25 Sep
2014
25 Sep
'14
11:53 a.m.
From: Jay West
Ensure that if you ever no longer wish to keep
the machine that it
winds up in the hands of another collector
This all seems eminently reasonable, but I had one question/clarification,
about the above: what about museums?
In other collecting fields I am aware of (Asian art, old racing cars, steam
locomotives) there are a range of opinions about giving things to museums. (I
personally don't have any strong feelings / axes to grind either way on these
issues, merely raise them as I know there is debate on them in other field.)
One issue with museums is that a lot of their holdings are stored out of
sight, never to be seen by the ordinary public, and in that case, they might
as well be with a collector who can enjoy them, and show them.
The other issue (only with the cars and locos) is that some museums have a
strict 'conserve it exactly as it was' policy, and since these things were
intended to be _used_, an old race car/loco that's been 'stuffed and mounted
on a plinth' (as the phrase goes in loco preservation) is akin to a zoo full
of stuffed and mounted animals.
What is worse to me is that many museums seem to regard all exhibits as
being pieces of fine art and conserve them accordingly. One 'horror
picture' I saw (relating to a major London musuem) showed some of the
workers handling parts of a prototype electornic device wearing
disposable rubber gloves. Yes, fingerprint oils and sweat do damage
objects. But ESD is a much worse problem for MOS ICs (which I happen to
knwo this deviec was full of). And yet they did nothign about that (no
wrist straps, etc0. In fact the gloves probably made it worse.
Mind you, I was in siad museum a few weeks ago. I happeneed to see one of
the memebers of staf refittign the covers on a one-of-a-kind device afte
cleaning them. The convers were fixed with slot-head screws and some
quater-turn catches. The former h fitted with a swiss army knife, the
screwdriver blade of which was not the rifght size and was burring the
heads. The latter should have been locked with a square-section key (I do
not know if straight or tapered). Instead he jammed a blade of the swiss
army knife diagonally across the sqare hole and used that to turn it.
And this was on a device of which only one wa ever made. I take more care
on relatively common devices.
Yes, using them can cause them to wear out (although there are rare counter-
examples - John Harrison's sea-going clocks H1 through H3 are allowed to run,
as their bearings, etc are thought to have indefinite life-times - which is
not the case with H4, his first chronometer, which is displayed stopped), and
also, to get one running may require replacement of some parts (although one
can always save the old parts, for historical purposes).
I find that last part particularly silly for mas-produced machines which
have been used and which were obtaiend by the museum ofter they were
taken out of service, Machines (be they computers or vehicles) which ahve
been in sue will ahve had parts replaced. To insist that no more parts
arerplaced after the museum gets the artefact -- to freeze it at that
moment in time -- seems to have no real justification.
It saddnes me to see wodnerful pieces of machinery (be they clocks,
computers, steam engiens, etc) that never run. THey were meant to be used.
Like I said, I can see both sides - just wondered what the feeling was about
this.
I've nbeen flamed for it before, I wil lbe flamed again. But I will never
let any part of my colelction go to a museum.
-tony