-1 MUSEUM CURATOR REPLIES TO CRITICISM

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 377, 11 June 1928, Page 12

-1 MUSEUM CURATOR REPLIES TO CRITICISM

100,000 VISITORS A YEAR

SIR HENRY MIER’S REPORT

“Even in its wretchedly inadequate building. the Auckland Museum attracted about 100,000 visitors a year,” writes Mr. Gilbert Archey, curator of the Auckland Museum, in regard to a recent leader in THE SUN in which comment was made concerning the report of Sir Henry Mier on the British museums.

“The War Memorial building,” says Mr. Archey, is the first step toward giving the public real museum service, in display, school service, and research, but financial support and public interest are necessary.

“Your leading article calls for comment, because it gives but a partial account, and conveys a misleading impression of Sir Henry’s report. I cannot think you have read the report itself. For instance, you refer to ‘English expert’s indictment of Great Britain’s 500 unattractive museums,’ and state that ‘the investigator declared that the 500 museums throughout Great Britain had failed lamentably in gaining recognition as a public service and in attracting the community’s support.’ This is an over- statement, because it gives the impression that all the museums have been roundly condemned.

“Sir Henry says: ‘This report has naturally dealt with the shortcomings of the existing museum service. For this reason, little is said of those individual museums, quite considerable in number ... in which the curators and their councils are endeavouring to pursue a wholesome policy. Unless the existence and work of these museums is realised, an unfair picture will be obtained of the actual state of affairs.’ This should be said in fairness to some very fine institutions. “NOT AS BAD”

“However the condition of most of the museums is admittedly as bad as your article describes, but you do not mention the reasons, clearly stated by Sir Henry, for the failure of the duil and unattractive museums. Here they

“Buildings.—‘Only 10 per cent, of the museums in the country are housed in a separate building (good or bad), designed for the purpose.’ ‘Very few are provided with the storage rooms or work-rooms which are essential.’ “Staff.—‘Full-time paid curators: These exist in about 14 per cent, of the museums in the British Isles, and are usually well selected and efficient.’ ‘Unhappily there are about 50 museums which do not possess a curator with any of the necessary qualifications.’ . . . ‘in more than half there is no skilled assistance whatever.’

‘. . . in only a dozen or so is there a full-time competent curator with an adequate staff.’ “Finance.—The museums have been starved. Where, as is often the case, they are under the library, the a**t gallery and museum committee of the municipality, the libraries receive a lid or 2d rate, sometimes even -'d, while the museum has to be content with or less. ‘Some are under such bodies as the parks, markets or even the cemetery committee!’ Almost invariably the museum has had to play Cinderella to the library both in regard to finance and staff. The report gives frank criticisms of indiscriminate collecting, wearisome display, lack of school services and the failure of many museums to carry out scientific research. “Indiscriminate accumulsition of ar-

tides is to be distinguished from the acquisition, for scientific purposes, of far more specimens than can be, or should be, displayed. But, where large and important collections are judiciously made, often the lack of adequate storage-rooms and cases has led to the exhibition of purely study series. “Sir Henry considers nq museum to be giving full service unless it is carrying out scientific research; but he points out that the lack of accommodation and of equipment prevents study being carried out. “The report gives details of the annual expediture on museums in the British Isles, and the following items are relative to the question of provision for the Auckland Museum: Liverpool (802,940), £11,400 a year; Bristol (376,975), £13,265 (museum and art gallery): Bradford (285,971), £5,773; Nottingham (262,634), £7,108: Leicester (234,143), £5.632: Norwich (120,000), £7,732; York, (84,000), £4,619. “These are all good museums, most of them in buildings much smaller than that which Auckland has provided. Liverpool is larger, having 64,000 square feet of exhibition space to Auckland’s 50,000; but this is by the way. . “MUSTY MUSEUMS” “The tenor of Sir Henry’s recommendations is for the snffall, inefficient, ‘musty’ museums to pursue a definite policy, if a limited one, and to bring themselves up to the standard of the live institutions. Many towns are washing hundreds of pounds in ‘supporting’ inefficient museums, wheras ‘a great effort and a very large expenditure are required to set the whole service in order and to supply deficiencies’ —i.e., instead of wasting hundreds they should be spending thousands. “The report says what this service should be. ‘No museum, however excellently planned and furnished, can be of real public use unless it attracts and teaches the inquirer, acts as a stimulus to school children, and offers tempting opportunities of research to the student.’

“To return to your article, it must at once be admitted that your final remarks are fair and just; but it may equally fairly be added that if ratepayers or their representatives will not pa.y the few thousands of pounds a year required for the upkeep of the museum, they cannot possibly get full recreational and educational service from it.”