Tag: AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting, Book and Paper Session, May 9 “The Conservation of the Jefferson Bible at the National Museum of American History Smithsonian Institution”

The Conservation of the Jefferson Bible at the National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution.  Janice Stagnitto Ellis, Senior Paper Conservator, and Emily S. Rainwater, Post Graduate Fellow, NMAH; Laura A. Bedford, Assistant Book Conservator, NEDCC.

The Jefferson Bible is an assemblage of texts from the New Testament created by Thomas Jefferson, and bound into a book by Frederick Mayo. Jefferson titled this work The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth.  According to the presenters, it has been in heavy demand and exhibited frequently during its lifetime.

This project was a team effort between conservators and curators. Before beginning treatment,  the conservators in consultation with the curators, thoroughly analyzed  its condition, materials and sewing structure, and together developed a plan for treatment and materials testing. As  the folios were separated conservators and curators examined each one before it was professionally photographed, and together decided where paper repairs should occur.

The treatment goal was to not improve the appearance of the folios (through flattening, for example) or to change Jefferson’s work.  Aqueous treatment and humidification were deemed too risky. Treatment consisted of removal of the textblock from the binding, replacement of the stubs, page repair, resewing and replacement into the original binding. The original endbands and their tie-downs were retained.

It is to the Smithsonian’s (and the conservators’) credit that they were willing to share the treatment of this artifact. The Smithsonian produced a facsimile and documentary, both for sale from the Smithsonian Store, and digital images are available online. An exhibition was installed in 2011, and the conservators allowed tours of the lab while work continued.

The UVA magazine has an illustrated description of the treatment: http://uvamagazine.org/features/article/jefferson_bible

The presentation also included a description of the conservation of 2 of the source books for Jefferson’s work. It was exciting to learn more about the life-cycle of this unique work.

 

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting, Book and Paper Session, May 9 “Exploring New Frontiers: Outreach and collaboration across institutional boundaries with the treatment of De Brys’ Collection of Voyages”

Exploring New Frontiers: Outreach and Collaboration across Institutional Boundaries with the Treatment of de Brys’ Collection of Voyages. Erin Hammeke, Conservator for Special Collections, Duke University Libraries.

This presentation addressed the challenge often faced by book conservators: do we treat the item for maximum use by scholars even if that means some of the components of the current binding might be lost; or, do we retain everything that’s “original” even if some of these components might be harming the text? The conservation staff and their curatorial partners at Duke chose the first option in the treatment of 3 volumes of de Brys’ Voyages. These volumes were pulled, washed, resewn on tapes for maximum opening, and rebound in full calf bindings. The half leather bindings on 2 of the volumes were removed and stored in the new clamshell boxes constructed for each volume.

This treatment provided an opportunity to not only maximize the durability of these bindings for use by scholars, but to also make digital copies of the text, thereby making these materials even more accessible.
I have to question the decision made by the conservation and curatorial team involving an incomplete map in one of the volumes. Although a complete copy of the map was obtained from UNC and used for the placement of a fragment found tucked into the volume, the missing area was left blank. Since the goal was to make the volumes useful to scholars, why not take this opportunity to make the volume complete? This question was posed during the question and answer portion of the presentation, and the answer seemed to relate to the size or “newness” of the replacement portion. It seems to me that there were several options here. Since the book was resewn, the copy of the map could have been inserted after the original, incomplete map. Or, it could have been included with the other material in the clamshell box. The digital copy could have at least been made complete, with a note to that effect somewhere in the restored volume (perhaps it was).
The conservation of the de Brys’ Voyages coincided with a symposium of de Brys scholars that was held at Duke. The conservator (Ms. Hammeke) made the most of this opportunity by meeting with the scholars and discussing her treatment with them. She also enhanced her treatment documentation with short videos.

Generally, the information contained deep in the binding that is discovered by conservators remains hidden from scholars and curators, but this project is an excellent model of how collaboration between conservators, curators, and scholars can allow that knowledge to be shared.

40th Annual Meeting- Book and Paper Session May 09: “Change the Frame and You Change the Game?:Research and Re-evalution of the Presentation Formats of the Kunstammlung’s Paul Klee Collection” By Nina Quabeck

The focus of this presentation was the search –or self-described quest- by the staff of the Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen in Düsseldorf to return their collection of Paul Klee works to their original presentation formats.  The speaker began by giving the genesis of the Paul Klee collection at museum which has recently acquired their 100th Paul Klee artwork. 

Through study of photographs of Klee’s studio and gallery exhibitions combined with the detailed handwritten cataloging Klee himself kept of completed artworks (predominately if not exclusively paintings) lends much insight into the manner in which the works on paper were likely displayed as well.  The studio catalog was transcribed in entirety in the nine volume catalog raissone of Klee.  Currently the collection of works on paper is predominately framed in a typical “gallery” style format with a gilded molding and textile covered wooden liners.   It is likely these frames were the addition of owners or dealers to increase the cache of the artworks as Klee’s original presentations were likely very modest.  The research into what the original or appropriate presentation style of these works has lead the conservators and curators to choose to display the works on paper in a uniform manner as they are not able to recreate the original presentation of each individual work.  The selected presentation format will be a simple, thin wooden molding frame, reminiscent of the plain strip frame used for many of the paintings, with a dark stain and white mats. 

In addition to the discussion of the framing of Klee’s works the speaker also touched on the topic of Klee’s use of a secondary support on which he typically made notations about the work.  She presented several examples from the Kunstsammlung’s collection in which the works have been removed from these secondary supports.  This lead to a discussion of the role these secondary supports played in Klee’s original presentation and the challenges this will present in proper display in the future. 

This was a very interesting presentation about a project which is taking a strong look at just how important presentation and framing formats can be to the intended aesthetic of a work.  While for some artists framing/presentation are secondary thoughts if thoughts at all but the scholarship of Paul Klee clearly shows that it was important to him and an integral part of the completion of an artwork prior to leaving the studio.  In this presentation Quabeck asserts that it is the duty of the conservator and curator to respect this in a similar way in which they respect the integrity of the image.

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting, Book and Paper Session, May 09: “A Creative Obession: Materials and Techniques of the Self-Taught Artist James Castle” by Nancy Ash and Scott Homolka

In this presentation Nancy Ash reported on a study of the working methods and materials of James Castle a self-taught artist from rural Idaho conducted by conservators and conservation scientists at the Philadelphia Museum of Art.   This comprehensive study including visual examination and analytical testing was done in conjunction with a 2008 retrospective of Castle’s work organized by the PMA.   James Castle was born deaf and scholars are unsure of the extent of his communicative ability outside of visual representations as it is believed that he could not read or use sign language.  Castle is known for creating soot and spit drawings, full color drawings and painting and constructions.   In relation to his art it was purported that Castle never used commercially made art supplies, instead using only self-made or found media/ materials.  It was this piece of the James Castle enigma that PMA conservators and conservation scientists set out to unravel.

The first component of the study Ash described was the in depth visual examination in which conservators found it necessary to develop a language specific to the methods and materials of Castle’s work.  An example of this was the phrase “wiped soot wash” to distinguish that a dilute application of a soot and spit slurry was applied with a wad of material instead of a brush since using only the term  soot wash lends itself more toward an interpretation of brush work.  I found this idea of an artist directed or at least artist specific lexicon very interesting in that it likely increases descriptive accuracy.

In addition to the examination of the artworks attributed to Castel the PMA researchers were also allowed to examine the contents of his studio that were donated upon his death to a museum in Idaho.  Within this collection poster paints, colored pencils and other commercial art supplies of school arts and crafts type were found among buckets of soot, sticks shaped by the artist, food packages and other non- “art” supplies.

Analytical testing confirmed the use of both the non-traditional art materials such as soot as well as some of the commercial art supplies found in his studio in the finished artworks.  This was the first confirmation of characteristic components of stovepipe soot and enzymes present in spit in the soot and spit drawings.  Other unique media identified in this study were laundry bluing used as paint and dyes extracted from colored papers by wetting as an ink or paint.   An additional result of this project was the establishment of a chronology for some of Castle’s works based on the date of introduction for pigments such as the chrome oxide poster paint and/or food packaging and advertising slogans or images.

This study and this presentation highlight the complexity of the art of James Castle, an artist who left only his works to speak for themselves and himself.

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, Book and Paper Session, May 10: “Ozalids in the Music Library: Life before Xerox” by Melina Avery

Melina Avery first encountered ozalids during a fellowship at Northwestern University Library when a large collection of music manuscripts and reproductions arrived in the Conservation Lab. Avery reports that “Ozalid” is the patented name of a diazotype reproduction process, but in common usage in music libraries, the term “ozalid” can also refer to photostats, mimeographs, blueprints, and other pre-Xerox reproductions.

Many original music scores have never been published, and delicate originals (often written on thin, “onion-skin” paper) were frequently discarded once reproductions were made. As a result, ozalids may be rare or unique copies of a given music score. Because so many different processes have been used to reproduce music manuscripts over the years, it can be challenging to firmly identify the process used and determine best practices for treatment and housing.

Avery surveyed the ozalids in Northwestern’s collections and, through visual identification, determined that 37% were diazotypes. The diazotype process was invented in Germany in 1923 and involves a reaction of light-sensitive chemicals with ammonia to produce a blue, maroon, brown, or black image. Because the chemicals were not rinsed from the paper in this process, diazotypes tend to display distinct patterns of deterioration, including darkening or discoloration of the image-side of the paper and loss of image contrast.

Avery was fortunate to acquire samples of known types of ozalids from a local music publisher to use for further testing in order to establish treatment protocols. She focused her research on diazotypes, which were the most common type of ozalid held in Northwestern’s collections.

Despite visual identification, Avery hoped to develop objective tools for identification using FTIR. She analyzed the front and back of the ozalids, and compared results to known diazotypes. Unfortunately, the spectra gave only ambiguous results.

Avery subjected ozalid and diazotype samples to common treatments, including surface cleaning, humidification, mending, and tape removal with solvents. Although diazotypes can be sensitive to moisture and displayed feathering of the media on exposure to water, she found that humidification for up to one hour could safely be carried out. She does not recommend extended humidification due to the potential for feathering, bleeding, and sinking of the media. Diazotypes have also been reported to be sensitive to heat, but Avery’s test showed no color change when briefly heated with a tacking iron, as for mending with heat-set tissue. Ethanol and acetone both resulted in feathering or bleeding of the media, but toluene did not. Based on these tests, Avery concludes that many basic treatments can be undertaken to stabilize fragile ozalid collections.

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting, Book and Paper Session, May 10: “Deceptive Covers: Armenian Bindings of 18th-Century Imprints from Constantinople” by Yasmeen Khan and Tamara Ohanyan

Yasmeen Khan and Tamara Ohanyan undertook a survey to better document the bindings found on Armenian printed books, especially those printed in Constantinople during the 18th century. Armenian manuscripts and their bindings have been well-documented, but previous reports claim that most Armenian printed books were bound in Western Europe. These assumptions were based on cover decoration that more closely resembles a Western European aesthetic rather than traditional Armenian style. While treating an early Armenian printed book at the Library of Congress, Khan and Ohanyan noted an interesting headband that appeared to be a hybrid structure of a traditional Armenian endband and a Western European front-bead endband. This discovery piqued their interest to know more about the history of the production of printed books for the Armenian diaspora communities.

The authors surveyed Armenian printed books in collections at the Library of Congress and in the Matenadaran Collection in Yerevan, Armenia, focusing on volumes in poor condition in order to examine the binding structure. Examination of the sewing, spine linings, boards, board attachment, endbands, edge decoration, doublures, and cover decoration suggest the books were bound by Armenian binders. Most of the structural elements examined appear to be based on traditional Armenian binding methods, with a general shift towards simplification and a Western aesthetic over the course of the 18th century.

Traditional Armenian bindings included thin wooden boards with the grain of the wood positioned perpendicular to the spine.  The survey showed that this practice continued well into the 18th century, with pasteboard appearing only towards the end of the 18th century.

Khan and Ohanyan believe the hybrid Armenian-Western endband may be unique to bindings from Constantinople, and may help to localize and date the bindings on Armenian printed books. Towards the beginning of the century, a traditional Armenian endband is common. For this endband, a primary endband structure is sewn through each section and through holes in the board; thus the endband extends past the textblock and onto the top edge of each of the boards. A secondary endband is sewn over this structure to create a decorative chevron pattern. Khan and Ohanyan report that hybrid-style endbands began to appear on books from Constantinople in the early 18th century. Several evolutions of the hybrid endbands were noted, including a simple front-bead endband in the Western style that extends onto the boards in a similar manner to the traditional Armenian endband. Finally, towards the end of the 18th century, simple Western-style front-bead endbands were most common.

In the future, Khan and Ohanyan hope to further their study of Armenian printed books through examination and documentation of tooling patterns in the decoration of leather covers. Their hope is that, as for the hybrid endband, documentation of an evolution of styles will aid in the dating and localization of bindings.

Although the evolution of binding styles is interesting in itself and as an aid to dating bindings, it also reveals shifting attitudes in the production and use of books by Armenian communities.

AIC’s 40th Annual Meeting – CIPP Business Meeting – “Levity and Brevity”

The following was written by George Schwartz, Chair, CIPP

To call what we had on Tuesday, May 8, 2012 a CIPP Business Meeting would be a misnomer. We conducted no official business, because we got carried away, absorbed in a deep and animated conversation with AIC Board President Meg Craft and AIC Executive Director Eryl Wentworth who generously accepted our invitation and spent a great deal of their precious time explaining the structural differences between Specialty Groups, Networks and Task Forces, which are forms of organizational groups within the umbrella of the AIC. We were attempting to determine if it might be advantageous for CIPP to change to one of these other formats and the ramifications of such a change.

Meg and Eryl commanded the attention of all attendees who asked many clarifying questions and the time just flew by in a productive conversation. While there were no conclusions reached, after weighing the pros and cons, we decided to remain with the present structure while keeping our options open as we go forward. I want to thank Meg and Eryl for their insight, patience and for the time they so graciously granted us.

Our Business meeting adjourned with many small groups engaged in conversation long into the night, with some adjourning to the bar. In a different post, I will welcome our new directors to their positions and conclude Board business in accordance with customary practice.

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, Paintings Session, Thursday May 10, “A Chastened Splendor: The Study and Treatment of Works by H. Siddons Mowbray” by Cynthia Schwarz.

Schwarz paper outlined the extensive and complex treatment, carried out over four years, of 9 40 x 80” lunettes painted by Mowbray for Collis Huntington’s mansion in New York. After a thorough biography and outline of Mowbray’s artistic development, she moved into a description of the nine, brightly colored allegorical female muses depicted on the lunettes, which were originally adhered to Huntington’s walls with a thick layer of white lead paint.

In the 1920s when the mansion was demolished, the lunettes were removed from the walls (quite hastily) and given to Yale University Art Museum. Unfortunately they were rolled directly around stretcher bars and stored in a less than perfect environment, which, in combination with previous water damage and some mold, left the paintings in dire condition.

Technical analysis of the paint revealed other possible causes of paint loss. In his search for an absorbent yet flexible ground, Mowbray apparently added an aluminosilicate component (kaolin) to his ground layer, which has likely contributed to the current adhesion failure between the ground and paint layers.

One of the more interesting phenomena Schwarz discussed was the occurrence of bright orange fluorescence under UV radiation in some of the areas painted a mossy green color (but not everywhere). No varnish was present, and cross sections showed the fluorescence occuring only on the surface. SEM-EDS proved the paint layer to be a combination of viridian and cadmium, and Schwarz suggested that the fluorescence might be due to a reaction between cadmium sulfide and air, resulting in a cadmium sulfate. Apparently Aviva Burnstock has conducted research on this phenomenon at the Courtauld.

Questions following Scharz presentation focused on her strappo-inspired method of removing the lead white paint from the reverse of the canvases, which involved two layers of fabric strips and Beva 371 film. The paintings were lined onto aluminum honeycomb panels, to better mimic their originally presentation. The lining involved several layers, including a sacrificial layer to aid in reversing the lining. A nice diagram explained the lining stratigraphy, though I was not quick enough to note it. The paintings are currently on view in the galleries at Yale.