Wikipedia

Deaccessioning: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Hyredcryx (talk | contribs)
15 edits
Added link to artist's article
 
(30 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown)
Line 1:
{{Short description|Permanent removal of an object from a museum's collection}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=December 2020}}
[[File:Flickr - USCapitol - AOC Registrar Examines Artifacts.jpg|thumb|A [[Registrar (museum)|museum registrar]] examines an artifact.]]
'''Deaccessioning''' is defined as the process by which a work of art or other object is permanently removed from a [[Collection (artwork)|museum’smuseum's collection]] to sell it or otherwise dispose of it.<ref name=":0">Report from the AAMD Task Force on Deaccessioning. 2010. ''AAMD Policy on Deaccessioning''. The Association of American Museum Directors, June 9, 2010. Retrieved from {{cite web |url=https://aamd.org/sites/default/files/document/AAMD%20Policy%20on%20Deaccessioning%20website.pdf |title=Archived copy |accessdateaccess-date=May 1, 2015-05-01 |deadurlurl-status=yesdead |archiveurlarchive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140803191723/https://aamd.org/sites/default/files/document/AAMD%20Policy%20on%20Deaccessioning%20website.pdf |archivedate=2014-08archive-03 |dfdate=August 3, 2014 }} Accessed November 14th14, 2015.
</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deaccession|title=Definition of DEACCESSION}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.npr.org/2014/08/11/339532879/as-museums-try-to-make-ends-meet-deaccession-is-the-art-worlds-dirty-word|title=As Museums Try to Make Ends Meet, 'Deaccession' is the Art World's Dirty Word|newspaper=NPR.org}}</ref>
</ref> Deaccessioning is a practical and constructive tool of collections care that, if practiced thoughtfully supports the long-term preservation of a collection and can help a [[museum]] refine the scope of its collection in order to better serve its mission and community.
 
==Deaccession policy==
The process undertaken by a museum to deaccession a work involves several steps that are usually laid out in a museum's [[Collections policy|collection management policy]]. The terms under which an object may be considered for removal, as well as the individuals with the authority to approve the process are outlined in the ''deaccession'' section of this article.<ref name=":2" /> Additionally, this section lays out the legal restrictions and ethicethical considerations associated with removal of the object and the types of disposal that are appropriate based on the reason for the deaccession.
 
==Decision process==
Each museum establishes its own method and workflow for the deaccession process according to its organizational structure. However all object deaccessioning involves the two processing steps of deaccession and disposal.<ref name=":1">{{cite book|lastlast1 = Buck|firstfirst1 = Rebecca A.|last2 = Gilmore|first2 = Jean Allman|title = Museum Registration Methods|place = Washington, D.C.|publisher = The AAM Press, American Association of Museums|year = 2010|edition = 5|chapter = 3I: Deaccessioning|pages = 100–107|isbn = 978-0-8389-1122-8}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite web|title = National Park Service - Museum Management Program|url = http://www.nps.gov/museum/publications/handbook.html|website = www.nps.gov|accessdateaccess-date = 2015-11-November 26, 2015}}</ref>
 
The process begins with the [[curator]] creating a document called a "statement of justification,", which outlines their decision criteria and reasoning for presenting the work as a possible deaccession. In order toTo determine if a work should be deaccessioned from a museum's collection, a [[curator]] or [[Registrar (museum)|registrar]] completes and documents a series of justification steps and then present their findings to the museum director and governing board for final approval.<ref name=":1" />
 
===Deaccession criteria===
Line 16 ⟶ 18:
* The work is no longer consistent with the mission or collecting goals of the museum.
* The work is of poor quality and lacks value for exhibition or study purposes.
* The physical condition of the work is so poor that restoration is not practicable or would compromise the work’swork's integrity or the artist’sartist's intent. Works damaged beyond reasonable repair that are not of use for study or teaching purposes may be destroyed.
* The museum is unable to care adequately for the work because of the work’swork's particular requirements for storage or display or its continuing need for special treatment for proper and long term conservation.
* The work is being sold as part of the museum's effort to refine and improve its collections, in keeping with the collecting goals reviewed and approved by the museum's board of trustees or governing body.
* The authenticity or attribution of the work is determined to be false or fraudulent and the object lacks sufficient aesthetic merit or art historical importance to warrant retention.
* The work is a duplicate that has no value as part of a series.
* The work may have been stolen or illegally imported in violation of applicable laws of the jurisdiction in which the museum is located or the work may be subject to other legal claims, includingsuch butas not limited to repatriation under Thethe [[Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act]] (NAGPRA)in andthe artUnited foundStates; or the work may be subject to haveother beenlegal plunderedclaims, duringsuch WWIIas by thewith [[Nazi plunder|Nazisworks misappropriated under Nazi rule]].
 
===Deaccession justification steps===
The typical steps that need to be taken in order to justify the deaccession and disposal of the work include:<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":3" />
 
* Verification of legal status: Staff verifies that the museum possesses official legal title of the work and check their records in order to ascertain if there are any restrictions that exist in the original gift, bequest, or purchase which may hinder or limit disposal options, including transfer of copyright or trademark.
** The need to establish clear and unrestricted title is important because it ensures the museum can dispose of the work the via legal sale without risk of improper title transfer.<ref name=":2">Malaro, M. and I.P. DeAngelis (2012). A Legal Primer on Managing Museum Collections. Chp. 5: The Disposal of Objects. pp.248-272248–272. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.</ref> See ''[[tangible personal property]]''.
** Donor restrictions are also uncovered at this stage of the process. Some donor restrictions determined at the gifting or bequest of the work or works may hinder the deaccession and/or the disposal process.
*** For example, the museum is looking to deaccession one piece of a set that was gifted and the donor's "deed of gift or bequest" included a request that the set remain together. In this case, the museum might need to seek legal counsel and take the documents to a judge to gain release from the deed of gift or bequest restrictions.<ref name=":2" />
Line 43 ⟶ 45:
 
*Donation of the object to another museum, library, or archive for educational purposes
**This is the ideal disposal choice for museums as it assures that the object will remain accessible to the public. Museums seek out possible institutions where the object might a useful addition to the collection or is better equipped to maintain the object.[[File:Antonio Molinari - Adamo ed Eva.jpg|thumb|[[Antonio Molinari -(painter)|Antonio AdamoMolinari]] ed– ''Adam and EvaEve'', Anan example of a deaccessioned work: Deaccessioned in 1988 from Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and purchased by Ball State University Museum of Art, Muncie, Indiana, from Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts in 1989.]]
*Exchange of the object for another object with another museum or non-profit institution
**This is another viable method for assuring that the object remains accessible to the public in some way. Exchanges are made in such a way that there is relatively equal value of the items involved, not just monetarily but historically.
Line 50 ⟶ 52:
**Often works deaccession from the collection can be reallocated into educational programs, to be used for hands-on demonstrations, school outreach programs, or testing for conservation research. In this case it is understood that the work will be subject to physical destruction over time. In this case, the work would be re-accessioned into a study or educational collection that is not as closely monitored as that of the main collection.
*Physical destruction
**Objects that may have deteriorated due to an [[Inherent vice (library and archival science)|inherent vice]], natural disaster, vandalism, accident, or other causes as well as works that made be considered hazardous, such as those containing drugs, chemicals, explosives, or asbestos should be disposed of via physical destruction. If dealing with hazardous materials, the proper authorities should be consulted in order to determine the best method of destruction. The method of destruction will depend on the type of material and completed in such a ways as to be irreversible. This is also the best method for works that are found to be fakes or [[Forgery|forgeries]]. See ''physical examination'' above.
**Human remains or certain items of religious or cultural sensitivity might need to be handled in a prescribed way in order to meet legal requirements or cultural standards. See [[Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act|NAGPRA]] from more information.
*Repatriation.
**Repatriation is the process of returning an object to their place of origin or proper owner. This is method of disposal is used for objects found to be illicitly held by the museum, such as [[Nazi plunder|Nazi looted art]] and objects requested for return according to [[Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act|NAGPRA]]. The illicit status of an object would be determined upon claim of repatriation via NAGPRA or claim by proper owner, in the case of Nazi looted or other stolen works. In either case, clear title and provenance would be determined during the step in which the legal status is verificated. See ''verification of legal status'' above.
*Return to donor.
**Similar to the process of repatriation, if the work was donated to the museum and the donor or legal heir can be located at time of deaccession processing, the museum may elect to return the object to the donor. This is not the best option for museums for a few reasons. First, it removes the work from public accessibility and second, it can cause tax complications, as a deduction can be given for a portion of the work's value upon donation and the return of the work to the donor may result in an audit or at least IRS claim on the deduction value previously received.<ref name=":2" />[[File:Crosby Garrett Helmet on auction at Christies.jpg|thumb|An auction at [[Christie's]].]]
*Private sale and public auction.
**Another method of disposal that is not the best option for museums. Museums hold collections in the public trust for public access. Though the best manner in which to generate funds from disposal for future accessions and care of current collection, disposal of works via sale or auction takes the work away from public access and places it into the hands of private citizens.
Line 64 ⟶ 66:
The first of these ethical concerns is rather straightforward. The second has become a point of contention in recent years since museums and cities, like Detroit, have been struggling with financial shortfalls.
 
According to the [[Association of Art Museum Directors]]: "Funds received from the disposal of a deaccessioned work shall not be used for operations or capital expenses. Such funds, including any earnings and appreciation thereon, may be used only for the acquisition of works in a manner consistent with the museum’smuseum's policy on the use of restricted acquisition funds."<ref name=":0" /> This stipulation was relaxed in April 2020 due to the [[COVID-19 pandemic]] and its [[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the arts and cultural heritage|negative impact]] on museum revenues, permitting some degree of deaccession through 2022 to "support the direct care of the museum's collection".<ref>{{cite web|title=Association Of Art Museum Directors' Board Of Trustees Approves Resolution to Provide Additional Financial Flexibility to Art Museums During Pandemic Crisis|website=Association of Art Museum Directors|url=https://aamd.org/sites/default/files/press_release/20200415_Press%20Release_AAMD%20Resolution%20on%20Use%20of%20Funds_Final.pdf|access-date=September 16, 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Pogrebin|first=Robin|date=September 16, 2020|title=Brooklyn Museum to Sell 12 Works as Pandemic Changes the Rules|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/16/arts/design/brooklyn-museum-sale-christies-coronavirus.html|access-date=September 16, 2020}}</ref>
 
According to the [[American Association of Museums]]): "Proceeds from the sale of nonliving collections are to be used consistent with the established standards of the museum's discipline, but in no event shall they be used for anything other than acquisition or direct care of collections."<ref>''Code of Ethics for Museums'', AAM. Washington DC. 1994, p. 9</ref>
 
According to the [[American Association for State and Local History|AASLH]] (the American Association for State and Local History): "Collections shall not be deaccessioned or disposed of in order to provide financial support for institutional operations, facilities maintenance, or any reason other than the preservation or acquisition of collections."<ref>A Statement of Professional Ethics, American Association for State and Local History, Nashville, Tennessee, 1992.</ref>
 
According to the [[International Council of Museums]]: Proceeds should be applied solely to the purchase of additions to museum collections.<ref>{{Cite web|url = http://icom.museum/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/ICOM_News/2003-1/ENG/p3_2003-1.pdf|title = Deaccessioning and ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums|date = JanJanuary 2003|accessdatewebsite = ICOM News|websitelast = ICOMLewis|first News= Geoffrey|publisheraccess-date = ICOMDecember News7, 2015|lastarchive-date = LewisMarch 4, 2016|firstarchive-url = Geoffreyhttps://web.archive.org/web/20160304052829/http://icom.museum/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/ICOM_News/2003-1/ENG/p3_2003-1.pdf|url-status = dead}}</ref>
 
These associations have each determined to their own degree that all proceeds from sale or auction should be restricted to the future acquisition of collection objects and/ or to the ongoing maintenance of current collection holdings. Their decision and perspective on the practice of deaccession reflects a long-term view of museum collections as items held in public trust and preserved for access, appreciation, education, and enjoyment of not only today's public but the future public. See ''[[public trust doctrine]]''.
 
An example of a recent controversy over deaccessioning was [[Northampton Museum and Art Gallery]]'s sale of its ancient Egyptian [[Northampton Sekhemka statue|statue of Sekhemka]] to an unnamed buyer despite protests from local residents and the Egyptian government. In 2014, Arts Council England deleted the museum from its accredited list.<ref name="losesaccreditationbbc">{{cite news | url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-28602849 | title=Sekhemka statue: Northampton Museum loses Art Council accreditation | work=BBC News | date=August 1, 2014 | access-date=March 14, 2015}}</ref>
 
==Views on deaccessioning==
Deaccessioning is a controversial topic and activity, with diverging opinions from artists, arts professionals and the general public.<ref>{{Cite news|title = Museums Draw Scrutiny When They Sell Artworks|url = https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/arts/design/27sell.html|newspaper = The New York Times|date = 2011-01-January 26, 2011|access-date = 2015-12-December 12, 2015|issn = 0362-4331|first = Robin|last = Pogrebin}}</ref> Some commentators, such as Donn Zaretsky of The Art Law Blog critique the notion of "the public trust" and argue that deaccessioning rules should probably be thrown out altogether.<ref>{{Cite web|title = AAMD Rules Need to be Deaccessioned -– News -– Art in America|url = http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/news-features/news/aamd-rules-need-to-be-deaccessioned/|website = www.artinamericamagazine.com|accessdatedate = 2015-12March 26, 2009|access-date = December 12, 2015}}</ref> Others, such as Susan Taylor, director of the New Orleans Museum of Art and the AAMD's current president, believes that proceeds from the sale or funds from the deaccession can only be used to buy other works of art.<ref>{{Cite webnews|title = As Museums Try To Make Ends Meet, 'Deaccession' Is The Art World's Dirty Word|url = https://www.npr.org/2014/08/11/339532879/as-museums-try-to-make-ends-meet-deaccession-is-the-art-worlds-dirty-word|website = NPR.org|accessdateaccess-date = 2015-12-December 12, 2015}}</ref><nowiki/>
 
== Deaccessioning and lawsuits ==
In 2017, the children of [[Norman Rockwell]] sued the [[Berkshire Museum]] in an attempt to block the deaccessioning of their father's artworks.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Stevens |first=Matt |date=2017-10-21 |title=Rockwell's Children Sue Berkshire Museum to Stop Sale of His Works |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/21/arts/berkshire-museum-norman-rockwell-lawsuit.html |access-date=2023-12-17 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> In 2023 the heirs of Hedwig Stern filed a lawsuit concerning [[Vincent van Gogh|Vincent Van Gogh]]'s ''Oliver Pickers'' which was deaccessioned and sold to the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in Athens without a complete provenance.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-01-27 |title=Was Van Gogh's olive grove landscape another Nazi-era 'forced sale'? |url=https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2023/01/27/van-gogh-olive-grove-landscape-nazi-forced-sale |access-date=2023-12-17 |website=The Art Newspaper - International art news and events}}</ref> Also in 2023 a court in Indiana dismissed a lawsuit challenging the proposed sale of three works of art by Valparaiso University.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Lawsuit Seeking to Stop Deaccessioning of Paintings at Valparaiso is Dismissed |url=https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/lawsuit-seeking-to-stop-deaccessioning-6593502/ |access-date=2023-12-17 |website=JD Supra |language=en}}</ref>
 
==References==
Line 81 ⟶ 88:
 
==External links==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20160222065504/http://whitney.org/file_columns/0002/6177/collection_management_policy_final_4-13-09_.pdf An Example Collection Management Policy. See Section H. for policies governing the process of deaccession] from the [[Whitney Museum of American Art]].▼
* [http://www.artbabble.org/video/dia/behind-scenes-dia-part-2 Behind the scenes at the Detroit Institute of Art: Deaccessioning practices], a 12-minute video.
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20150921141028/http://law.depaul.edu/student-resources/student-activities/journals/art-technology-intellectual-property-law/Documents/jatip_all_in_a_days_work.pdf An Article from the ''DePaul Journal of Art, Technology and Intellectual Property Law'']. Vol. XXII: 119: Stephens, Heather Hope. 2011. "All in a Days Work: How Museums may approach Deaccessioning as a necessary Collections Management Tool.▼
▲* [http://whitney.org/file_columns/0002/6177/collection_management_policy_final_4-13-09_.pdf An Example Collection Management Policy. See Section H. for policies governing the process of deaccession] from the [[Whitney Museum of American Art]].
▲* [https://law.depaul.edu/student-resources/student-activities/journals/art-technology-intellectual-property-law/Documents/jatip_all_in_a_days_work.pdf An Article from the DePaul Journal of Art, Technology and Intellectual Property Law]. Vol. XXII: 119: Stephens, Heather Hope. 2011. "All in a Days Work: How Museums may approach Deaccessioning as a necessary Collections Management Tool.
{{Commons category|Deaccessioning}}
 
{{Art world}}
{{Cultural Conservation-Restoration |state=expanded}}
{{Authority control}}
 
[[Category:Museology]]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaccessioning"