30 Jul
2010
30 Jul
'10
3:34 p.m.
On 7/29/10 2:11 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
This is something I havea great problem with...
Any computer which has been seriously used for many years is likely to
have been repaired. And thus some of the parts are not the originals. If
it no longer works, (even if it's in a museum), there is nothing (to me)
to be lost by replacign the minimum numner of parts to get it going again
(this means, of course, component-level repair). After all, if those
repaires had been done the day before the machine was given to the
museum, then the museum would almost certainly still have accepted it.
Of coruse any repairs done should be locked, and if possible the
replacement parts marked to indicate they are replacemnts.
An example of this (not computer-related) is the Salisbury Cathedral
clock, which is one of the oldest mechanical clocks in the world. It was
origionally a foloit balance, then conveted to pendulum operation about
300 years ago, A bit later it was replaced and the old movemt pusehd to
one side in the tower. Fortunately, about 100 years ago somebody relaised
what it was, and it was broguht out for public viewing, and restored.
It was restroed (as far as they can tell) to the _original_ state -- that
is with a foliot balance (it wasn't complete enough to be run in the
'found state' as a pendulum clock anyway). The restoration was obviously
docuemtned, and the replacement parts are painted a slightly different
colour so it's possible to tell what's what. And seeing it in operation
is certainly impressive.
differ, realistically, from repairs made to
the
system during its service life?
I just had a discussion with another curator about what we've
been talking about here.
The short answer is the world changes after a machine ends its
'useful life'.
You have no control over what was done while an example of material
culture is being used. Once it becomes an EXAMPLE of what the tool,
etc. WAS, you have to think of the object differently.
What you are trying to preserve is rarely new, you WANT to save
its provenance, warts and all.
Sure. If there have been modifications done to the computer during its
working life, you may want to preserve them. Or in some cases you may
not IMHO.
--
Using a car analogy, some possibilities are:
1) it is new
2) you make it appear to be new (repaint, NOS parts, etc.)
3) you preserve as much of the original as possible (basic object conservation)
So, what we have been talking about about is case 2
If you are an average collector you want 2 to be as close to 1 as
possible, since it increases its perceived 'value'.
Museums, with the goal of preservation of an artifact as an example of
the times that they were used, stay around 3
I can see the difference, but I still think museums have got it wrong!. A
machine that can be operatied is of more interest (and more use,
historically) than one that can't.
-tony