Open Forum

To elaborate: given discussions about how full museums  are these days when it comes to collections and having acquired thousands of things in various jobs (the number is large because of some large individual gifts), I believe museums continue to collect, or new ones are founded to do so.  Existing places expand as they give arguments that more space is needed for collections.  The collection abundance issue is also an argument for disposing of collections.  I have written about deaccessioning often over the years. 

Essentially - there is a lot of stuff out there, be it new art, future historic artifacts, or things of recent scientific value.  Deciding what to acquire is, or should be, a defined deliberative process under the authority of staff responsible for collections reflecting what is to be collected, or possibly collected.  I am a collection maven and believe the only thing that makes museums unique is having, keeping, and presenting things relating to our natural and human universe for public benefit and for the long term (however that is defined) (perpetuity is a popular term). Recognizing that the idea of long-term can be wishful thinking, it is, nevertheless, a notion museums strive to adhere to as most make preservation a top operating priority.  Thanks!

Steve  

Hi Steve,

What's the purpose of the essay? Publication by itself (where?) or in a collection of themed articles? Anticipated length?

At the National Museum of the US Air Force, we're always collecting the new -- trying to anticipate what will be important in the long run by applying historical knowledge and professional experience to collection development keyed to what's happening in the present and the near future. Making judgments about what's going to be important has paid off for us in many cases, but not all. And we do indeed have space issues! 

Cheers,
Doug

To elaborate: given discussions about how full museums  are these days when it comes to collections and having acquired thousands of things in various jobs (the number is large because of some large individual gifts), I believe museums continue to collect, or new ones are founded to do so.  Existing places expand as they give arguments that more space is needed for collections.  The collection abundance issue is also an argument for disposing of collections.  I have written about deaccessioning often over the years. 

Essentially - there is a lot of stuff out there, be it new art, future historic artifacts, or things of recent scientific value.  Deciding what to acquire is, or should be, a defined deliberative process under the authority of staff responsible for collections reflecting what is to be collected, or possibly collected.  I am a collection maven and believe the only thing that makes museums unique is having, keeping, and presenting things relating to our natural and human universe for public benefit and for the long term (however that is defined) (perpetuity is a popular term). Recognizing that the idea of long-term can be wishful thinking, it is, nevertheless, a notion museums strive to adhere to as most make preservation a top operating priority.  Thanks!

Steve  

Sorry Doug and Katie; I see I neglected to say my idea is to organize a book of essays about collecting new things for museums of all stripes. I believe in hearing from those who make decisions about collections and work with them.  My shelves are full of books by museum-outsiders who have no inner-museum collection experience.  When I say "museums of all stripes" I am including those from the three categories I define as museum types: science, history and art.  Your museums fits my idea.  And a museum need not have that name in its name.  Children's museums can be an associated sibling as I would love to hear an example of how one collects if that is part of a mission.  I should add that I am seeking input from museums collecting for the long-term, which is, as we know, referred to optimistically as In perpetuity - a word that remains undefined but some museums may have time-limits on their collection retentions.  Museums live in an evolving collection whirl these days.  When I started thinking about collecting new things I had hoped to make decisions on what the future would think of them in addition to how directly they connected to the museum's mission, setting aside contemplations on how that might change in the future.  I would love to pay authors but suspect that is not on the horizon though I would provide free copies (whoopie).  If I am to be paid an honorarium I am happy to share it by author annually.  I would submit the book idea to our field's best publishers: Rowman & Littlefield, recently a part of Bloomsbury Publishing, Inc. and Routledge but I have no problem proposing it to other houses.  I would like to reserve some editorial input to each essay but in the past I have only had to edit work submitted by authors for whom English was not his or her first language.  These folks were fine.  If a publisher wants to weigh in that might be a consideration.  I would write an introduction which I would send to all participants for prior approval.  Though I have had five books published (and a 6th by me) I am a novice in the world of publishing so any and all advice is appreciated.  I do know that getting illustrations rights is essential and I would rely on the authors to provide that.  This is obviously a ways off as I am just now assessing interest.  Both of your questions are spot-on, at least in my experience: how and why does a particular museum decide to collect something new and does it have a policy for that, and is the care and preservation of the thing(s) part of that policy and decision making process.   

Thanks so much!  Steve    

Hi Steve,

What's the purpose of the essay? Publication by itself (where?) or in a collection of themed articles? Anticipated length?

At the National Museum of the US Air Force, we're always collecting the new -- trying to anticipate what will be important in the long run by applying historical knowledge and professional experience to collection development keyed to what's happening in the present and the near future. Making judgments about what's going to be important has paid off for us in many cases, but not all. And we do indeed have space issues! 

Cheers,
Doug

To elaborate: given discussions about how full museums  are these days when it comes to collections and having acquired thousands of things in various jobs (the number is large because of some large individual gifts), I believe museums continue to collect, or new ones are founded to do so.  Existing places expand as they give arguments that more space is needed for collections.  The collection abundance issue is also an argument for disposing of collections.  I have written about deaccessioning often over the years. 

Essentially - there is a lot of stuff out there, be it new art, future historic artifacts, or things of recent scientific value.  Deciding what to acquire is, or should be, a defined deliberative process under the authority of staff responsible for collections reflecting what is to be collected, or possibly collected.  I am a collection maven and believe the only thing that makes museums unique is having, keeping, and presenting things relating to our natural and human universe for public benefit and for the long term (however that is defined) (perpetuity is a popular term). Recognizing that the idea of long-term can be wishful thinking, it is, nevertheless, a notion museums strive to adhere to as most make preservation a top operating priority.  Thanks!

Steve  

Sorry Doug and Katie; I see I neglected to say my idea is to organize a book of essays about collecting new things for museums of all stripes. I believe in hearing from those who make decisions about collections and work with them.  My shelves are full of books by museum-outsiders who have no inner-museum collection experience.  When I say "museums of all stripes" I am including those from the three categories I define as museum types: science, history and art.  Your museums fits my idea.  And a museum need not have that name in its name.  Children's museums can be an associated sibling as I would love to hear an example of how one collects if that is part of a mission.  I should add that I am seeking input from museums collecting for the long-term, which is, as we know, referred to optimistically as In perpetuity - a word that remains undefined but some museums may have time-limits on their collection retentions.  Museums live in an evolving collection whirl these days.  When I started thinking about collecting new things I had hoped to make decisions on what the future would think of them in addition to how directly they connected to the museum's mission, setting aside contemplations on how that might change in the future.  I would love to pay authors but suspect that is not on the horizon though I would provide free copies (whoopie).  If I am to be paid an honorarium I am happy to share it by author annually.  I would submit the book idea to our field's best publishers: Rowman & Littlefield, recently a part of Bloomsbury Publishing, Inc. and Routledge but I have no problem proposing it to other houses.  I would like to reserve some editorial input to each essay but in the past I have only had to edit work submitted by authors for whom English was not his or her first language.  These folks were fine.  If a publisher wants to weigh in that might be a consideration.  I would write an introduction which I would send to all participants for prior approval.  Though I have had five books published (and a 6th by me) I am a novice in the world of publishing so any and all advice is appreciated.  I do know that getting illustrations rights is essential and I would rely on the authors to provide that.  This is obviously a ways off as I am just now assessing interest.  Both of your questions are spot-on, at least in my experience: how and why does a particular museum decide to collect something new and does it have a policy for that, and is the care and preservation of the thing(s) part of that policy and decision making process.   

Thanks so much!  Steve    

------------------------------
Steven Miller
Doylestown, PA

Executive Director Retired
Boscobel Restoration, Inc.

Original Message:
Sent: 09-15-2025 08:29 AM
From: Douglas Lantry
Subject: Collecting the New: essay sought. Thanks! Steven Miller

Hi Steve,

What's the purpose of the essay? Publication by itself (where?) or in a collection of themed articles? Anticipated length?

At the National Museum of the US Air Force, we're always collecting the new -- trying to anticipate what will be important in the long run by applying historical knowledge and professional experience to collection development keyed to what's happening in the present and the near future. Making judgments about what's going to be important has paid off for us in many cases, but not all. And we do indeed have space issues! 

Cheers,
Doug

------------------------------
Doug Lantry, PhD
Curator and Historian, Research Division
National Museum of the United States Air Force
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH
douglas.lantry.1@us.af.mil
nationalmuseum.af.mil

Original Message:
Sent: 09-12-2025 06:20 PM
From: Steven Miller
Subject: Collecting the New: essay sought. Thanks! Steven Miller

To elaborate: given discussions about how full museums  are these days when it comes to collections and having acquired thousands of things in various jobs (the number is large because of some large individual gifts), I believe museums continue to collect, or new ones are founded to do so.  Existing places expand as they give arguments that more space is needed for collections.  The collection abundance issue is also an argument for disposing of collections.  I have written about deaccessioning often over the years. 

Essentially - there is a lot of stuff out there, be it new art, future historic artifacts, or things of recent scientific value.  Deciding what to acquire is, or should be, a defined deliberative process under the authority of staff responsible for collections reflecting what is to be collected, or possibly collected.  I am a collection maven and believe the only thing that makes museums unique is having, keeping, and presenting things relating to our natural and human universe for public benefit and for the long term (however that is defined) (perpetuity is a popular term). Recognizing that the idea of long-term can be wishful thinking, it is, nevertheless, a notion museums strive to adhere to as most make preservation a top operating priority.  Thanks!

Steve  

------------------------------
Steven Miller
Doylestown, PA

Executive Director Retired
Boscobel Restoration, Inc.
------------------------------

To elaborate: given discussions about how full museums  are these days when it comes to collections and having acquired thousands of things in various jobs (the number is large because of some large individual gifts), I believe museums continue to collect, or new ones are founded to do so.  Existing places expand as they give arguments that more space is needed for collections.  The collection abundance issue is also an argument for disposing of collections.  I have written about deaccessioning often over the years. 

Essentially - there is a lot of stuff out there, be it new art, future historic artifacts, or things of recent scientific value.  Deciding what to acquire is, or should be, a defined deliberative process under the authority of staff responsible for collections reflecting what is to be collected, or possibly collected.  I am a collection maven and believe the only thing that makes museums unique is having, keeping, and presenting things relating to our natural and human universe for public benefit and for the long term (however that is defined) (perpetuity is a popular term). Recognizing that the idea of long-term can be wishful thinking, it is, nevertheless, a notion museums strive to adhere to as most make preservation a top operating priority.  Thanks!

Steve