|
|
|
| How to Post Photos |
REGISTER (click here)
|
|
|
|
| How to Post Photos |
REGISTER (click here)
|
|
 SMP Silver Salon Forums
 A Curator's Viewpoint
 How do you like YOUR silver?
|
 SSFFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: How do you like YOUR silver? |
|
Ulysses Dietz Moderator Posts: 1265 |
posted 02-10-2007 11:33 AM
  
As a curator, I am presented with different ways to present silver in my museum (when I have the space to show it, which is another matter...). How do silver collectors like to see silver organized in exhibition? In our permanent Ballantine House "House & Home" galleries it is shown thematically, along with lots of other decorative arts objects; but if I manage to get permanent silver galleries someday, how do you all think it would best be arranged? Chronologically? By maker? By form/function? Style? Size? IP: Logged |
|
Clive E Taylor Posts: 450 |
posted 02-10-2007 05:05 PM
You face the same problem as all of us in our collections , plus commercial and polititical pressures added. Personally as a silver freak what I do NOT want to see is a few silver items placed " in context" with a load of associated other objects, plus a load of explaination and giant photographs. Unfortunatley in England this is politically correct, and showing a load of silver items in rows like soldiers on parade is regarded as "elitist". Personally I feel that the primary sort should be by date, with as much hard detail (marks, lenght etc) as possible so I can make my own mind up . We all often disagree with museum labels, and an accurate description of the marks -say "Lion Passant Guardant of London 1740 -1756 form, maker AG (script) probably Andy Glove" tells me far more than "George II, maker Andy Glove does". It also tells me a lot about the competance of the cataloguer as well ! But for practical purposes no curator ever has enough space for all his worthwhile items so perhaps the best approach is to take a theme to cut numbers down, say tea and coffee pots, and then class by date. Keep changing the theme on display every year or month if you can - this keeps everyones interest.In England we have a large collection of silver shoe buckles at Kenwood House. The display has not changed in years, the cataloging was done before the publication of the key work on London Makers marks by Grimwade. Result- very little can be learnt by the enthusiast, and the general public are bored. [This message has been edited by Clive E Taylor (edited 02-10-2007).] IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-10-2007 10:01 PM
I guess it depends on what the theme of the exhibit is. However things are grouped - maker, form/function, style (if the theme itself is not chronological) I would arrange the objects within each group chronologically, though, because that is the way they appeared on the scene originally. When you deal with antiques, I cannot see how anything but a historical approach makes any sense, because you are looking at the development of these objects over time, along with changes in the ways in which they were put to use. IP: Logged |
|
ahwt Posts: 2334 |
posted 02-11-2007 12:22 AM
I would love to see an exhibit where the development of some form is displayed chronologically. I would also like to see this exhibit include examples of all materials used for the particular form shown. For example, if tea sets were the form shown would it be possible for one museum to show sets made of sterling silver, silverplate, ceramic or any other material used from the beginning of the use of tea sets to the present time. I have always been interested in the cross fertilization of design ideas between the ceramic producers and the silversmiths and I have often wondered which group was historically the design leader or innovator. Also were the manufacturers of silver plate always followers of someone else’s design or did they on occasion become the leader? The time frame suggested may really be too long to be of interest to many and may be beyond the reach of many museums, but a subset of the time frame should be within the reach of most museums. IP: Logged |
|
vathek Posts: 966 |
posted 02-11-2007 11:44 AM
I like seeing items displayed in a certain historical context. For instance, when a Chippendale chair was made, how did the original owners dress? How did they wear their hair? What other types of decorative arts did they have? But by the same token I also like to see things exhibited by evolution of form as well. However, when last I was in the Met Museum in NY I thought their silver room a bit much, with glass cases full of stuff but rather too much. IP: Logged |
|
doc Posts: 728 |
posted 02-11-2007 06:05 PM
The history museum in Charleston has (or at least had) a wonderful Southern silver exhibit that was done in chronological order. It displayed both in cases of silver only, mixed with displays of tableware settings containing furniture of similar period. It also contained some British silver, both to show the import business in the South as well as to contrast American made pieces with their British counterparts. I was there on a day where a group of school children were also viewing the exhibit, and the museum also had some great educational materials to use with groups. IP: Logged |
|
witzhall Posts: 124 |
posted 02-13-2007 09:04 AM
quote: Oh, does this strike a chord! And the choices are so numerous that deciding becomes a real chore. I guess my preference is chronological by form, to show developmental changes; if the choices are made really selectively, there will be a good opportunity for learning about different forms - maybe in parallel with each other. This is an interesting thread! IP: Logged |
|
Clive E Taylor Posts: 450 |
posted 02-13-2007 12:20 PM
Quote from Witzhall This is an interesting thread!
IP: Logged |
|
FWG Posts: 845 |
posted 02-13-2007 01:32 PM
When I faced that question with my Anthropology Collections, I decided to do different cases in different ways. So I have some regional, some chronological, some on the basis of motifs and styles, some functional, and one just plain ol' cabinet-of-curiosities jumble of interesting things. But I have an advantage in that I can do whatever I want in my displays -- basically answering only to myself -- and I have a number of cases to work with. There is both aesthetic and pedagogical rationale to this variety, though. With silver, I like to see some pieces in a context like a dining or dressing table, but sometimes pieces of particular note -- historical or aesthetic or whatever -- are better highlighted by a more spotlighted kind of display. And of course the narrative you select plays a huge part in how the exhibit should be organized; a history of style should look very different from a 'silver in American life' kind of project or a designer's retrospective or a history of local production. Newark's production history lends itself to a wide range of narratives. The main problem you face, I'd say, is having to fight for space! IP: Logged |
|
Dale Posts: 2132 |
posted 02-13-2007 09:26 PM
I keep feeling that I am going to have something intelligent to say here. And I really don't. Don't think I have ever seen a museum display of silver that impressed me. From the Chicago Art Institutes's habit of labeling things: Spoon===American? to the numerous small museums with dippy spoon collections, never saw one. I really enjoy seeing a silver dealer with a booth. That probably is the way I would like museums to display silver. Haphazard display with a very knowledgeable and chatty person to explain things. No help, am I? Anyway, I tend to feel that silver is best understood not as something that falls into endless abstract catagories but as something people do. So, the table setting with plate, sterling and coin mixed together strikes me as a valid way of proceeding. Then put duplicates in boxes on the side to explain and explicate the silver. And everything else too. IP: Logged |
|
FWG Posts: 845 |
posted 02-14-2007 09:06 AM
quote: I think that's a crucial idea! In my Anthropology Collections I try to convey that through photographs of people making and using objects like those we have. It even underlies the decision to use mulitple organizational strategies, in the hope that that will help to challenge and break down the categories. The most exciting museum exhibit I've seen lately was a show of 20th-century British fashion installed in the period rooms at the Met. For those who may not know them, the period rooms are intact displays of a room and furnishings represent a particular place and time. For many people, including me, they are one of the favorite features of the Met - but they are also rigid and elitist in their notion of what is 'Important'. By installing figures dressed in everything from Burberry to Gaultier to Johnny Rotten they managed to turn that on its head, while still showing both sets of objects. I suspect many people hated it, but I loved it, as did most of the people I was there with. In pure silver, one of the most interesting exhibits I can remember are the cases of treasure-trove in the Victoria and Albert. It's fascinating to see a Viking or Celtic pile of objects, sometimes twisted and crushed into a solid mass, knowing that that represents what was important to a particular person of the time. Not too far distant from the idea of a dealer's case piled with an assortment of goods.... IP: Logged |
|
FWG Posts: 845 |
posted 02-14-2007 10:09 AM
One of the real problems in museum displays gets back to Dale's idea of having a knowledgeable person there to explain things. Obviously one can't do that, so the logical substitute would be to give lots of text. But the received wisdom in museum design these days is that people won't read text, so you shouldn't produce it. I've always argued that that is nonsense, as have others, but it's like banging your head against a wall. The silver display at the Virginia Museum that I wrote about last month, the interactive area intended for kids and neophytes, has a fair amount of text, and I regularly see people reading it all -- and then taking the brochure to read some more. Their Faberge hall also has a good deal of text, and people seem to read that as well. From my observation, what many won't read is a standard sort of curatorial label (Item, Date, Place, Provenance, etc.); but many are quite willing to read an interesting narrative. It does need to be carefully designed and written, though -- and the overall display also should allow casual viewers to walk through and be entertained by the pretty objects without having to worry their heads about larnin' nuthin'.... After all, that is in essence becoming the mission in most museums.... [This message has been edited by FWG (edited 02-14-2007).] IP: Logged |
|
Ulysses Dietz Moderator Posts: 1265 |
posted 02-14-2007 02:31 PM
Well, this has a been a gratifying response. My favorite museum overall for decorative arts generally and silver specifically is the Victoria & Albert in London. I spent four hours going through their silver galleries when I was there last--precious little for an Americanist, but fabulous silver arranged in a way to make for a clear narrative. But in the "British" galleries, they place silver in context with other equally fabulous objects, putting it all into a cultural and aesthetic context. I was staying in a hotel across the street and it was easy to obsess to my heart's content. A glorious collection without much point to the interpretation is the Gilbert Collection in London's Somerset House. Incredible things, but other than for loonies like me, I'm not sure the general public would care. Of course, it's worth going to see the insane waxwork figure of Mr. Gilbert himself. IP: Logged |
|
Ulysses Dietz Moderator Posts: 1265 |
posted 02-14-2007 02:38 PM
More from the Windbag... In my Museum's Ballantine House galleries, we have silver placed in a broadly chronological cultural context--i.e. silver arranged according to its meaning along with ceramics, glass, furniture (and also chronologically). In the exhibition I did in 2005: Style, Status, Sterling, it was all arranged chronologically, trying to show both style and development of form, as well as the cultural (anthropological) meaning. The success of texts in an exhibition is to "trick" people into reading them. Whatever a silverphile (or a serious museum-goer) might feel, the majority of the people who traipse through museum galleries don't read much label copy. This is pretty well proven through endless costly audience research and tracking studies done all over the US. We are a non-literate nation. HOWEVER, the other trick is to provide LAYERS of information, so that the casual visitor can get what he or she wants, and the more serious visitor can dig deeper. By the way, the casual visitor wants to know: WHAT IS IT? WHO MADE IT? WHERE? Period. Of course, they all want to know what it's worth, thanks to the Road Show. I've always thought that if we included current market values on all the labels, we'd fill the galleries (for a few months at least). Sad but true. We are also, and have always been, a money-obsessed nation. [This message has been edited by Ulysses Dietz (edited 02-14-2007).] IP: Logged |
|
salmoned Posts: 336 |
posted 02-14-2007 02:58 PM
Hey, price history and current value are just as valid bits of information on a piece as date and place of manufacture. Providing historical valuation provides a context that many find interesting. I don't find that a sad state of affairs, but rather a tendency to be exploited, especially in the realm of silver (a material once widely synonymous with money). [This message has been edited by salmoned (edited 02-14-2007).] IP: Logged |
|
Dale Posts: 2132 |
posted 02-14-2007 11:35 PM
Quote: One of the real problems in museum displays gets back to Dale's idea of having a knowledgeable person there to explain things. Obviously one can't do that, Why not? It is not at all clear that on any subject a museum could not find half a dozen knowledgeable lay persons and dealers to stand and explain the objects. This would involve setting aside prejudices and a priori assumptions, on the part of the museum of course. But there are such people, and they are available. Regarding the grand displays being mentioned. These always strike me as being: Dead European White Men Reaped the Rewards of Imperialism. So what? It is nice to see how the minuscule elites of former ages lived; their privileged ways and luxurious settings are of interest. Of course it always seems logical that after emerging from this, the next exhibition should be about how the guillotine works. Or the estate tax. On the other hand, there is always the idea of silver as a living art and tradition. Which would concentrate on ordinary people's contact with silver. And how silver came into the lives of rather ordinary people. How it was used. What it meant to them. Next, I shall speak against the traditional folk song "Going Up Cripple Creek". It must be replaced by "Going Up Physically Challenged Creek". IP: Logged |
|
Ulysses Dietz Moderator Posts: 1265 |
posted 02-17-2007 11:48 AM
Gee, we're veering off topic a wee bit--BUT...this is in fact the problem with exhibiting silver in general, because marketing and education departments tend to see it as "white man's treasure." Now, we happen to be among the very few museums who have collected "middle class" silver, because we have a sub-focus on Newark's silver makers--Unger and Kerr are really aimed at middle-class consumers, while Tiffany's Newark factory was still for the carriage trade. And we are also one of the few museums who have looked at and collected and exhibited silver from the perspective of its cultural meaning as well as its technical and aesthetic angles. [Of course, we haven't had the funds to publish any of this, because silver catalogues are elite and "no one will buy them."] But most museums that are "art" museums don't want middle class goods (hence the prejudice against silver plated goods) and history museums are so skittish about any elegant object these days that silver is rarely taken seriously. To me, the importance of the middle-class market is at the core of the explosive success of coin/sterling silver in America. If I ever get to do the "permanent" silver installation in a new gallery (and there is one on the horizon if we can raise the money to build our new building), I will want to do a cross-section of silver, including the most elite and the most mass-market. Fortunately, our collection can support that. Ironically, the very paucity of colonial silver in Newark's collection is really reflective of the reality that few colonial people had any silver at all--and I used that thematically to demonstrate the massive rise in silver productio and consumption by the Civil War...you go to a place like Philadelphia, which has fabulous colonial silver, and you get no sense of a middle-class market at all. Same with the Met and the MFA Boston (and Dallas, and Houston, etc. etc.). Well, that makes me feel better...if only I could publish it. Maybe before I retire. IP: Logged |
|
Clive E Taylor Posts: 450 |
posted 02-17-2007 12:43 PM
If we are going into the political correctness arena then may I fire the first shot - or throw the first javelin. Virtually all great art, as we regard it today, was a product FOR the upper strata of the society that produced it. Discuss. Notice the "FOR" the upper strata, not "BY" the upper strata. Also remember that until recently - last hundred years perhaps - the ONLY arbiters of what is regarded as great art were members of that elite. Also what makes great art ? Fine Technique, Spiritual Uplift, Emotional Content. Beauty in the eye of the beholder ? . Define Beauty. What is the value to Society of Beauty. That should keep us all arguing for the next fewe weeks ! Personally I find the current tendancy to deplore art that has been produced for the minority as the truimph of theory over practicality. IP: Logged |
|
salmoned Posts: 336 |
posted 02-17-2007 02:03 PM
Outline: 1. Greatness in most arenas is the result of uncompromised vision. 2. Large scale production/sales necessitates compromise. 3. There is, however, [in some pieces] a beauty apparent in the struggle of factors involved in production for a wider clientele. [This message has been edited by salmoned (edited 02-17-2007).] IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-17-2007 08:21 PM
quote: Many museums have been using recorded commentary for those who want more detailed information, either through push-button narration at each exhibit or by recordings available through borrowed/rented receivers/players (guided tours, for instance). Not as good as someone who can answer questions, but better than nothing. IP: Logged |
All times are ET | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a
|
1. Public Silver Forums (open Free membership) - anyone with a valid e-mail address may register. Once you have received your Silver Salon Forum password, and then if you abide by the Silver Salon Forum Guidelines, you may start a thread or post a reply in the New Members' Forum. New Members who show a continued willingness to participate, to completely read and abide by the Guidelines will be allowed to post to the Member Public Forums. 2. Private Silver Salon Forums (invitational or $ donation membership) - The Private Silver Salon Forums require registration and special authorization to view, search, start a thread or to post a reply. Special authorization can be obtained in one of several ways: by Invitation; Annual $ Donation; or via Special Limited Membership. For more details click here (under development). 3. Administrative/Special Private Forums (special membership required) - These forums are reserved for special subjects or administrative discussion. These forums are not open to the public and require special authorization to view or post. |
|
copyright © 1993 - 2022
SM Publications
All Rights Reserved. Legal & Privacy Notices |