In a message dated 1/28/2004 11:08:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
there is something that comes 
along in terms of leadership or funding that makes it difficult or impossible 
for 
the public to have access to the wonders wrought by the people who came 
before 
us (mostly female).  
The leadership of museums would say that they are the slaves of the tastes 
and fashions of the public. There is a very complex dance that results in what 
is shown and featured in museums. Museums want to get people in the door. The 
curators might be interested in something, but they are not going to display it 
unless they think the public will come and increase their visitation numbers. 
In order to figure out what people are interested in curators follow auction 
markets to see what people are buying. Currently there is virtually no market 
for lace in America that I can detect. 
What makes people buy one thing and not another? For one thing, there is the 
entire area of what is being written about and published in magazines and 
journals. If people read about something in a magazine they might go out and bid 
on it at an auction. If they think they know more than the dealers they buy it. 
If they are totally in the dark about what to look for, they don't. Maybe 
stimulating lace outreach programs to teach people who might like to collect what 
to look for would benefit this market.
Another source that curators look to in order to figure out what to display 
is "What do rich donors like to see?" A rich donor who comes in the door to see 
an exhibit may sponsor another exhibit. In the 1920's lace collecting was 
big. The Needle and Bobbin Club was, even more than a club of lace collectors, a 
club of "Big Donors to Museums". At the time there was an entire room devoted 
to lace at the Metropolitan Museum. As late as the 1960's the MFA in Boston 
sent limousines to pick them up at the airport when a bunch of them flew to 
Boston to see a textile exhibit there. The curator gave them lunch in the Trustees 
Dining Room.
This huge passion for lace collecting is no more, which is why the lace at 
the Met is largely in the storage facility. But the problem is that the public 
supporters of the collection are all gone not that the curators are fickle. If 
the jet setters were all calling for lace, there would be a gallery of it 
again so fast it would make your head spin. The drying up of public interest in 
something could actually cause the demise of a smaller, more specialized museum.
I think the answer to having a museum devoted to lace or even to having more 
access to the lace in collections that already exist is one that is entirely 
dependent on the market for lace. Typically we on this list are more interested 
in making lace than collecting it. But the state of lace collecting is not 
entirely beside the point as far as we are concerned, if we want to see more 
exhibits, and if we want Jeri to realize the dream of a museum specially devoted 
to lace and embroidery.  
What needs to happen to stimulate the lace market, I have no idea. It seems 
to be totally dead. Perhaps the IOLI, as the only American lace organization 
should try to reach out to collectors as well. Historically, it was a club for 
collectors as well as makers, but that seems to have declined, perhaps with 
collecting itself. At the Met now, we are getting in about one collector every 
other month who brings in things she has bought at auction and asks Gunnel and 
me what they are. These people are people who have a little extra money to 
spend on things and they want to be educated. They also might be people who would 
be in a position to make small donations. Gunnel and I are doing our best to 
send them to the Lace Fairy site and the IOLI site. But actually there is not 
much for them there.
Devon
proposing a universalist answer to a pressing present problem

-
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line:
unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to