums. All of the speakers touched on the idea that working with artists was necessary to determine a sense of the essence of the objects/artwork-even if they weren’t working with the artists who created created the items in question. These engaging talks were followed by a question and answer session which gave the speakers and the audience the opportunity to explore questions and concerns about the role of the conservator and the artist in interpreting and preserving museum collections.

The first speaker was Landis Smith, who spoke about her experiences working with indigenous artists. She has worked with people from many different communities, from tribes in the Southwest US to Native Alaskans, and in her career she has seen as shift in the way that museums work with these communities-from a post-colonial way of working toward facilitating greater access to collections for indigenous people. She has learned how objects from these communities are more than just objects-they are an embodiment of culture, traditional knowledge and memory, and this has affected how she carries out examination and documentation. She touched upon the idea that working with artists in this way always involves a risk-benefit assessment; that there is a middle ground to be found between artist intent, object meaning and conservation needs.

Landis stressed the importance of working collaboratively with indigenous communities so that we can better interpret, document and exhibit their material culture. While most of the consultations she spoke about were in-person, she also briefly mentioned a live video consultation carried out as part of the Living Our Cultures, Sharing Our Heritage: the First Peoples of Alaska at the Smithsonian. Using new technologies for this type of interaction may allow for more conversations and collaborative projects to take place that otherwise might be prohibitively costly or logistically difficult. For any consultation, Landis stressed the importance of preparing in advance so that this experience can result in a meaningful information exchange and to allow a real dialog to take place.

Landis concluded her talk with a discussion of the fact that the missing link for ethnographic conservators is spending time in these communities. She recently worked with NMAI to organize a trip for their conservators and Mellon fellows visit communities in and around Santa Fe and Albuquerque. This type of experience offers the unique opportunity for conservators to being to make the link between the objects and the culture, the people and the landscape.

Charles Stable spoke next about a project at the National Museum of Scotland, where the museum worked with a Maori artist to recreate missing components of a war canoe in the collection. The canoe has mostly resided in storage and it cannot be attributed to a specific Maori community-it was likely made as a trade piece-and has been challenging to interpret. As a result, the museum consulted with Maori artist George Nuku, who suggested that the canoe was a pastiche that was not constructed by a Maori. He recommended that certain components be removed and replaced and the museum worked with him so that he could create pieces using his own inspiration and materials. Both Nuku and the museum wanted it to be obvious that these new components were reproductions, so Nuku chose to make these pieces in his material of choice-Perspex, which is essentially the same as Plexiglas. After creating these components he added new abalone shell inlays, and bound the pieces to the rest of the canoe using traditional methods.

During the talk, I believe that Charles mentioned that Perspex is not a stable material and so there would be issues with its preservation over time. Perspex is a Poly (methyl methacrylate)-I’m still not certain why it has preservation issues-it’s possible that due to the way Nuku carves into the Perspex, which may make it more brittle? If anyone else knows more about this please leave a comment!

In the end, this project was an attempt to balance the integrity of the object with Nuku’s interpretations and artistic expression. While some may find this type of work controversial, Charles pointed out that all of the additions made are reversible. To hear George Nuku speak about this project and to see him work on the new canoe components, follow this link.

The third speaker was Glenn Wharton, Time-based Media Conservator at MoMA and NYU Conservation Center faculty member. Glenn spoke about several projects at MoMA that have involved working with artists to exhibit their work many years after they were created. In the case of these artists and their work, there were questions about how the exhibition should look or be configured, so he requested interviews. He discussed the fact that working with the artists in this way results in the conservator, curator and artist working together to construct the authenticity of the artwork.

Glenn presented several examples, including Valie Export’s 1967-68 “Abstract Film No. 1”, John Maeda’s 2004 “Reactive Books” and Bruce Nauman’s 1993 “Think.” In some cases, because of technology or because the fact that the original artwork was a performance piece, the work as it was originally shown could not and cannot be exhibited. In these cases, Glenn has worked with the artist to identify the essence of their work and how this can be properly communicated to the public in a new exhibition. He spoke about the re-exhibition of these pieces as “translations” and “reconstitutions” of their artwork. In some cases, the pieces are re-dated to include the new date of exhibition, since this new exhibition is still part of the piece. So, for example, Bruce Nauman’s Think was originally created and exhibited in 1993 as 2 videos playing on 2 CRT monitors on a metal table with playback equipment, but in 2009, the videos were exhibited on 2 plasma screens on DVD. Nauman’s Think is now dated 1993/2009.

Glenn also spoke about his conversation with John Maeda, who felt that his work, which incorporated CRT monitors and plasma screens, was not about technology, but rather about people interacting with the work. He felt that this interaction should be filmed and perhaps this was the best way to exhibit (or preserve) the work into the future, however Glenn also mentioned that this idea may not be fully resolved by the artist or the museum.

Questions and discussion followed the talks, including conversations about artists’ “afterthoughts”-the fact that an artist’s idea of what the essence of their work is may be a moving target. Glenn reminded everyone that even in these more extreme examples that were presented, all interventions are reversible, which allows for future reinterpretation and changes to be made-both by the artists and the museums.

Several people voiced opinions about the notion of an artist reinterpreting another artist’s work-some people took issue with this and others thought this was interesting and an important way to involve artists. Conservation, after all, is not neutral either, no matter how much of an attempt we make for it to be. This led to a discussion on the importance of documentation-as we all know, no matter what decisions are made, it is important to document both the interventions and the decision-making involved. Landis also commented that documentation helps us to take the subjectivity out of our decision-making.

I thoroughly enjoyed this session and the discussion-it was evident that this was a topic that can and should be revisited repeatedly in the future-especially as museums and the role that they play in our culture evolve. I hope that anyone reading this will feel welcome to leave comments as well to continue this discussion and to raise any points that I failed to mention!

Creative Endeavors and Expressive Ideas: Emerging Conservators Engaging through Outreach and Public Scholarship – Outreach to Allied Professionals

ECPN interviews emerging conservators reaching out to professional allies

LeeAnn Barnes Gordon, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

Tell us a little about yourself-your background, where you’re working now and what you do in your current position?

I’m a recent graduate of the Winterthur/University of Delaware Program in Art Conservation. I work at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (MFA) as the Sherman Fairchild Fellow in Objects Conservation. At the MFA I am engaged in a variety of general conservation activities including examination and treatment, scientific analysis, exhibitions, and outreach. Through my conservation duties I interact with a broad range of museum professionals, interns, and the general public.

I have a special interest in archaeological conservation, and last summer I worked as the conservator at an archaeological field school in Cyprus.

I have been actively involved with AIC undertakings including several recent OSG Archaeological Discussion Group projects and the AIC Conservation Wiki.

What form of outreach are you using? If it is an online tool, please specify which platform (Blogspot, Tumblr, Twitter, etc.)

In the fall of 2011 I worked with members of the OSG’s Archaeological Discussion Group to create a brochure on Archaeological Conservation.

Who would you say is your target audience?

The primary audience for the brochure is field archaeologists, including project directors, staff, specialists, and students.

What were/are you trying to achieve using this form of outreach? Was it met or solved using this particular approach or tool?

The OSG’s Archaeological Discussion Group wanted to raise awareness among archaeologists about archaeological conservation as a profession. The group was keen to find ways to improve the accessibility of conservators to address statements that archaeologists “don’t know how to find conservators” for their projects. The brochure was created specifically as a handout for archaeological conferences, such as the Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA), where it would supplement a booth display about conservation. The brochure provides a convenient, portable reference about archaeological conservation with a focus on excavations at both terrestrial and underwater sites. It includes online resources and contact information. Colorful photographs, many of which were supplied by emerging conservators working on archaeological materials, are featured throughout the brochure to illustrate a variety of conservation activities described in the text. Most importantly, the brochure highlights archaeological conservation as a profession by emphasizing the specialized training that conservators of archaeological materials receive, as well as the role of our national membership organization, AIC, in establishing codes of ethics and guidelines for practice. At the 2012 AIA Annual Meeting the brochure was available at an exhibit booth hosted by AIC.

Is there anything you would do differently, or any recommendations you would make to other conservators who might want to use your approach / tool for themselves?

In general, creating a brochure as an outreach tool provides a flexible format that can be used in both a printed and digital form. At the AIA meeting we had positive comments and feedback about the brochure. I thought the handout was successful because it is a tangible resource that archaeologists can take with them, but it is important for AIC to maintain a presence at conferences and meetings like this in order to continue to network and reach more individuals.

Have your outreach endeavors produced any unexpected outcomes or benefits?

Not that I’m aware of….it may be too soon to say.

Check out the Archaeological Discussion Group’s website to learn more about this new initiative: www.conservation-us.org/archaeology

Archaeological Conservation Brochure Acknowledgements: Jessie Arista, Claudia Chemello, Suzanne Davis, Morgan Gilpatrick, Molly Gleeson, Susanne Grieve, Steven Koob, Ariel O’Connor, and Ruth Seyler.

Tara Hornung, Denver, CO

Tell us a little about yourself-your background, where you’re working now and what you do in your current position?

I came to conservation as an artist and discovered museums while an apprentice at the Fabric Workshop and Museum in Philadelphia. I have worked in museums for over ten years and earned my masters degree from the Conservation Center, New York University. Currently, I am a conservator in private practice providing conservation consultation, project management, and treatment services for archaeological, historic, and artistic objects in private and museum collections.

What form of outreach are you using? If it is an online tool, please specify which platform (Blogspot, Tumblr, Twitter, etc.).

I present workshops for artists on archival materials. I am a photographer and printmaker, so I focus on teaching hinging, matting, and framing for artists who work on paper. Although that is not my specialty as a conservator, I consult with colleagues on best practices and try to translate that for artists.

Who would you say is your target audience?

For my framing workshops, I am targeting artists who are interested in best practices for exhibiting their works on paper and photographs. Most recently, I presented a workshop at the Light Room: A Photographic Community in Philadelphia.

What were/are you trying to achieve using this form of outreach? Was it met or solved using this particular approach or tool?

I try to teach the basic vocabulary of archival materials so that artists can choose products based on a knowledge of what I ‘archival’ means vs. a product label. I demonstrate the basic techniques of archival hinging/ mounting of works on paper and photographs, and work with individuals to problem solve a best practice solution for their artistic vision. Finally, I try to convince artists that it is worthwhile to choose archival materials. I believe that the workshop format is successful because it is a forum for dialog and discussing specific solutions.

Is there anything you would do differently, or any recommendations you would make to other conservators who might want to use your approach / tool for themselves?

My approach is informed by my own background as an artist with an understanding of the cost and time of preparing works for exhibit. I present best practices and then suggest a middleground based on how the workshop participants are willing to allot time and money.

Have your outreach endeavors produced any unexpected outcomes or benefits?

I convinced a workshop participant to stop using double stick tape to mount his salt prints. I continue to learn techniques for mounting and framing works on paper and photographs, which expands my knowledge of the field of conservation and fosters commraderie with my colleagues.

To learn more about Tara’s work, check out: http://artifactconservationservices.com/

Or her Facebook business page: Artifact Conservation Services

Creative Endeavors and Expressive Ideas: Emerging Conservators Engaging through Outreach and Public Scholarship – Private Practices Build Conservation Awareness and Opportunities

ECPN interviews emerging conservators in private practice

Liz Chayes, Orange County, CA

Tell us a little about yourself-your background, where you’re working now and what you do in your current position?

I am a 2008 graduate of the UCLA/Getty Conservation Program, which is a three year graduate program that focuses on the conservation of ethnographic and archaeological materials. Through the program I gained conservation experience in museums and archaeological sites around the world, including Africa, England and Australia. Prior to graduate school, I worked in museums, archives and archaeological sites within Southern California for eight years. In addition to the daily management of Indigo Arts Alliance, I am currently working as an independent conservator for the Santa Barbara Museum of Art.

What form of outreach are you using? If it is an online tool, please specify which platform (Blogspot, Tumblr, Twitter, etc.)

In 2008, I co-founded a non-profit called Indigo Arts Alliance, which is a free web-based resource for conservators that contains financial support through grants in addition to news, job listings and a community network.

Who would you say is your target audience?

Our primary target is art conservators, and has expanded to include many interest levels and disciplines including museum professionals, collection managers, students, and the interested public.

What were/are you trying to achieve using this form of outreach? Was it met or solved using this particular approach or tool?

First and foremost we wanted to have fun and to help others in the field. Since our launch in the Fall of 2011, we have had a very positive response. One of the elements of the site we’re proud of is our Network page, where people can connect, create groups and invite others to post and chat. This area of our site is the fastest growing and has a really positive response. In addition, we established a grants program as a source of financial support for professionals in the field. This was an important part of our mission since we have known many conservators who have given up great opportunities for lack of funding. This year will be the first we are accepting applications for Indigo’s financial awards so it is very exciting!

Is there anything you would do differently, or any recommendations you would make to other conservators who might want to use your approach / tool for themselves?

I would say to find what you love to do then share it. For those involved with Indigo, we have a passion for philanthropy and conservation and it is a privilege to be able to combine them both for the benefit of others.

Have your outreach endeavors produced any unexpected outcomes or benefits?

The other day a pre-program student in rural Connecticut contacted Indigo and thanked us for being a resource for her as she didn’t have any in her immediate area- it inspired me to continue to be a source of support and information for others who are interested in the field at any level.

To learn more about Indigo Arts Alliance go to: http://indigoartsalliance.org/

Emily G. Phillips, Essex, NY

Tell us a little about yourself-your background, where you’re working now and what you do in your current position?

I am a 2008 graduate of the Buffalo State College Art Conservation program, specializing in paintings conservation. Soon after I established a private practice located in Essex, NY (close proximity to Burlington, VT). As owner and operator I oversee all the day to day management of running a business and get to work on a pretty wide range of projects and clients.

What form of outreach are you using? If it is an online tool, please specify which platform (Blogspot, Tumblr, Twitter, etc.)

I currently use Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and a WordPress blog. They are mostly linked to eachother for ease of management.

Who would you say is your target audience?

My target audience at this stage is the general public and fellow conservators.

What were/are you trying to achieve using this form of outreach? Was it met or solved using this particular approach or tool?

I am trying to peak there interest and educate them on our field.

Is there anything you would do differently, or any recommendations you would make to other conservators who might want to use your approach / tool for themselves?

Pace yourself and plan. The web is getting noisy with everyone starting up blogs and facebook pages and twitter accounts. Content has to be good, nice images help too. Also try to link your online tools so they update eachother, makes them more manageable.

Have your outreach endeavors produced any unexpected outcomes or benefits?

I am constantly blown away by a follower from Japan “liking” a post, or someone in Australia retweeting my tweet. It really helps when in private practice to feel the world is accessible and people are listening.

To learn more about Emily’s practice and online media network, visit:

www.phillipsconservation.com

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Essex-NY/Phillips-Art-Conservation-LLC/276647438370?ref=search

http://twitter.com/adkconservator

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting – Outreach Session, May 10, 2012, Communicating Conservation with Nancie Ravenel, Rosa Lowinger, Heidi Sobol, Melissa Tedone, and Beth Doyle

This outreach session brought together conservators from different parts of the profession to discuss how they have communicated conservation through social media, especially blogging.

Nancie Ravenel introduced the session, she has been running a very successful Flickr site to promote conservation at Shelburne Museum. Nancie presented for Rosa Lowinger. Rosa Lowinger’s paper focused on a television interview that she gave after the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Rosa had prepared for the interview and cleaned her lab, set up a few art pieces she wanted to talk about, and felt that the interview went well. 6 months later she saw the interview and she was shocked at how she appeared, while she felt she was slightly irreverent during the interview, she thought she came across as incompetent. This experience taught her a few lessons about working with the press that she shared:

1. Everything you say is on the record, do not share anything you do not want quoted.

2. If you know you are going to be interviewed, prepare. Prepare some anecdotes you want to present.

3. Don’t do your thinking out loud, take your time before you answer something tricky, as you can be quoted on anything you say.

4. Make sure your space is ready to be recorded as well, clean your space, remove any confidential information out of sight.

Rosa also blogs for www.c-monster.net for the column ‘Ask the Art Nurse‘ and she had a few pointers for bloggers.

– All the rules of journalism apply to blogs, you should check the Electronic Frontier Foundation for more information about your rights.

– Consider your audience and format accordingly, people want to see pictures and not read text (something I am not following in this post, sorry!)

– Be generous with links and link to other sites, they will in turn link to you, ask to use images, you can register with MoMAPress as a blogger to gain permission to use images.

– For music check Freemusicarchive.org or soundcloud.com.

– For video there is www.artbabble.org/

– You should have a clear point of view, be pithy and informative and not self-important, blogs are not digital versions of our academic position papers, but they are living with pictures, videos, and they are interactive.

The next presentation was from Heidi Sobol and Mark Farmer at the Royal Ontario Museum. Heidi presented about 2 case studies from the ROM. The first case study was from ‘Restoring the Palampore‘ which was a video blog on the ROM website and Youtube. This covered a major treatment and highlighted the opening of a new gallery.

Visitation:
366 unique page views
time spent ~ 4 minutes
86% bounce rate (high)
77.4% exit rate (high)

The second case study was a series of blog posts titled ‘On the mend‘ that followed the treatment of a portrait of a Chinese official. These posts were text with images, encouraging the visitor to check back to see new posts while the treatment progressed.

On the mend
241 unique page views
time spent – 57 seconds

Overall, visitors to the Palampore site spent longer (probably to watch an entire video) but did not read much else on the ROM blog. Visitors to the On the mend posts were 2x as likely to read other posts, showing an increase in ‘stickiness’ for these posts.

She emphasized that the most popular posts are ‘behind the scenes’ and conservators should take a popular event or topic and then embed scholarly facts to really capture an audience.

The final presentation came from Melissa Tedone and Beth Doyle, about a collaborative project between Iowa State University Library and Duke University library where they work, respectively. Each library uses different social media, Duke has Youtube and Pinterest while both libraries use Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, and WordPress. The collaboration meant the libraries chose a topic that interested them and wrote a post, then posted on the same day and linked to each other. Blog posts covered a variety of topics and included a ‘Quick Pic’ series, when a post would only contain an image.

There were many questions about a social media policy and Richard McCoy said the IMA has posted online about the creation of a social media policy and encouraged conservators to review the policy information.

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting, Conservation and Education II, May 10

Chaired by Beverly Nadeen Perkins, Chief Conservator for the Buffalo Bill Historical Center, this session included 4 interesting presentations. All focused on post-secondary education in conservation for students in allied professions.

Beverly began the session by stating two important beliefs from early in her career: 1) that she should share information freely with other conservators, and 2) that she should be cautious about sharing information with non-conservators. Over time, however, she has come to believe that her knowledge and experience can and should be shared with all. To facilitate conversation on this topic, she chose two questions for the presenters and the audience to discuss following the talks. Sadly, the session ran out of time and no discussion was possible. But if you attended the session and are reading this post, perhaps you’d like to comment and discuss here? Here are the questions:

1) To what extent should conservators be involved with directing and educating upcoming artists about their use of art materials? Is there any ethical dilemma here? Would conservators be overstepping their bounds by doing so?

2) How is increased outreach and education among allied professions impacting the role of conservators?

In presentation order, the talks in this session were as follows:

Ingrid A. Neuman, Conservator at the Rhode Island School of Design Museum of Art, in Providence, Rhode Island, gave a fascinating overview of her work with young artists at the Rhode Island School of Design (RISD). At RISD, she educates undergraduate students about art materials, with the goal of enabling them to make informed choices about the materials they use. Her teaching includes information about how to use art materials safely and about how to manipulate them to achieve desired effects. She also described her work with the “Sitings Competition.” In this program, degree candidate students at RISD can apply to create site-specific installations in the Museum of Art. Working with Ingrid, the students are introduced to issues in exhibition conservation and to tools like MSDS sheets.

Ingrid linked conservation to artistic creation by enumerating common activities shared by conservators and artists, including: problem solving, creativity, repurposing, borrowing, and experimenting. She also discussed the reasons to transmit knowledge to young artists. Practically – their work will be acquired by collection institutions. Idealistically – conservators have a professional obligation to share knowledge. Realistically – professors of art are responsible for educating students about artistic processes, not the chemistry and deterioration of art materials.

Finally, Ingrid noted that while this population might not be seriously invested in preservation at this moment in their careers, their views may change over time. In future, she would like to survey recent alumni about what they found valuable and what they would like to have learned in regard to art materials and preservation. She also encouraged conservators to participate more in education at art schools, suggesting that more widely available, quick, and simple classes on this topic would be beneficial.

Nina Roth-Wells and Lauren Lessing spoke about their work with students at Colby College in Waterville, Maine. Their goals at Colby are to give students a hands-on connection with art, to expose them to the field of conservation, and to instill in them the importance of cultural heritage in a comprehensive and inclusive way. Nina and Lauren talked primarily about two courses they’ve been involved with at Colby College, a special January term course (a month-long course between the regular academic terms), and an upper level chemistry course.

Nina, a conservator in private practice and an instructor at Colby College, spoke about the January term course that she designed and taught. The class was open to all students, not just those in related disciplines like art history. In fact, she observed that art history students had a harder time engaging with the physical, material aspects of artwork than did students who had never studied art. Nina shared the structure of the course, in which she tried to present a wide range of conservation activities to her students. The class included many field trips, as well as lab-based activities. Notably, students were required to write condition reports and to propose and defend conservation treatments (although no treatments were conducted – a disappointment to some students). The collections of the Colby College Museum of Art were used for these activities, and the assignments encouraged students to think about how conservation treatment might change the informational value of artwork and artifacts.

Lauren, the Mirken Curator of American Art at the Colby College Museum of Art, talked about the need to make academic museum collections valued and useful for students and faculty across campus (an incredibly important goal!). At Colby, she has worked to expand the Museum’s collections use from the art department to the humanities, social sciences, and sciences. More specifically, she spoke about engagement with an upper level chemistry course focusing on instrumental methods and analysis. The Museum’s involvement with the class has evolved over time and, thanks to assistance from Nina, now includes a concrete connection to art, as students examine artwork with different, measured wavelengths of light and use a digital camera to produce infrared reflectography.

Both Nina and Lauren stressed the ways in which conservation can build bridges to the humanities and made the point that opportunities for sustained examination of cultural heritage materials are rare and valuable in today’s world of mediated, virtual looking.

Norman Muller, Conservator at the Princeton University Art Museum, in Princeton, New Jersey, gave a very practical talk focused on the activities he has used to successfully teach technical information to art history students. His work, as presented in this talk, has focused on teaching the materials and technology of painting.

Norman described how he introduces students to examination techniques and to technical analysis. His teaching helps students see how paintings in a particular school, or during a particular time period, are related in a physical, technical way, deepening the students’ understanding of artwork and enabling them to evaluate paintings in multiple ways. He also discussed the ways in which he works with students in the galleries at the Princeton University Art Museum.

A truly committed teacher, Norman demonstrated the use of a 14^th century Siennese triptych model that he built (!) to teach students about the construction of panel paintings. He also presented information about an exhibition he designed to share technical information about paintings with students and visitors at Princeton’s museum.

Katherine Untch, Director of the Conservation Division at ARG Conservation Services in San Francisco, California, spoke more broadly about conservation education for allied professionals. Her presentation posed multiple, wide-ranging questions about education and conservation.

In evaluating conservation education, Katy encouraged conservators to examine what allied professionals should learn and why, and what conservators are teaching and why. She also asked conservators to think about the ways in which conservation education relates to education in allied professions, and what conservators might learn by looking more carefully at what is taught in those professions.

In a disturbing portion of her talk, Katy reported that allied professionals have told her they prefer not to work with conservators because conservators are inflexible, don’t deliver to expectations, and are not team players. As an audience member, it was not clear to me how many professionals had expressed this view or in what context the criticism was delivered. Katy made the point that conservators must learn how to engage and respect other professionals, and learn to work more efficiently and effectively in teams.

Katy also examined professionalism and respect among conservators. Are we wise to criticize past treatments? Do we define our jobs too narrowly by always focusing on treatment in outreach? To illustrate this last point, she examined a series of conservation images online, all of which showed treatment activities. To balance this focus on treatment, Katy argued that we should share more of the complexity of what we do. She further encouraged conservators to develop joint curricula with allied professions, and to pay more attention to feedback from non-conservator colleagues, including whether or not we are meeting their needs. Opportunities that she enumerated for conservation education in future included expanding opportunities for continuing education and expanding research degrees at the doctoral level in joint fields. Finally, she listed a series of concepts that conservation educators could focus on in teaching, including team and project based learning, process based decision making, and the development of communications skills.

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting: Conservation Conversations: Audience, Fundraising, Institutional Support, and Career Paths

At the annual meeting this year, I appreciated that many of the sessions incorporated and allowed for conversations and discussion between the presenters and audience, and this session was no exception. The first half featured 3 more traditional-style presentations followed by a dynamic panel interview with 3 conservators whose career paths have diverged from the bench.

Sari Uricheck opened the session with a strong presentation on “Promoting Conservation.” She spoke about marketing and PR and how the field of conservation needs to work on its message and image, and offered some concrete ideas for how we can start doing this. She pointed out the fact that conservation has weak “brand recognition” and made important points about the fact that terminology matters. We use so many different words to describe our work-conservation, preservation, collections care-but we need to be consistent in our language. Public Relations is about communicating and image control is part of this. Sari urged us to use the term “conservation” to describe our work.

In her talk, Sari outlined some essential elements of a successful conservation PR campaign. She discussed the need for an association audit-what do audiences connect with conservation? Among the public, people often think of paintings conservation. In museums, many of our colleagues may associate conservation and conservators with being difficult or saying “no”, and among allied professionals, conservation may be associated with a large expense. Using PR, we can plant associations that we want people to make. Our messages should be explaining what conservation makes possible-we should be communicating “YES” not “NO”. Sari also pointed out that targeting allied professionals is just as important as targeting the public and that we need to highlight the fact that conservation is central to all museums’ missions.

Sari also discussed the idea of borrowing from a social organization model by Dr. Marshall Ganz-“Self, Us, Now.” The idea is that we as a profession can draw unity, inspiration and power from our personal narratives to form a collective identity. And the urgency of “now” is often difficult to convey-why conservation now? There are ways to convince people that conservation is important now, such as organizing events around Preservation Week and May Day. Sari pointed out that the US is about a decade behind Europe when it comes to promoting conservation. She urged us to take action now to bring about a greater awareness of our field and what we do. I liked Sari’s talk and I think that her message is spot-on. I’ve been working on AIC’s PR Toolkit, so I particularly appreciated her ideas and I hope to start working on incorporating them into this resource soon.

Carmen Li spoke next, about a project at the Museum of Northern Arizona (MNA), where she helped develop a project using social media for fundraising, in conjunction with a collections move project from 2008-2011.

Money had been raised to build a new collections center, but the museum needed funding for supplies and equipment. So the “Save-a-pot” campaign was started to solicit small donations and to highlight research taking place behind the scenes. They started with a Facebook giving campaign by making a video featuring the prehistoric ceramic collection, showing the collection in its old storage conditions and then in the new storage location, and showing the progress of the move. The video was made using still shots, assembled with Final Cut Pro, edited using Quicktime, and uploaded to Youtube.

They made this into a “microgiving” campaign and let people know what their money would help fund-$5 for 50 hot glue sticks, $100 for a roll of Tyvek, etc. The key points of their campaign was that it told a story, it allowed for multiple donations of small amounts of money for specific causes, it showed how the donations would be directly input into the museum and the project, and it was based on the belief that philanthropists need not be millionaires.

Unfortunately, after all of that work, the director left and the campaign wasn’t launched. So instead they posted the video on the MNA homepage and they still managed to raise funds. The lesson Carmen left us with is that while social media is easy to use, it isn’t necessarily simple to use it effectively and successfully. She also stressed the fact that museums need to be open to their staff taking on different roles.

In the third talk of the session, Catriona Hughes and Sarah Kay spoke about how the National Trust moved conservation projects into the public spotlight, which helped increase revenues and visitorship. Early on in properties within in the National Trust, visitors were shown finished rooms and conservation was done off-site or in the off-season. When work had to be done on-site, there was no access or interpretation for the public. In 2001, there was pressure for the Trust to increase revenue and open properties for longer seasons, which meant that conservation could no longer take place in the off-season, and lead to an effort to bring greater awareness to conservation and to make these projects more interactive and participatory.

Conservation projects started to be carried out with transparency, and they found that public engagement is a powerful way of building support and is a tool for unlocking funding. An example is the Attingham Re-discovered project, which began in 2006 in an effort to make interior improvements to the Attingham mansion. By drawing visitors into conservation debates and decision-making, they saw an increase in visitors by over 100%. Marketing and social media played a big role in this as well-they launched Attingham Park TV on Youtube.

By putting conservation front and center, the National Trust found that they could generate support, encourage funding, increase visitor numbers and raise the profile of conservation and the value of traditional skills.

These inspiring presentations were followed by a talk show-style interview with Scott Carrlee, Nicola Longford and Susan Mathisen, led by Julie Heath. All three conservators’ careers have diverged from the bench into other areas, including museum and institutional development, administration and community outreach. I found this part of the session so interesting and inspiring-all three said that their education, training and experience in conservation gave them confidence and curiosity needed to contribute and to be successful in these other roles. In their new positions, they can also act as important advocates for conservation. In this economic climate, with seemingly few jobs and opportunities, hearing from Scott, Susan and Nicola was an excellent reminder that there are many ways to be effective in caring for collections and that there are more ways to be a conservator.

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting – CIPP Seminar Reaching Out – The Art of Using Outreach to Grow Your Business

The following post was written by CIPP Chair George Schwartz:

Those in attendance in the fully booked CIPP Seminar Reaching Out – The Art of Using Outreach to Grow Your Business were not disappointed. We held our breath listening to all the exceptionally useful and practical material presented by out two charismatic and animated presenters.

Ann Shaftel took the podium first and held our attention with her anecdotes, while giving us practical advice on how we can increase our visibility to the public. Ann spoke from the perspective of many years of practical experience. She wrote a regular newspaper column as an expert in preservation, conservation and restoration, appeared on regular radio and TV programs, live to air call in shows, and even movies.

She explained practical ways of capturing the attention of the audience, to educate and enlighten listeners on the finer points of our field. Ann addressed ethical and legal issues that can become unforeseen pitfalls in doing public outreach. It was obvious that her hard work in putting together her program paid off by capturing the attention of everyone present. We’re grateful for her efforts.

Scott Haskins followed with his presentation after a brief intermission. Those of you who know Scott, already appreciate his success and expertise in social media outreach. During his rapid-fire presentation we also got to appreciate his incisive critical thinking, his quick wit and exceptional good humor.

Scott came very well prepared. Within minutes of the start, we were making unbelievable videos without any camera equipment and posting them on YouTube. Here is a link to the one I made: http://tinyurl.com/7p6l7co . Most everyone came up with something useful just by following Scott’s instructions. He showed us other facilities to produce useful promotional outreach materials and what’s even more important, advice on how to determine who our audience is, what the content needs to focus on and how to avoid the mistakes that so many people tend to make.

I cannot meaningfully summarize the hundreds of points we touched on, but check back here on the AIC Blog as Scott has prepared some useful information which he plans to post online soon.

In closing I have to say, that the knowledge that I gleaned during these presentations was alone worth the cost of my trip to Albuquerque!

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting – Case Studies I: Public Outreach in the Developing World Session, May 10, 2012

The Balance Between the Conservation and the Dissemination of the Art Museum of the

Central Bank of Colombia Collections

Adriana Paez Cure

Middle East Photograph Preservation Initiative: Learning in Collaboration

Nora W. Kennedy, Debra Hess Norris, Zeina Arida, Rima Mokaiesh, and Tram Vo

Heritage Without Borders – Tackling Skills Shortages In The Developing World

Dominica D’Arcangelo

This interesting session addressed three initiatives in South America, the Middle East and Europe that provide conservation training, preservation resources, and public education to underserved regions of the world.

Heritage Without Borders brings together qualified and motivated young professionals (volunteers) to help solve heritage problems and build local capacity. While participation is limited currently to UK residents there is the possibility that this restriction will change. They seek people who are excellent communicators and value education and training and who enjoy the challenge of developing creative solutions to real problems. Emerging conservators and senior professionals are welcome to participate in wide ranging projects. Removing the barrier of cost Heritage without Borders aims to help alleviate poverty through the improvement of heritage provision. 2011 projects were organized in Turkmenistan and Bosnia.

See info@heritagewithoutborders.org OR www.heritagewithoutborders.org

The Middle East Photograph Preservation Initiative (MEPPI) is a strategic training and outreach initiative to promote the preservation and awareness of photograph collections in the broad Middle East, from North Africa and the Arab Peninsula through Western Asia. MEPPI is collaborating with several partners. This multi-faceted initiative includes a survey of collections in the region, a series of courses for collection custodians with a distance mentoring component, and a symposium focusing on the rich photographic legacy of the Middle East. MEPPI Beirut 2011 welcomed 18 participants from leading photograph collections of the greater Middle East, including national archives and libraries, museums, press agencies, and universities from Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine and Syria.

See http://www.meppi.org/ Or http://www.getty.edu/conservation/our_projects/education/cons_photo/cons_photo_meppi.html

While the Central Bank of the Columbia Museum of Art is not leading a global training initiative, this presentation reaffirmed the conservator’s varied role as administrator and practitioner, especially when dealing with the challenges of modern and contemporary art and a demanding exhibition schedule.

See http://www.banrepcultural.org/museodearte.htm

Lessons learned from these unique projects and global preservation activities include;

Importance and value of collaboration with multiple partners who contribute expertise and financial or in-kind support .
Enormous value of on-site and engaged partners who welcome expertise, can mediate project development and implementation, and remain committed to public access to collections at-risk
Need to develop sustainable solutions to build capacity and better ensure continued impact
Need to respect and embrace regional traditional preservation practices while advancing conservation practice and understanding
Importance of multilingual glossaries to facilitate conversation and advance understanding
Need for cultural sensitivity and clear understanding of goals of all global partners
Focus on the highest of standards connected with unvarying flexibility
Always identify in-country resources, including adequate storage enclosures
Potential for international projects to advance preservation awareness and best practices and connect communities globally
Value of distance mentoring to strengthen education and build a strong cohort of workshop participants
Opportunity to connect our efforts to successful and prominent global initiatives, including Doctors Without Borders
Potential for these projects to build confidence, advance skills, and expand marketability of emerging conservators

N.B. This post was written by Debra Hess Norris, Henry Francis DuPont Chair of Fine Arts, Chair and Professor, Art Conservation Department, Associate Dean for Graduate Education & Interim Associate Dean for the Arts, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Delaware.

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting – Public Art Outreach Session, May 10, 2012

This group of sessions presented various projects of outdoor murals, public sculpture, and architectural elements and how the general public was involved and/or contributed to the efforts of preservation and cataloging of the collection.

Leslie Ranier, of the Getty Conservation Institute, began the session with a discussion of the 1932 Siqueiros mural, America Tropical, located in Los Angeles across from City Hall. Although the artist had been commissioned to portray a particular subject matter, he instead used the opportunity to comment on American imperialism. Authorities were not amused and it was almost immediately painted over. As years went by and the overpainting faded, the mural began to peek through. The wall onto which the mural had been painted was partially hidden by surrounding buildings so the lack of visibility contributed to it being ‘lost’ to the public. By the 1960s, however, there was a public call to restore the mural and the GCI became involved in the 1980s. A temporary protective shelter was erected to provide protection. By the 1990s, an agreement was signed with the city to provide treatment which is currently underway. A more permanent shelter is being designed by Brooks + Scarpa Architects, along with an interpretive center (with the help of IQ Magic) and an observation platform which will bring the public up to eye level with the restored mural. (http://www.pugh-scarpa.com/projects/siqueiros) Outreach activities for this project include: site visits for the public and officials to view conservation activities, screening of a 1971 documentary on the artist, staging of an opera which tells the story of the mural, production of a video of the project and its evolution, and a symposium on the legacy of Siqueiros. These activities, along with the actual conservation work on the mural, all contribute to preserve the story of the mural and the evidence of the artist’s hand.

The next presentation was by Kristen Laise, of Heritage Preservation in Washington DC. She discussed the evolution of their Save Outdoor Sculpture program which was able to bring together 7,000 volunteers across the country to catalog 30,000 public sculptures between 1989 and 2006. This effort introduced the local communities to conservation and directed attention to long neglected statues. This catalog was then made available to the public through the Smithsonian’s Inventory of American Sculpture database. The program was carried out through a combination of federal, foundation, and corporate funds and had a presence in every state in the country. (Sidebar: During the course of my own work restoring public sculptures, I can’t tell you how many times I was asked if a statue was newly installed, when in fact it had been there for a hundred years. Sometimes you just don’t see what’s in your own backyard until a project like SOS calls your attention to it.) Children’s education was one of the targets of their outreach activities and included a traveling exhibition entitled “Preserving Memory”, an education kit called “Inside Outdoor Sculpture”, and even the introduction of a Girl Scout patch program. I believe she mentioned that efforts to publish information on the program on YouTube are currently underway. With an emphasis on good visual images and extensive press coverage, Kristen stated that her office had binder after binder after binder of press clippings covering the program. Perhaps because of the huge success of the program, the National Cemetery Administration used it as a model for their own Historic Monuments Assessments program where 960 objects in 125 cemeteries were assessed, with a subsequent 76 historic monuments conserved. (Full disclosure: I was a recipient of several of those contracts.) Kristen then reviewed their follow-up program of Rescue Public Murals which was launched in 2006. The goal of the project was/is advocacy and documentation for public murals. She gave an example of a mural in Atlanta which lacked these items and was unfortunately repeatedly covered with graffiti to the point that it was no longer recoverable. Heritage Preservation has collaborated with ARTstor to publicize images of public murals (http://www.artstor.org/what-is-artstor/w-html/col-murals-heritage.shtml) in an effort to garner community support for their protection. Again, Kristen emphasized the importance of good press coverage in protecting murals, the need to have community groups take ownership, and the necessity of educating the public (in particular, any neighborhood associations within the area) as to the importance of the mural. Another aspect of the RPM program is to review existing guidelines for mural protection, to conduct artist interviews, and to do materials research to support preservation efforts.

Next up was Richard McCoy of the Indianapolis Museum of Art. After an initial blog post to challenge the public to come document IMA’s outdoor art was less successful than he had hoped, Richard took another approach and went to his museum studies students at Indiana University Purdue University (IUPUI). His assignment to them was to survey the public art within their campus and to create Wiki articles and Flickr posts to document the collection. They used SOS materials to guide them in conducting their surveys and became familiar with the importance of primary source material in creating their Wikipedia postings. The resulting blog attention to this project was so extensive that Wiki gave it an entry on their main page. And because of the use of geolocators within the Wiki posts, links to other websites and pages (e.g., a fan page within Facebook) resulted in an even greater dissemination of the information. Richard’s next effort was to bring students to the Indiana Statehouse to document the art found within the building. During this effort, students were able to bring attention to an overlooked statue that had been shown in the 1893 World’s Fair and had since been mistakenly identified (http://www.imamuseum.org/blog/2011/02/08/resolving-to-care-and-document ). To further publicize and utilize the documentation efforts of the students, the ‘book creator’ tool within Wikipedia was enabled and guidebooks to the public art of the Statehouse were produced and sold. At the beginning of his presentation, Richard stated that the premise of using Wikipedia is that rather than claiming ownership of the information, the author is giving the gift of knowledge.

The next speaker was Fabio Carrera from the Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Massachusetts. Fabio has spent 25 years collecting information on public art and architectural elements created before 1797 in Venice, Italy. His WPI engineering and science students began documenting these in the late 1980s in partnership with Earthwatch Institute volunteers, creating a wiki-based website to give access to the information to the public (http://venipedia.org/index.php?title=Main_Page ). Each object is given a single page within this website, leading to the creation of 3,068 pages of information; sematic tags within the pages allow you to search for like items. Their documentation efforts have enabled the discovery that 33 pieces within the catalog are now found to be missing. The project has continued to evolve, with efforts currently underway to create a mobile app which will serve as a guide to each of the public art wiki entries. It is to have interactive ‘intelligence’ which will allow the viewer to view condition photos of the object while standing in front of it, to provide an updated photograph, to contribute money to its restoration, to sign up for alerts when others update the catalog entry, and other ways to stay informed. This app is expected to be ready in the summer of 2012. In addition to this wiki project, Fabio has started a non-profit organization called PreserVenice.org which will collaborate with UNESCO in the preservation of the public art of Venice.

This was followed by a presentation by Andrew Smith of Sculpture Conservation Studio in Los Angeles where Andrew told the story of a glass tile and mosaic mural that had been covertly installed on a train trestle in Encinitas. The religious image (a surfing Virgin of Guadalupe) combined with the fact that the art was unsanctioned by the city, sparked controversy and the city tasked his firm with investigating how/if the mural could be removed. Because nobody had yet claimed responsibility for its creation, Andrew and his fellow conservators were at the site attempting to understand its fabrication and how it might be removed – while the public and press watched. A few remarks made by Andrew to an inquiring reporter regarding the artwork, spoken from the heart but perhaps made without thinking of the ramifications, went viral online and called even more attention to the project, resulting in international coverage and scrutiny of how the artwork should be seen. This sort of attention then placed both the client and the conservator in a difficult position. Andrew ended the presentation by prompting the audience to consider where the line is when conservators are asked to protect controversial or provocative works of art, particularly when they are not sanctioned by authorities. And we must be careful to remain aware of the public’s perception of our efforts in this age of instantaneous media coverage.

This session was brought to a close by a short video presented by Scott Haskins which was created to publicize the efforts to save a series of freeway murals created in Los Angeles as part of the 1984 Olympics. The murals were supposed to have been maintained and preserved in perpetuity but, instead, were being painted over by Cal Trans because of their legal obligation to address graffiti. Part of his efforts have included the edification of highway crews to show that the graffiti tag can be removed without completely painting over the whole mural and that the mural can then be saved (http://www.fineartconservationlab.com/save-los-angeles-freeway-murals/ ). A second closing note was given by Viviana Dominguez, who discussed the removal of three mural paintings from the Holy Trinity Episcopal Church in Haiti after the recent earthquake. Their efforts successfully saved these 3, while 11 others were destroyed during the quake.

The presentations of the Public Art Outreach Session were all very successful in showing how important it is to involve the community in preservation efforts. It is our responsibility to articulate the significance of public art, not only in terms of the importance of the artist or the placement of the object, but also its beauty, the artist’s vision, and how the object speaks to the soul. The methods through which that is accomplished have grown exponentially over the past couple decades and we need to be familiar and comfortable with the ways in which we can publicize our message.