1

S. Hollis Mickey
Prof. Steve Lubar
AMCV2220: Museums in their Communities

Acquisition File Analysis: Taoist Paintings (Ascn. No. 2006-7)

This is the gift and promise of material culture. Artifacts are disappointing as communicators of historical
fact, they tell us something, but facts are transmitted better by verbal documents. Artifacts, are, however, excellent
and special indexes of culture, concretions of realities of belief of other people in other times and places, ready and
able to be re-experienced and interpreted today.
--Jules David Prown

Jules Prown essentially defined the field of material culture in 1989 in his article “Mind

in Matter.” Material culture, he suggested, were man-made or used objects, and thus objects

which articulated systems of belief and meaning from other cultures and times. Prown asserted

that objects may not be able to communicate the facts or data of their own history. Yet, objects

are still valuable resources of knowing. The gap between the understanding garnered from a

material thing and the knowledge gained from archival documents and collated texts is perhaps

most evident in the museum. For the public, well-researched wall-labels impart the narratives

that the object cannot visually communicate. For curators and researchers, more than 150

words—the typical length of a label—is necessary to comprehend the context and meaning of an

object.

A primary source for the history of a particular object is its accession file. Within these

thick files compiled by curators and registrars is a wealth of information about the object which

can only be transmitted through ‘verbal documents.’ The acquisition file of Accession 2006-7,

Gift set of Taoist paintings dated to 1670 from the Brown University Haffenreffer Museum of

Anthropology makes a provocative case study. This file tells us not only about the object, but

also much about museum practice. The file points to questions about when and in what way an

object should be acquired and reveals that even with significant research the facts and histories

of an object are often uncertain.

 2

File Contents:

This acquisition file consists mostly of printed emails. These emails disclose

correspondence between the curator, the acquisitions committee, the object donor, an appraisal

film, and a researcher who was delegated to retrieve the object. Included also are several

versions of the deed of gift which reveal the acquisition of several objects not originally offered

by the donor. As well, letters from conservators evaluating the condition and conservation needs

of the objects. Also enclosed in the file is a CD of JPEG images. These photos depict a step-by-

step process of the curator opening the shipped package of artifacts, full-scale photos of each

artifact, as well as details of damage or areas of interest. In addition, included also is a museum

leaflet from the Haffenreffer which evidences an exhibition or display of similar items in 2002.

This set of documents and images offers an insightful record of this acquisition: how and why it

was made, as well as the history and condition of the objects themselves.

Story of the Acquisition:

The email correspondence reveals that in 2006 a family representative approached the

Haffenreffer wanting to make a donation of Taoist paintings from his family’s estate. Initial

emails describe that these paintings had been used by the donor family in traditional religious

ceremonies, but were no longer in satisfactory condition to be a house for gods. The family

planned to celebrate with the paintings in one final event, and then divest them from ownership

so that they might be replaced. It seems after the initial email, the curator was somewhat delayed

in responding as he discussed with the accessions committee. The representative then sends

another email revealing that the family had the firm intention to donate them to the Haffenreffer,

and no other cultural institution. If the Haffenreffer would not take the works, the family
 3

intended to ritually destroy the works. Upon receiving this email, the curator repeats his appeal

to the admissions committee.

In the curator’s second appeal he emphasizes that the donation would be “without

restrictions” and be a notable addition to the Haffenreffer’s collection. Some members of the

committee seemed eager to acquire the Taoist paintings with the basic information they have

been provided. Others have many questions: Who is the family that owns the paintings? Are we

sure they are authentic? Were they used in the home country of the family? Exactly why are they

being given? Is there space for the items? Does the museum have the resources to preserve,

conserve, and protect the items? As well, one member expresses that the family should provide a

written statement that it was their intention for the museum to have the objects. This would

ensure that in the future family members would not ask to retrieve the donation.

The curator responds quickly to these queries: the family is the Saechao Family; he

believes the paintings are authentic and were used in Laos before the family moved to the Pacific

Northwest; he reminds the committee that the works are being given because of their

deteriorating condition and the family’s inability to care for these objects any longer; he also

states that he does believe that the museum has space and ability to conserve these relatively flat

items which could be stored in an archival textile box after some basic conservation. It is

important, however, to note that at this point the curator has yet to examine the items to be

donated. In the email the curator also assures the committee he would get a statement from the

family. Upon receipt of this information, the committee agrees—apparently over email, though a

meeting may have taken place—to acquire the objects.

In response, the curator sends an email back to the potential donor family saying that the

museum will accept the donation. The email also includes a long list of questions regarding the
 4

history of the objects. Other emails in the file indicate that the curator is concurrently working

with a researcher who is a Brown University graduate, but not associated with the Haffenreffer,

to arrange the receipt and shipment of the gift. The family member immediately responds

regarding the pick up of the objects, and promises additional information later: the ceremony

with the paintings is quickly approaching and after this final event, they must be immediately

divested from the family’s home. For this reason, the researcher is scheduled to arrive at the

family’s home in Portland, Oregon immediately following the ceremony and ship them the

subsequent day.

The curator charges the researcher with gaining more information about the paintings

during her visit, as well as acquiring a photo of the family with them. However, the researcher is

unable to fulfill these requests. As she explains in an email, the sacred nature of the event meant

that she had very limited interaction with the family. In fact, both the researcher and the family

member working with the Haffenreffer were excluded from the ceremony altogether, not even

allowed to enter the consecrated home, because they lacked proper knowledge of the Taoist rites.

The researcher assured the curator that some photos would eventually be sent, and some do

appear to be on the CD in the file. Though they are unlabeled, a few of the photos seem to depict

family members in a location outside of the home.

 5

Emails reveal that the researcher shipped the donated items, insuring them, at the

curator’s recommendation, for $8,000. Some debate over which carrier to use, and eventually

FedEx is chosen for its price. Again, it is important to note that at this time no appraisal or

official condition report has been completed. When the package is received, the curator is

surprised to discover some unexpected donations. The receipt of gift lists eighteen large Taoist

scrolls and eight of smaller size. In addition to these expected items are two scepters, a

waterbowl, and an incense bowl. The images on the CD reveal a few other items later discussed

in emails conservationist as ‘masks.’ Though it is challenging to tell from the images, it does

appear that the decaying paper has holes and might be used in this way. Emails to appraisers also

mention two iron daggers, which are not pictured in the CD images.

Upon receipt of the package, the curator contacted the donor in gratitude. The family

representative responds with a request that the items be appraised for the purpose of tax

deduction and offers information enumerating the use of the painting scrolls in traditional

ceremonies of celebration and commemoration such as birth, marriage, and death. He admits his

own ignorance of their full use, but says that every year on June 6th they are brought out to

‘stretch’ under the sky.

The curator proceeds to contact several appraisers and auction houses on the donor

family’s behalf. However, all respond that they have no expert on Taoist paintings and do not
 6

feel comfortable making the appraisal. Subsequently, the curator contacts the family

representative and offers some records of recent sale of twenty-four scrolls for $6,000. He also

suggests that the family is able to list the donation as worth up to $5,000 without outside

appraisal. No further contact with the family is included in the file.

The other emails in the file are with various conservators. The conservators report the

condition of the objects thoroughly, noting a serious need for conservation. The paintings are of

varying degrees of stability—some quite stable, others much less so, as the images depict:

The conservator suggests that each item will take approximately four hours of work and will cost

around $75. Of particular concern are the masks, which do not seem particularly salvageable due

to their significant deterioration. The file does not contain information that records any

conservation efforts, though, presumably, they were undertaken for the objects were deemed

otherwise unstable.

Questions and Reflections on the Acquisition:

This file reveals what the paintings cannot—the winding path of their acquisition by the

Haffenreffer. The paintings themselves communicate another story, that of Taoist systems of

belief across generations. While this is the narrative that might be told in museum labels, what is
 7

to be learned from the other story, the story of how they got where they are today? It seems to

me that this other story is immensely valuable. The story of acquisition raises interesting

questions about museum practice that deserve further attention. First, the story points to the

importance of understanding exactly what is being acquired. More items than anticipated arrived:

What should the museum do? It is probably more costly and time consuming to return the items.

Is it the museum’s obligation to preserve and protect these items they did not intend to collect?

What should be done with them? Second, the story points to the challenges of working with

donors: How should the curator negotiate the politics of not receiving all of the background

information he had hoped for? He seems to have no choice but to accept these items without

much context.

This challenge of researching context and object history is significant, for in the case of

these objects in particular, it seems to be their particular value. The scrolls are certainly

aesthetically pleasing, but in the ownership of an anthropology museum or study collection as

the Haffereffer is, the importance of the object is its attachment to a family’s story. While the

scrolls can, as Prown suggests, tell us narratives of Taoist belief, that information is already

widely available. It seems to me that these scrolls are of worth to the Haffenreffer because of the

specific stories they might be able to communicate. Since those specific narratives are not

attached to the objects, perhaps the objects are best displayed in another context. What if the

museum used these objects as an opportunity to tell the other story the story of how museums

acquire what things fill their glass cases and are packed away in storage rooms? How might this

also tell us a story about systems of belief, social structures, and cultural practices?

Acquisition file 2006-7. Haffenreffer Museum of Anthropology.

Prown, Jules David. “Mind in Matter.” Winterthur Portfolio. 17.1(1982):1-19.

<http://www.jstor.org/stable/1180761>.