I am tempted to trot out the old definition of a cynic ( one who knows the
price of everything and the value of nothing) in response to the suggestion
to Anna Greening from her Museums colleague.
Many archival pieces of great informational value are not of interest to any
collector I know of (and the converse is also true), so I see no way that
this suggestion is either helpful or applicable. A valuation for insurance
purposes, which is really the cost of conservation to a damaged document
that is still safeable is the closest we should aim for, and if the
depositor (another little difference from the practice of many museums
there, I think) likes to think of that as the "value" then they are welcome
to do so!
Bruce Jackson
Lancashire Record Office
-----Original Message-----
From: Anna Greening [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 06 September 2000 14:13
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Subject: Valuations for potential archival donations
Here at The Fawcett Library we are at the cutting edge of
mixed-media administration with librarians, museum
professionals and an archivist on the staff.
At our Collections Management Group this morning, one of my
museums colleagues expressed the opinion that it is
unethical to take in material without a prior
external valuation by the donor.
I have always muffled commercial valuation in decent
obscurity unless for a very good reason - insurance,
acquisition by purchase, or in lieu of tax (something which
has not come my way).
What do colleagues think?
Anna Greening
Archivist
The Fawcett Library
London Guildhall Library
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|