The Technology Committee set as the following goals for the upcoming year:
The Committee also discussed the possibility of serving as guest editor of a technology-related issue of Art Documentation.
For further information, contact Paula Hardin, Committee Chair.
Speakers Paula Hardin, Miranda Haddock, and Martha Mahard gave introductory remarks concerning various aspects of slide filing schemes. The session was then opened for round-table discussion of the advantages/ disadvantages of the Fogg Classification System. Martha Mahard proposed forming an advisory committee, possibly a joint ARLIS-VRA task force, to undertake a revision of the Fogg System. Suggestions were made to post proposed revisions to a web site, so that members could comment on revisions or adopt parts of schemes for their own collections.
Sheryl Wilhite GarciaAcquisitions at the Millennium: Current Business Trends presented views of three booksellers [Dirk Raes, Erasmus; Beverly Jo Karno, Howard Karno Books; and Rick Lugg, Yankee Book Peddler] and three librarians/book buyers [Amanda Bowen, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University; Allen Townsend, Philadelphia Museum of Art; and Robert Beebe, San Antonio Public Library] on the current status and developing trends in the acquisitions transaction and how recent technological advances are playing into this mix. It was enlightening for each side to hear the other's perspectives and both groups represented, as well as ARLIS members attending the session, gained from the presentations and the dialog that followed. The booksellers expressed varying views on how technological advances have affected both competition and profit margin. The smaller and specialized booksellers are feeling pressure, both in shrinking profit margins and added competition, especially due to the ever-increasing access to product availability over the internet. However this may also have the added benefit of leveling out prices for products such as OP materials and providing added exposure to the products of even the small booksellers. Librarians are facing many new challenges and opportunities in book buying and a great number of these are related to technological advances that allow better access to available materials. Presenters were asked to discuss how buying habits have changed due to online purchase opportunities, electronic publications, approval plans, institutional priorities and resource sharing. These changes differed for each presenter due to staffing, budgets, current levels of automation, and institutional restrictions. These changes have allowed libraries to locate and acquire appropriate materials for their customers in a more informed and timely fashion than was previously possible utilizing added information such as inventory status, local customer buying patterns, and information sharing through electronic mailing lists to name just a few.
Robert BeebeThis session presented the timely and sensitive topic of provenance in relation to works of art acquired during or shortly after World War II. Four speakers provided a varied perspective, from which historical, research, ethical, and recovery issues were addressed.
Jack Perry Brown, Director of Libraries, Ryerson-Burnham Libraries at the Art Institute of Chicago, gave a broad historical context to the discussion, detailing the underlying reasons that repatriating efforts are currently surfacing. The death of the individual heirs whose materials were looted might be a factor; often times, these individuals had no wish to be faced with the past, nor the objects associated with it. The fall of communism and the opening of archives previously sealed may have led to greater communication and increased access to information. Lynn Nichols' book entitled The Rape of Europa has prompted a growing interest as well. As a result, the AAMD established a set of guidelines for institutions to identify and return confiscated works to their rightful owners.
Nancy Yeide, Curator of Records at the National Gallery of Art (NGA), Washington DC, presented an overview of the process by which the NGA followed through on the AAMD's guidelines. NGA began by focusing their search on those paintings for which significant ownership gaps existed between the years 1933 and 1950. Ultimately, it was found that eight paintings had been looted during the war. However, all of these had been returned to their rightful owners following the war and were later acquired by NGA. Ms. Yeide noted that the entire process could be very complicated and multi-disciplinary. Additionally, she stated that each case is unique, which was echoed by several other speakers during the session.
Jennifer Tonkovich, Curatorial Assistant at The Pierpont Morgan Library, provided a fascinating glimpse of the curatorial side of the issue. She discussed the distinction between the AAMD guidelines and the realities of institutional practice. Ms. Tonkovich distinguished between the level of research done on the permanent collection and that conducted for objects accompanying traveling exhibitions. She highlighted some of the frustrating aspects of provenance research. One of which is the all too frequent "oral tradition," rather than the institutionally preferred written one. Regarding the research process, she stated that a well considered strategy, consisting of reasoned steps, is essential. As a suggestion for those beginning provenance research, she recommended that photographic archives be consulted, reminding her audience that many of the resources available in such archives have yet to be published.
The final speaker, Evie T. Joselow, who serves as the Research Chief at the Commission for Art Recovery, represented the claimant's perspective. She indicated that interest in art reclamation has arisen, in part, due to the overall interest in reclaiming other material, such as insurance monies, property, etc. She noted that there is no such thing as a "safe" or "clear" provenance. Even so, she feels that the process should be one of sharing, rather than one of fear. Still, the burden of proof lies with the claimant to prove ownership. The process itself can be one that is extremely time-consuming and emotional. She emphasized that each case is unique, requiring a certain amount of creativity. She concluded by stating that we must allow the institutions in which stolen works are suspected the necessary time to do their research.
Jon Evans