Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Matrix ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register
Patreon importer is back online! Tell your friends ✅

Museums vs Private Collections, Part 2 (Patreon)

Published:
2020-12-24 19:38:41
Imported:
2021-03

Content

Scheduled for December 31.

Files

Belongs in a Museum Pt 2

http://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons https://www.floatplane.com/channel/ForgottenWeapons/home Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! http://shop.bbtv.com/collections/forgotten-weapons Contact: Forgotten Weapons 6281 N. Oracle #36270 Tucson, AZ 85740

Comments

Anonymous

I think you meant "lepidopterist", not "botanist" :)

Anonymous

Also is there a Part 1 that I missed somewhere or is that coming?

Sean Smith

I totally agree with your point about the direction of museums changing, and I also totally agree with the reasons why it happened.

Anonymous

Here's another form of "de-activation," although not as physically destructive. We visited the Cody Firearms Museum several years ago (great museum), but were astonished to overhear a docent explaining that cowboys were generally not allowed to carry their guns with them while working! Sort of clashed with all the Charles M, Russell (working cowboy) art work in the adjacent wing of cowboys on horseback wearing sidearms, but a better fit if there's an agenda at work.

Anonymous

"That's it Mister, you just lost your Museum Archives privileges!" The deactivation standard you're describing is true for all the countries in the EU, as it is the new EU standard since 2018. it was pushed by France after the Paris attacks, as those were allegedly perpetrated with "re-activated" firearms.

ppeeks

Ian, what arms museums existed, but exist no more, that held and displayed the sort of comprehensive detail about anything in their collection? As far as I know, such "museums" were essentially just display spaces for someone's private collection, were small operations, and had no need to operate at a profit or break even, for that matter. "Public" museums -- at least in their display spaces -- have always catered to a wider audience more interested in breadth than depth, generally speaking.

Anonymous

Full of excellent points, Ian. I think your (surely correct) claim that the only real test of a firearm is how it fires and handles is bound to reduce museum specimens somewhat to the status of interesting artefacts. I feel the same way about museums of cars and motorbikes and aircraft. Sure, depending on the museum and their age, some exhibits do indeed get taken out and started, even driven and very occasionally flown. But this can involve great expense in terms of mechanics and - in the case of aircraft - formidable problems of airworthiness, insurance etc. It's the problem shared by all displays of functional objects reduced to merely being looked at. One usually goes away with a feeling of having missed something essential.

Chairman

Ian, the thumbnail makes me think you should use the traveling map video from Indiana Jones when you travel (plane, train and car traveling all over the world). Or at least switch out the "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego" from the old PBS show with "Where in the World is Ian McCollum."

Anonymous

That's much the same comments that I've heard from a retired curator of the Mississippi War Museum at Camp Shelby. They're actively removing guns from displays because modern thought is guns are icky, and focusing on personalities. It's truly a shame too. I got to volunteer in the vault for a few years to help preserve the guns being donated, and saw some amazing things that I'll never get to see again at that museum.

Anonymous

My experience with museum curators has been that they appeared to hold the collection as wholly their personal collection and were unwilling to allow artifacts to be approachable or examined. Visitors are treated not as aficionados, but as "occasional thrill seekers". Questions are pushed aside by "have your people contact my staff" dismisses. Artifacts offered or donated are stashed away in the backroom because they are of minor interest to the current curator or there are no funds available for there restoration or display. Agreed some private collectors will fall into these same bailiwicks, but most I have met quickly realize that we both enjoy the same stuff and will spend as much time as wanted on opening their collections to inquiry and demonstration. It doesn't take much effort to convince me that you like guns, or pocket knives, or duck decoys. Have a seat, we'll talk, would you like a beer?

Anonymous

Museums certainly have changed, though I don’t think that it is entirely because of the internet. The Smithsonian Institution has a tremendous gun collection that hasn’t been on display for some time. As late as the early 1960s, a substantial amount of the collection was on display in the Arts and Industries building. When the Smithsonian opened up the Museum of History and Technology (Now renamed the Museum of American History) , the collection was moved there. Since that time, the Smithsonian has opened buildings dedicated to flight, the American Indian, and now African American History. And the History and Technology building has taken on a new role as just dedicated to American History. So, even though floor space has increased with three new buildings to display artifacts, the gun collection, along with the collection of steam locomotives, farm implements and a collection of naval ship models depicting the growth of the American Navy have been removed from the floor for other exhibits. The museum has, however, expanded its educational outreach programs to aid educational professionals teach American and World History and there are specialized rooms available to researchers who wish to study items in their collections (including the gun collection, btw.). Last year, the Smithsonian, in conjunction with a program sponsored by the University of Maryland and GW University, made part of its collection of coins available to graduate students participating in a seminar in which the topic of discussion was mercantile development during the colonial period of American History. So I think that museums have bifurcated their role. The collections are still available for serious study, but exhibits on the limited floor space hit the highlights in an interactive fashion instead of the rows upon rows of curio cabinetry they used to display items in.

Tiger in man's clothing
>>50493650

A shame France is unwilling to admit that they have been selling firearms and ammunition to terrorists for decades and these sales came back to bite them on the ass for their poor choices.

Tiger in man's clothing
>>50379204

If you can rewrite history you can rewrite reality, or so some people think. In actuality they are forcing the next generation to relive the mistakes of those who are trying so hard to rewrite history.

Anonymous

Dear Ian,

Anonymous

You raised some good questions about the role of museums.

Anonymous

If I may provide some parallels with antique airplane museums and private collections .... They range from strictly collecting rare airplanes to offering "discovery flights" to the precious possessions of filthy rich men.

Anonymous

I learned a lot about antique airplanes while working in the parachute industry, specifically the pilot emergency parachute industry. I had the good fortune to start with Manley Butler who specialized in custom-building PEPs to exactly fit the seats of the flood of WALLIED and communist-surplus warbirds that flooded into the American market during the 1990s. Many of these warbirds were converted to carry a second person, but configurations varied widely. For example, the USAF only bought a handful of P-51D Mustangs that were converted to carry two pilots ... and they only bought them post WW2. Nowadays, the majority of civilian-owned Mustangs have two seats. Many these two-seater Mustangs now sell "discovery flights" to the general public. Charging a thousand dollars per "discovery flight" may sound excessive, but it barely covers the cost of overhaul and maintenance. Unless a private collector is filthy rich (e.g. Paul Allen) they need donations to keep their collections airworthy. To that end, British warbird overhaul shops are converting rare Spitfires, Messerschmitts and even a Hurricane to add an extra seat. Only handfuls of two-seater Spitfires and Me.109s were built during WW2 and zero Hurricanes left the factory with two seats. Now they are earning their keep flying members of the general public on "discovery flights." OTOH Gov't funded museums (e.g. Rockcliffe, Canada) have not flown most of their collections since they went on display. Many of the airplanes at Rockcliffe are the last of their type (e.g. Junkers J.1) and the museum considers them far too valuable to risk wrecking. My work on PEPs was to try and save the lives of pilots whose precious warbirds disintegrated in flight. Some aviation afficianados now question the logic of risking rare warbirds during the Reno Air Races. As an aside, I packed parachutes for many of the winners at Reno 1993 and Oshkosh 1993.

JSluka

This makes me wonder if there isn't space for a website to exist that allows for the individual cataloging and documentation of individual small arms. For example, in my collection, I have a '45 manufacture Nagoya Arsenal Type 99 with the 'mum ground off, and a '42-'43 German-built P.35(p) pistol. Neither are, themselves, GREAT examples of their pattern, but they are certainly examples that could at least be worth examining in more of a big-picture sense. I'm kind of envisioning, like, a Wiki-type thing that lets you create an indexed listing of any given weapon, sorted by pattern and serial number. You could upload photos to a gallery, and write in what little history there was for the particular piece. That way, someone like me could say "Well, I own P.35(p) number P6210; I wonder what P6211 or P6209 looked like?" Or, if you wanted to know if your particular firearm was refinished, you could locate a similar serial number and pattern and check to see how it compares. And, of course, if you happen to have, say, an M1911 that has some crazy history like that Canadian SMLE, it could be an interesting curio page.

ViejoLobo

I remember vacationing in Pennsylvania and New York in the 50's and 60's and visiting "museums" crammed with firearms, mostly blackpowder from the colonial era and the War for Independence ; holes in the wall where you could handle the firearms if you asked nicely or even buy them if you asked nicely enough and paid for the privilege. Often in a private residence, presided over by an ancient in cardigan and hornrimmed glasses. I wonder where those firearms are now?

Anonymous

Due to beginning of video, as a Spanish I can categorically affirm that my country is probably one of the most lawful disrespectful with gun collections and history, absolutely a shame

Andrey Gardner

It is not possible to learn function from a non-functional artifact. In that sense, accessible private collections are a distributed museum, great for research and good for preservation but not sight seeing. It might be a cultural difference, but I have never cared for the modern artifact light museum style. I do not go to a destination to read about the artifacts and the experiences. I do the reading at home and go out to see the goods. Thus, it is artifact density that keeps me coming back. I could not possibly appreciate the entire artifact collection in one visit, but I can skim all the artifact-less exhibits in on go. If I wanted to read a wiki article, I would read a wiki article. I want to see the real thing or better yet handle it, but that is apparently not a popular way to explore history. There is place for modern museums, or should I say exhibit halls, but it is not at the expense of artifacts and their provenance.

Anonymous

I think a lot of your arguments could be settled by better funding and cataloguing of museum pieces. Museums are starting to really take advantage of the internet with high quality photos and descriptions of pieces that allow anyone to access them any time. Encouraging these practices would allow (to my mind) the best of both worlds with artefacts being protected but also available for view, even the obscure ones. Not everything can be learned from photos, but videos like your channel does of disassembly could also be incorporated given enough time and money. The deactivation is inexcusable though. Maybe simple things like welding in a barrel block could be justified (though I wouldn't agree with it) but if you're going to weld it all shut just display a non firing reproduction made in India. It has as much provenance to the original artifacts.

Anonymous

I could not agree more Sir. I love the access to knowledge we have today. When I was a kid some 50-60 years ago, I read the encyclopedia from A-Z because I was interested in learning new and exciting stuff. Going to museums has become a rarity in my life. Sad indeed.

Anonymous

I'm not exactly sure what this particular rant is supposed to convey. I guess the gist of it is that today's museums don't serve the needs of specialists like Mr McCullum (SP?). Consider the fact that if the museums depended for their support on the perhaps .01% of the population that has Mr M's level of expertise, the museums would not exist. I'm as elitist as the next Phi Bate, but we do have to be practical. My 2c worth.

Jack92783

I couldn't agree more, Ian. In the past decade or so, I've had largely unsatisfying visits to museums largely for the reasons you posit, which is the focus on the general audience to the detriment of someone who actually wants to learn something that can only be gained from the museum. The nadir of my experiences so far has been visiting the NASA museum in Houston, where the exhibits basically handwave away anything that might potentially be interesting with "We got really smart scientists to solve the problem", which is less than you might achieve from a 3D Wikipedia article. All for the cost of ~$100 per head for the ticket and tour.

Anonymous

Very true indeed. I find myself more attracted to art museums rather than firearms centric ones simply because I enjoy art, but it is not my area of expertise or my professional vocation. I can learn more from an art exhibit than I can from a war museum. I would never consider paying upwards of 40 dollars to see examples of firearms from a particular era behind glass with the most basic of information about them attached as a side note. I will, and have donated feely the same amount to a fine art exhibit, but even then I know that those who know the industry don't find it as fascinating as I do. Alas, as you said those who are interested in firearms can find the information they seek for no more than the cost of an internet connection and a couple of reference books.

John S Wren

Difficult stuff and lots to unpack. Most museum services have chronic financial problems. Without visitor income that becomes even more problematic. That in turn necessitates an offer that's not necessarily what the "specialist" wants, but the "dumbed down" offer is what keeps the lights on, preserves the jobs of curators and their properly sourced, peer reviewed knowledge, and the collection safe. The real difference for me is that most of us are not Ian. A collector is unlikely to show me his prized collection just because I ask nicely. However, I can go to examine weapons in museums if I ask to do so. The collector route relies on word of mouth recommendation whereas the museum is egalitarian. As far as deactivation for museum objects - that's ludicrous.

Anonymous

Thank you for this video. It really explains why they’re is a history in fire arms and why they should be preserved however possible. That’s why I enjoy your videos so much. You give me a look into the history I don’t even know because it was before my time when these guns couldn’t exist