Navigation – Plan du site
Dossier

RE-ORG: A methodology for reorganizing museum storage developed by ICCROM and UNESCO

Simon Lambert

Résumés

Partout dans le monde, environ 60% des réserves de musées sont dans un état tellement déplorable qu'il est devenu impossible pour le public d'en bénéficier, que se soit à travers la médiation, la recherche ou les expositions. Cet article propose une méthodologie pour la réorganisation des réserves (RE-ORG), développée par l'ICCROM (Centre International d'études pour la conservation et restauration des biens culturels) et l'UNESCO (Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'éducation, la science et la culture) disponible gratuitement en ligne (www.re-org.info). Afin d'examiner l'application pratique de RE-ORG, l'auteur présentera une étude de cas sur la collection ethnographique Janapada Sampada du IGNCA (Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts) à New Delhi en Inde.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

The author wishes to thank Gaël de Guichen, who planned the recent IGNCA-ICCROM workshop and whose 40 years of experience at ICCROM in over 45 countries lies at the very heart of RE-ORG. Particular thanks are owed to Nao Hayashi-Denis and Galia Saouma-Forero of UNESCO, who enabled the development of the Storage Reorganization Methodology, as well as to all members of the Storage Task Force, whose experience and contributions have greatly enriched its international dimension. For their insight and continued support, the author wishes to thank Catherine Antomarchi and Isabelle Verger, and for their comments on the manuscript, Katriina Similä and Jennifer Copithorne. Special thanks also to Achal Pandya, Head of the Department of Cultural Archives and Conservation at IGNCA and to all the workshop participants: Ritu Jain, Charu Bablani, Manjeet Kumari, Vishnu, Mekala Mani, Anil Verma, Anil Dwivedi, Gopal Singh, Abdur Rasheed, Gagan John, Subrata Das and Md. Nooruddin Ansari.

Introduction

1Over the past twenty years, museum storage has been receiving an increasing amount of attention in specialist circles, but also in the general media. In many countries, this is due to a growing awareness that vast amounts of public funds are being spent annually to maintain collections that are neither accessible to the public, nor in satisfactory condition to be used for research, exhibitions or loans. Recent research on access to collections has linked these problems to existing deficiencies in museum documentation and to the disorganization of storage areas (Keene et al. 2008, 68). It is believed that in about 60% of institutions worldwide, the conditions of storage areas are so devastating that using the collection for any museum activity has been rendered entirely impossible (de Guichen, pers. comm.).

2The aim of this article is to introduce a methodology for the reorganization of storage in small museums (<10,000 objects) that was developed by ICCROM (International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property) and its professional network, within the framework of a three-year partnership with UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) for the preventive conservation ofendangered museum collections in developing countries. This methodology was designed as a practical tool for museum staff and as didactic material for teaching programmes. To illustrate the methodology in action, a case study based on the ethnographic collection of IGNCA (Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts) in New Delhi, India, is presented. This demonstrates how substantial improvements can be achieved in eight days using the RE-ORG methodology.

Background

3ICCROM is an intergovernmental organization of 129 Member States (as of May 2011), which is dedicated to the conservation of cultural heritage worldwide through training, information, research, cooperation and advocacy programmes. Since the early 1980s ICCROM has become increasingly interested in the storage of collections and documentation. Expert missions, combined with consultations and sample surveys, have demonstrated that collections in storage worldwide are in grave danger and require reorganization. Although there are obvious problems, there seems to be a general reluctance to take action (de Guichen, pers. comm.).

4In many museums, collections continue to grow exponentially with no adequate provisions for storage (Merriman 2006). While highly visible activities such as exhibitions and publications have traditionally attracted more resources, less visible activities such as storage management are consistently neglected – in developing and developed countries alike. Research shows that in the United States of America, only 11% of institutions have adequate storage facilities (Heritage Preservation 2005). In St-Petersburg, Russia, the inventory control of the Hermitage Museum revealed 50,000 missing objects (Billette 2008). In Wales, a report indicated that 67% of museum storage areas were already full in 2007, or would be by 2012 (WAG 2007).

5A considerable amount of guidance is available on planning new storage areas, and much it is readily available online (Johnson and Horgan 1979; NPS 1993-2001, 2001; Bordass 1996; Windsor 2002; CCI 1993-2010; UNESCO 2007-2009). However, there exists a gap in the literature when it comes to addressing the problem that most museums face: that of improving an existing situation that has deteriorated over time and that has led to inaccessible collections, dysfunctional documentation systems, worsened conservation conditions and unclear assignment of responsibilities.

ICCROM-UNESCO Partnership for the Preventive Conservation of Endangered Museum Collections in Developing Countries

6In 2007, a three-year joint project was launched by ICCROM and UNESCO focusing on the Preventive Conservation of Endangered Museum Collections in Developing Countries. This project aimed to improve museum skills and provide tools to analyze documentation systems and storage areas to facilitate conservation, research and education, and prevent theft and illicit traffic. It was felt by both organizations that these two issues required stronger political support and a greater involvement of decision makers at both institutional and professional levels. ICCROM responded by developing new tools designed to address the specific context of small institutions with limited access to resources or expert technical advice.

7The Documentation Systems component was developed by a small working group established and led by the École du Patrimoine Africain, a conservation training institution based in Porto Novo, Benin that serves all 26 French-, Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries of sub-Saharan Africa. In collaboration with ICCROM, the Practical Guide to Documentation was produced first in French, translated into Spanish with the assistance of ILAM (Fundación Instituto Latinoamericano de Museos) and then into English (http://www.re-org.info/​en/​documentation-system/​introduction).

8The Storage Reorganization component is based on extensive work carried out by Gaël de Guichen at ICCROM. Later, it was further developed by an international group of 15 museum professionals from Angola, Argentina, Austria, Canada, Columbia, Czech Republic, India, Iran, Kenya, Peru, Philippines, Serbia, the Netherlands and Venezuela. This Storage Task Force met in Rome, Italy and in Caracas, Venezuela, but continued to work in smaller groups in between the meetings on specific aspects of the methodology. During its development, the methodology was tested in field projects in Iran and Argentina.

RE-ORG: the first storage reorganization methodology

Introduction to the step-by-step tool

9According to RE-ORG, museum storage must abide by the following core principles:

  1. There is at least one trained member of staff in charge;

  2. There is a basic documentation system (complete and up to date);

  3. Storage areas are reserved exclusively for the collection;

  4. Every object has an assigned location;

  5. Every object is retrievable within three minutes;

  6. Every object is movable without damaging another;

  7. The building is designed or adapted for conservation.

10To achieve this aim, RE-ORG is articulated in four phases:

  1. Getting Started

  2. Storage Condition Report

  3. Storage Reorganization Project

  4. Storage Reorganization Implementation

11To make storage reorganization more manageable, the methodology addresses the four main areas of responsibility that relate to storage:

  • Management

  • Building & Space

  • Collection

  • Furniture & Small Equipment

12Each area of responsibility is a key component of functional and professionally managed storage. For optimal conservation, access and use of the stored collection, each area of responsibility should fulfill certain criteria defined by RE-ORG.

13Each phase includes a series of tasks that are grouped by area of responsibility. Every task is explained by a worksheet that describes its importance, objective and final outputs, the materials required, as well as remarks, advice or relevant discussion points. Each worksheet is supported by examples, forms, didactic images, online resources and additional guidelines.

14As of February 2011, the Storage Reorganization Methodology, all related supporting materials and the Documentation Practical Guide are freely accessible on the RE-ORG website at the following address: http://www.re-org.info (Fig. 1). Below is a brief summary of each phase of the Storage Reorganization Methodology.

Fig. 1 Homepage of RE-ORG

Fig. 1 Homepage of RE-ORG

RE-ORG, the new ICCROM-UNESCO platform for endangered museum collections.

Art Direction, IA, UX, Web Design: Jean-Maxime Brais

Phase 1: Getting Started

15This phase outlines what one needs to have, to know or to do before beginning to reorganize storage. Users can download the Self-evaluation Tool, which is used to obtain a snapshot view of the situation and to identify the most important problems. Key elements of this phase are the creation of a reorganization team, and the definition of the Cultural Project. The Cultural Project is a clear and concise expression of the projected use of the stored collection and the experience that its users are expected to have. Having a well-defined Cultural Project is essential to ensure the reorganization progresses in the desired direction.

Phase 2: Storage Condition Report

16Professionally minded conservators produce condition reports before intervening directly on single objects. Likewise, the reorganization team must collect information on the present situation, analyze it and produce a diagnosis before the physical reorganization can begin. The Storage Condition Report is a useful tool that can be used to obtain the institution’s approval to move forward.

Phase 3: Storage Reorganization Project

17Based on the conclusions of the Storage Condition Report, the reorganization team identifies all actions required to achieve the desired outcome and schedules them in a Storage Reorganization Project plan.

Phase 4: Storage Reorganization Implementation

18In this phase, the reorganization team puts the Storage Reorganization Project into action, monitors its progress, and establishes appropriate systems to ensure the sustainability of the reorganization.

19The following section illustrates the practical application of RE-ORG on a stored collection. Each phase is discussed one by one.

Case study: The Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection at IGNCA, New Delhi, India

Context

20IGNCA (Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts) was established in 1987 as an autonomous institution under the Ministry of Culture of India, as a centre for research, academic pursuit and dissemination in the field of the arts. In February 2011, an eight-day workshop on preventive conservation applied to storage reorganization was held at IGNCA, in collaboration with ICCROM. IGNCA granted its staff the authorization to work on the ethnographic collection of the Janapada Sampada department. The department aims to understand the rich and variegated heritage of the rural small-scale societies within their eco-cultural and socio-economic contexts. The accessible portion of the ethnographic collection counted 449 objects (masks, textiles, scrolls, leather shadow puppets, hand puppets, basketry, etc.).1 This was a unique opportunity to apply the RE-ORG to a real situation.

21IGNCA has a very active exhibitions programme. At any given moment, and often in the same week, several hundred objects may leave or enter the storage area, depending on the exhibition schedule. In the Janapada Sampada department, exhibitions are generally prepared within the storage area (10 x 12 m). One of the entrances to the storage area is from a hallway (4 x 9 m), which was currently used to store unused office furniture, photographic reproductions and objects from the collection, mostly basketry and Tazia (large, fragile objects used in religious processions). The second entrance (with double doors) is from a large open space (10 x 12 m) used to organize meetings and to accommodate artisans coming to IGNCA from all over India to create objects – some of which will likely enter into the collection. Eventually, the curator of Janapada Sampada plans to use this space for temporary in-house exhibitions.

22There were only four days to prepare, plan and implement the storage reorganization using RE-ORG. The results are described below.

Phase 1: Getting Started (Week 1, Days 1-4)

23The first week of the workshop focused on introducing the key elements of preventive conservation. As preventive conservation is a team effort, various group activities took place on different topics such as the significance of cultural heritage, objectives, definitions of conservation, materials deterioration mechanisms, etc. Through these activities, the team of 12 people who would carry out the storage reorganization was formed. These sessions resulted in a better understanding of each team member’s strengths, which would allow for a clearer definition of roles for the reorganization.

24Although the authorization to work in the storage area had already been granted by the curator, an informal meeting with her allowed for further discussions on the core principles of storage reorganization, and provided an opportunity to ask a number of questions to formulate the Cultural Project:

  • How the collection is used and by whom (i.e. the functions of storage);

  • How the collection should be distributed in storage (according to region, to material, to object type, etc.);

  • What the projected growth of the collection is;

  • Whether the storage would be open or closed to the public.

25Following this discussion, the Cultural Projectwas defined as the following:

26The stored ethnographic collection of the Janapada Sampada department will be actively used by the institution for weekly exhibitions and loans, and monthly by occasional scholars, but will remain closed to the general public. It will be distributed according to object type, and provisions should be made for its rapid expansion.

27This discussion led to the definition of four main functions associated with the storage area:

  1. Collection storage

  2. Loading and unloading of packing crates

  3. Exhibition preparation

  4. Study and research

28To help the curator envision the physical changes that would likely take place in the storage area, a hand-drawn sketch was presented. To finalize the preparation, the team made a list of all materials required for adapting the furniture and working on the collection (hammers, nails, steel wire, scissors, fabric, staplers, electric jigsaw, electric drill, etc.). Practical work could then begin the following week.

Phase 2: Storage Condition Report (Week 2, Day 1)

29Before the reorganization, the entire collection was on the ground (Figs. 2-3). It was impossible to access certain portions of the storage area due to the large amount of non-collection items and materials to discard. It is estimated by the workshop teaching team that approximately 20% of the available storage space was being used by the actual collection, although the initial feeling of the institution and workshop participants had been that the storage area was already full. This was due to the lack of storage furniture, which gave the impression that objects were occupying more space. It was also because of the other items that had begun to accumulate in the space: exhibition panels, plastic wrapping, paper, foam, batting, cardboard boxes, pieces of wood, and non-accessioned photographic reproductions. The lack of furniture was also exposing the most fragile objects to a high risk of damage whenever they needed to be retrieved. Luckily, only three objects (leather shadow puppets) showed signs of past insect damage, but no active deterioration was observed. The exhibition staff was using one corner of the storage area as an object preparation area, and storing wooden packing crates against one wall.

Fig. 2 and 2a General view of the Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage

Fig. 2 and 2a General view of the Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage

IGNCA, India, 7 February 2011.

Credit: Gaël de Guichen

Fig. 3 Collection of painted masks, Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage

Fig. 3 Collection of painted masks, Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage

IGNCA, India, on 7 February 2011.

Credit: Simon Lambert

30After a brief introduction to the information needed to diagnose the storage area in all four areas of responsibility (Management, Building & Space, Collection, and Furniture & Small Equipment), the reorganization team was split up into three sub-teams. Team 1 was responsible for conducting the collection analysis (all relevant statistics on the composition of the collection). Team 2 would draw the floor plan of the storage area and map the collection and non-collection items (including materials to discard). Meanwhile, Team 3 would collect all management-related information such as job descriptions and procedures, they would list past disasters and incidents, and make an inventory of small equipment, building systems, storage furniture and non-collection items. The overall results of the condition report are presented below (Figs. 4-5).

Fig. 4 Summary of the results of the condition report

Fig. 4 Summary of the results of the condition report

Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage, IGNCA, India, on 7 February 2011.

Credit: Simon Lambert

Fig. 5 Collection analysis for Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage

Fig. 5 Collection analysis for Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage

IGNCA, India. Proportions of objects by object category, and chemical nature.

Credit: Simon Lambert

31All three sub-teams had approximately two hours to collect data for the condition report. The sub-teams then presented their results to the others, and discussed aspects requiring further clarification. Following these presentations, the entire reorganization team of workshop participants evaluated the overall situation together using the RE-ORG Self-evaluation tool (http://www.re-org.info/​en/​contact-us/​tool-kit-files/​self-evaluation-tool_savecalc.pdf). The results indicated that among the four areas of responsibility, Management, and Furniture & Small Equipment were at serious risk, while Building & Space and Collection required a Reorganization Project (Fig. 6). Since addressing the management issue required more time, the reorganization team chose to focus on the other three. However, to ensure the sustainability of the reorganization, it would have to be addressed as soon as possible.

Fig. 6 Results of the RE-ORG Self-Evaluation for Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage, IGNCA, India, on 7 February 2011

Fig. 6 Results of the RE-ORG Self-Evaluation for Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage, IGNCA, India, on 7 February 2011

Note: the score for “Collection” does not consider the documentation system, as it was not accessible during the workshop.

Credit: Simon Lambert

Phase 3: Storage Reorganization Project (Week 2, Day 2)

32Once the reorganization team had an overall picture of the situation, the actions required to bring the storage area up to standard were defined. These actions were organized in a schedule (Storage Reorganization Project).

33Overall, the workshop participants identified four key areas of deficiency in the Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage:

  1. Lack of administrative framework (procedures, job descriptions, etc.)

  2. Lack of furniture for all collections

  3. Dust

  4. Improper handling

34The lack of furniture posed a serious threat to the collection, which could be resolved in the short time available, thus, each of the three sub-teams were assigned three deficiencies to analyze; two of these were related to the lack of furniture for a specific collection. The remaining deficiencies (administrative framework, dust and handling) were distributed evenly among the sub-teams.

35For each deficiency, sub-teams defined a desired quality standard (e.g. “all large masks are housed in a shelving unit and can be retrieved without moving more than one other object”). Then, they listed the actions required to achieve this standard (e.g. find eight shelving units, clean shelving, adjust shelf height, etc.). Finally, they listed all actions needed to maintain this standard in time, who would be involved and when the next monitoring would take place.

36To resolve the lack of furniture, the sub-teams proposed solutions based on materials or furniture that could be found in the institution at no additional cost, whenever possible. For each object type, they calculated the precise number of storage units needed to store all of the objects in that collection by examining how many objects could fit in one unit and dividing this by the total number of objects.

37At the end of this exercise, each proposal was discussed with the entire reorganization team. The long list of immediate actions was organized in a schedule for the two remaining days of implementation. This was reproduced on a large whiteboard to allow the team to follow the progress of the reorganization as it unfolded. This schedule was used to identify any outstanding missing materials before the start of the implementation on the following day.

38Due to time constraints, it was decided that the team would address the remaining deficiencies (i.e. the drafting of job descriptions and procedures for handling, cleaning, inspection, security, object movement, etc., and the dust proofing of objects) in the weeks following the workshop.

Phase 4: Storage Reorganization Implementation (Week 2, Days 3-4)

39By the start of the implementation, each sub-team knew exactly which collection and which storage furniture to work on. By chance, another department of IGNCA happened to be replacing all of its storage units at the same time as the workshop. This allowed eight adjustable metal shelving units to be reused by the reorganization team. Other unused units or material were retrieved from various locations around the building. Once refitted, these units would be perfectly suitable for the collection (Fig. 7-9).

Fig. 7 Summary of the refitting of furniture found at IGNCA

Fig. 7 Summary of the refitting of furniture found at IGNCA

Credit: Simon Lambert

Fig. 8 Refitting of metallic cabinet for the collection of bronzes

Fig. 8 Refitting of metallic cabinet for the collection of bronzes

Credit: Simon Lambert

Fig. 9 Refitting of wooden boxes for the collection of small and medium masks

Fig. 9 Refitting of wooden boxes for the collection of small and medium masks

Credit: Simon Lambert

40By the end of Day 4, about 90% of the collection had been removed from the ground and placed within units. An extra half-day’s work was required to house the remaining medium and small masks, as each one required individual attention to hang them properly on a chain system which was developed using metallic chains fixed securely to the top of the boxes using long screws inserted transversally.

41The rolling exhibition panels, on which the shadow puppets and basketry were hung, offer a great degree of flexibility. As these panels are movable, they can be adapted if the functions of storage change (Figs. 10-11). Should an extra 500 objects suddenly be accessioned into the collection, it would be relatively easy to adapt the space and add extra units.

Fig. 10 Final result

Fig. 10 Final result

Final result after completion of the reorganization, showing refitted rolling exhibition panels for shadow puppets (far left), wooden box for Tazia (near left), refitted metal shelving units for large masks (middle), and refitted wooden boxes with chain system for small and medium masks (right).

Credit: Gaël de Guichen

Fig. 11 Final result

Fig. 11 Final result

Final result after completion of the reorganization, showing refitted wooden boxes with the chain system for small and medium masks (near left), refitted rolling exhibition panels for basketry and shadow puppets (far left and far centre), and refitted metal shelving units for large masks (near right).

Credit: Gaël de Guichen

42During the IGNCA-ICCROM workshop, it was not possible to access the documentation system. Furthermore, there was too little time to organize proper course sessions on this topic. Thus, the reorganization team could only focus on creating location codes, and not the other elements of the basic documentation system (accession register, object numbering, main catalogue and movement register). For the time being, each object was assigned a single location, identified with one letter and one number. Once the documentation system is complete and functional, these location codes will allow any of the 449 objects to be retrieved within three minutes.

Discussion

43This practical experience in storage reorganization has highlighted a number of important issues that should be kept in mind. Firstly, the absolute necessity of defining a Cultural Project clearly before any work begins cannot be emphasized enough. In a case like the one at IGNCA, this is what permitted a clear division of spaces. It is true that ideally storage areas should only be reserved for the museum collection. However, at IGNCA, space is abundant and it was relatively easy to create physical separations within the same space. The clear statement of the curator’s vision for the storage area was of the highest importance.

44Whenever necessary, the Storage Reorganization Methodology should be adapted to a given situation. As work progressed on the condition report of the Janapada Sampada ethnographic storage, it became apparent that non-collection items and materials to discard had to be removed from storage be able to access the objects and to move around in the space (even before the implementation phase). Within 30 minutes, the 87 photographic reproductions, 26 didactic panels, and 6 m3 of materials to discard were removed from the storage area and placed temporarily in the adjacent room. This led to the discovery of an additional 15 shadow puppets previously believed to have been lost, and a box containing 15 bronze objects. The adjacent hallway space was also cleaned in the same way, revealing six large fragile objects (Tazia) and a collection of 16 basketry objects.

45Moreover, it is important to have all tools and materials – in good condition and in sufficient quantity – to avoid slowing down the process. Whenever several teams are working simultaneously, everyone should have the materials they need to accomplish their tasks and to avoid having to wait for others in order to continue their own work.

46Finally, anyone working on storage reorganization must be mindful of the potential challenges in tackling aspects in the area of responsibility of “Management.” Ultimately, the decision to write or update job descriptions, policies and procedures is an institutional one. During the IGNCA-ICCROM workshop, time was not sufficient to draft administrative documents. However, to ensure the success or the reorganization and its sustainability, procedures must be written for at least object entry, object movement, cleaning and security, as these were identified as key deficiencies. In addition, the cleaning and handling staff should be trained by the reorganization team to ensure the collections are well looked after by all staff members at all times.

Conclusion

47RE-ORG was developed to address a problem of vast proportions: the grave risk of damage and hindered access to the world’s cultural collections as a result of improper storage and documentation. As the majority of museums are small, and as their resources continue to decrease, it was important to develop a tool that would allow their staff to make meaningful improvements without having to request specialized technical advice.

48Before the reorganization of the Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage of IGNCA, access to the collection was impossible because it was piled on the ground and mixed with non-collection items and various materials to be discarded (Fig. 12). Moreover, a number of activities were taking place in the storage area (storage of objects, unloading/unloading of crates, exhibition preparation, and study and research), without clearly defined, designated spaces. As a result, the storage area was believed to be already full, but only about 20% of the total space available was actually occupied.

Fig. 12 Section of the floor plan, showing the Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage before and after the reorganization

Fig. 12 Section of the floor plan, showing the Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage before and after the reorganization

Storage functions identified: A) Collection storage, B) Loading/unloading of packing crates, C) Exhibition preparation, D) Study and research.

Credit: Simon Lambert

49After reorganization, all 449 objects are housed inside storage furniture, identified with location codes, and the collection is visible, adequately protected from dust and retrievable within three minutes (Fig. 12). After reorganization, the storage area is now full to about 50%: over 1/3 of the total space is assigned to loading/unloading and exhibition preparation, while the rest is allocated to the collection. This means that the storage area can house at least 450 more objects without modifying the current movable panel layout. In addition, a new designated area for study and research has been created in the hallway just outside the storage area.

Fig. 13 Results of the RE-ORG Self-evaluation for Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage, IGNCA, India, on 10 February 2011 (after reorganization)

Fig. 13 Results of the RE-ORG Self-evaluation for Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage, IGNCA, India, on 10 February 2011 (after reorganization)

Note: the score for “Collection” does not consider the documentation system, as it was not accessible during the workshop.

Credit: Simon Lambert

50By applying RE-ORG to the Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage of IGNCA, it has been possible to see what can be achieved by a team of 12 people in just eight days. Even if Management and documentation issues were not fully addressed, the score on the Self-evaluation was improved significantly for Building & Space, Collection and Furniture & Small Equipment (Fig. 13). All in all, the entire reorganization has cost 20,000 Indian Rupees (equivalent to about 315 Euros).2 This proves that small museums worldwide should not let limited resources stop them from embarking on a storage reorganization project. This experience has been inspiring for both the workshop organizers and the workshop participants, who now have a renewed motivation to maintain the reorganization, which they planned and implemented together.   

Haut de page

Notes

1 Approximately 300 more objects were enclosed in crates that returned to the storage areas during the workshop, and an undefined quantity were contained in four locked metal crates.

2 This amount includes the three custom-made racks for painted textile rolls at 6,000 Rs (about € 95) each and all the hardware, i.e. chains, nails, screws, etc. at 2,000 Rs (about € 30).

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1 Homepage of RE-ORG
Légende RE-ORG, the new ICCROM-UNESCO platform for endangered museum collections.
Crédits Art Direction, IA, UX, Web Design: Jean-Maxime Brais
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 264k
Titre Fig. 2 and 2a General view of the Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 188k
Légende IGNCA, India, 7 February 2011.
Crédits Credit: Gaël de Guichen
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 200k
Titre Fig. 3 Collection of painted masks, Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage
Légende IGNCA, India, on 7 February 2011.
Crédits Credit: Simon Lambert
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 232k
Titre Fig. 4 Summary of the results of the condition report
Légende Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage, IGNCA, India, on 7 February 2011.
Crédits Credit: Simon Lambert
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 136k
Titre Fig. 5 Collection analysis for Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage
Légende IGNCA, India. Proportions of objects by object category, and chemical nature.
Crédits Credit: Simon Lambert
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 28k
Titre Fig. 6 Results of the RE-ORG Self-Evaluation for Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage, IGNCA, India, on 7 February 2011
Légende Note: the score for “Collection” does not consider the documentation system, as it was not accessible during the workshop.
Crédits Credit: Simon Lambert
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 28k
Titre Fig. 7 Summary of the refitting of furniture found at IGNCA
Crédits Credit: Simon Lambert
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 88k
Titre Fig. 8 Refitting of metallic cabinet for the collection of bronzes
Crédits Credit: Simon Lambert
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 196k
Titre Fig. 9 Refitting of wooden boxes for the collection of small and medium masks
Crédits Credit: Simon Lambert
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 140k
Titre Fig. 10 Final result
Légende Final result after completion of the reorganization, showing refitted rolling exhibition panels for shadow puppets (far left), wooden box for Tazia (near left), refitted metal shelving units for large masks (middle), and refitted wooden boxes with chain system for small and medium masks (right).
Crédits Credit: Gaël de Guichen
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 260k
Titre Fig. 11 Final result
Légende Final result after completion of the reorganization, showing refitted wooden boxes with the chain system for small and medium masks (near left), refitted rolling exhibition panels for basketry and shadow puppets (far left and far centre), and refitted metal shelving units for large masks (near right).
Crédits Credit: Gaël de Guichen
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 252k
Titre Fig. 12 Section of the floor plan, showing the Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage before and after the reorganization
Légende Storage functions identified: A) Collection storage, B) Loading/unloading of packing crates, C) Exhibition preparation, D) Study and research.
Crédits Credit: Simon Lambert
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 92k
Titre Fig. 13 Results of the RE-ORG Self-evaluation for Janapada Sampada ethnographic collection storage, IGNCA, India, on 10 February 2011 (after reorganization)
Légende Note: the score for “Collection” does not consider the documentation system, as it was not accessible during the workshop.
Crédits Credit: Simon Lambert
URL http://ceroart.revues.org/docannexe/image/2112/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 31k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Simon Lambert, « RE-ORG: A methodology for reorganizing museum storage developed by ICCROM and UNESCO », CeROArt [En ligne], 6 | 2011, mis en ligne le 09 août 2011, consulté le 31 mai 2016. URL : http://ceroart.revues.org/2112

Haut de page

Auteur

Simon Lambert

Simon is currently engaged as a consultant for ICCROM (International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property) and has been working on the storage reorganization methodology since 2008. Apart from editing and managing the content of RE-ORG (www.re-org.info), he is involved in the planning and implementation of the International Course on First Aid to Cultural Heritage in Times of Conflict. Simon received an MSc in the Care of Collections from Cardiff University, UK, with a dissertation on the carbon footprint of museum loans for which he was awarded the ICON Student Conservator of the Year Award. He holds a BA in Art History and Italian literature from McGill University, Canada and a Laurea in Paintings Conservation from the University of Urbino, Italy. Contact: simonlambert9@gmail.com.

Articles du même auteur

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Licence Creative Commons
CeROArt – Conservation, exposition, restauration d'objets d'arts est mis à disposition selon les termes de la licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.

Haut de page
  • Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Les cahiers de Revues.org