ON INITIAL INSPECTION, collection-based exhibitions may appear to be less involved and require less effort than loan-based or traveling exhibitions—this could not be further from the truth. Collections-based exhibitions share many of the same logistical challenges as loan-based exhibitions, but may also include an additional workload associated with enhanced research and content development along with detailed, object-level assessment and the need to coordinate conservation treatment.
Exhibitions showcasing institutional holdings provide opportunities to display the depth and breadth of our collections within a broad range of conceptual frameworks. In-house exhibitions vary in both content and schedule and do not necessarily exclude noncollection objects, but do share common traits. Intended as a starting point for developing internally focused exhibitions, the following considerations provide a framework for collections-based exhibition development.
Similar to loan-based exhibitions, collection-based efforts have important benchmarks to clear and schedules to meet. These include planning sufficient time for content and design development, critical conservation treatment to be undertaken, mount and casework design and fabrication, and perhaps most importantly, allocation of adequate resources and time to ensure the smooth and orderly handling of potentially fragile, large or complicated objects.
When budgeting the appropriate amount of time to prepare for and install an exhibition, it is never too early to start. The entire process could take months or even years depending on the complexity, content, size, and anticipated duration of the exhibition at hand. The specific procedures for exhibition develop ment and installation are unique to each museum, but all share common, core benchmarks. Each undertaking begins with conceptual design, continues through schematic and final depiction, and ends with construction and installation-ready plans that take even more time to successfully execute—again varying greatly depending on size, complexity, content, and duration.
Successful exhibition development and installation necessitates input from a variety of critical stakeholders, and it takes time to adequately vet and incorporate this input into the final product. Critical voices contributing to the end product include all museum departments (curatorial, education, security, registration, conservation, etc.), community groups, external consultants and related contractors, software/application developers, and fabricators. All exhibitions are unique; as such, a successful outcome is dependent on adequate time and the noted associated benchmarks of development to ensure they are successfully implemented.
Although internally focused exhibitions are frequently comprised exclusively of collection objects, noncollection objects are often incorporated, such as objects on loan or reproductions. Regardless of object type, all require significant time, both in terms of front-end planning and execution and may involve external parties including lenders, shippers, couriers, and intellectual property or rights holders.
Although detailed workflow checklists are useful tools to guide a registrar through the processes of developing and executing collections-based exhibitions, they are frequently framed within an institution-specific context and not therefore universally applicable. Rather than attempt to provide a one-size-fits-all approach, the following presents a responsible and preservation-centric approach for practical exhibition development and execution.
Perhaps the most import part of any exhibition planning endeavor is consistent communication. Beginning with the initial concept and checklist development and extending through deinstallation—and involving all members of the team—the need to be in constant dialog is imperative to ensure the coordination of all related activities.
Successful exhibition planning and development is an exercise in careful and concise logistical planning that incorporates the time necessary (always an overlooked and underrepresented resource) in proportion to the size and complexity of the exhibition to inform a realistic timeline.
Although the exhibition planning processes and staffing structures will vary by institution, the primary responsibility of selecting objects for exhibition lies with a core team—ordinarily initiated and led by curatorial staff input. From the early iterative stages of development through final selection, the essential input and perspective of the registrar is an indispensable necessity. Among other duties, the registrar ensures that object(s) selected are in suitable condition for exhibition purposes or can be brought into stable and presentable condition.
Other duties that often fall squarely on the shoulders of the registrar include drafting, reviewing, and closely coordinating the documentation associated with all of the objects in the exhibition. This includes packing and shipping, condition reporting, and photography, as well as loan and insurance agreements should the exhibit include borrowed objects.
An auxiliary list of sensitive objects (e.g., works on paper or objects that include fugitive pigments) should be developed as an addition to the initial checklist. Sensitive objects usually need special preparation for display to ensure their safe and efficient future rotation. Beyond physically sensitive objects, we are also stewards of culturally sensitive collections that represent a wide range of worldviews. Caring for and properly displaying this category of objects requires far more than simply preserving their physical stability. When considering collections of this nature, conventional preventive conservation practice needs to also incorporate any associated aspects of spiritual care that the objects require (see CHAPTER 7B, “The Care of Culturally Sensitive and Sacred Objects” for further information).
In addition to the condition of an object, the duration of time an object should be placed on exhibition is an equally important factor. The planned rotation of sensitive objects of all types needs to be incorporated early in the process because it will impact every associated component of the exhibition from context to case design.
The checklist is the seminal document that guides everyone through the entire exhibition timeline. While in development, each iterative draft of the checklist should incorporate basic information about each object, including its unique identifying number (loan, accession, catalog, etc.), as well as basic descriptive content and associated photography. As planning progresses, so too will the checklist—from first draft through the final checklist. All involved parties, including staff, vendors, and contractors, will need timely access to the checklist and be made aware of any changes to it.
There is much in the way of initial research work involved with assessing the suitability of an object for display. From thorough physical examination to a review of previous display and past conservation treatment histories, a close scrutiny of all objects is the next critical step in the process.
A major factor to consider when determining the suitability of an object to be placed on display is its susceptibility to further damage from exposure to the exhibition environment and, if deemed necessary, its potential to respond positively to environmental mitigation efforts. For example, can an acceptable microclimate be designed for the object’s specific environmental requirements or can light levels be set low enough to facilitate periodic viewing while also limiting cumulative damage?
Often, remedial cleaning is all that is required (or possible) to improve the appearance of an object. This task frequently falls under the responsibility of the registrar. Given the complexities associated with cleaning any object, it is advisable to seek the guidance and recommendations of a conservator prior to undertaking any cleaning operation. Once an acceptable cleaning strategy has been established, proceed with caution and beware of well-intentioned but potentially damaging cleaning actions. Go into the process with a conservative approach in mind and know your limits. And remember—do no harm!
As part of an institution’s overall risk mitigation approach the physical security of the objects should be incorporated into both the design and execution of the installation. The design of any security measures should conform to an object’s individual needs and associated acceptable levels of risk exposure. For example, valuable or particularly vulnerable objects may have specific requirements for tamper-resistant hardware or locked casework.
If necessary, and as time and budget permit, the oftentimes necessary and complex treatment of objects requiring conservation work needs to be planned and accommodated. Allow sufficient time for the entire conservation process, including packing, transit, examination, and dialog with a conservator to inform the proposal, and of course, time for the treatment itself.
After the condition of an object is well understood, the work associated with its preparation begins. This will encompass a wide range of activities including everything from proper matting and framing to designing and fabricating custom mounts and casework. The time, cost, and expertise required for these steps necessitates the early identification of an object’s unique requirements in the continued development of the checklist.
For objects that include electronic components or that have specific spatial requirements (e.g., additions to the built environment), the registrar must ensure that all needs can be accommodated in the associated exhibition design and budget and that all constituent components are in good working order or are otherwise readily available.
Lastly, based on the availability or condition of the original object, the need to incorporate reproductions into the exhibition is occasionally required. Aside from the time required to arrange for the physical reproduction to be made, plan sufficient time to secure intellectual rights or reproduction permissions from the various associated rights holder(s).
As the checklist comes into sharper focus and object-specific frames, display mounts, and casework are being conceived of, the overall exhibition design and production process gets underway. As there remains a constant potential for objects to continue to be added or removed from the checklist, timing for checklist revisions becomes critical at this stage.
Whether using in-house expertise, outside vendors, or some combination thereof, exhibition design and production is an iterative process resulting in the final design used for pricing and scheduling purposes. Beginning with an initial conceptual design and continuing through the execution of construction-ready documents, the need to incorporate preservation-specific materials and methodologies in the exhibition design is necessary.
The development of realistic preservation criteria within the established budget, space, and time constraints often necessitates compromise between potential objects and the manner in which they can be safely displayed. The use of inert materials combined with an object-focused and preservation-centric approach should drive the design and fabrication methods of all related object mounts, supports, and casework.
There are a number of resources available to help guide you through the planning processes, appropriate material selection, and casework construction. Among them are the National Park Service’s Conserve-O-Gram1 series and the Canadian Conservation Institute’s (CCI) CCI Notes2 and related technical bulletins, all of which are readily available online.
Equally important to bear in mind is incorporating desired traffic flows and adhering to code requirements and other audience-specific considerations within the overall exhibition design. Balancing these pragmatic and legal considerations while staying true to the overall curatorial position and exhibition premise is an exercise in compromise.
Lastly, plan for sufficient time to select, test, and prototype proposed materials and designs. It is essential to build in time to allow surfaces to thoroughly cure and off-gas, along with time needed for the dry-fitting of objects within all mounts and casework. These final, and often lengthy, processes need to be kept at the forefront and undertaken well in advance of actual installation.
Whether an inaugural exhibition within a new or renovated space or one following on the heels of a previously installed exhibition, gallery transitions need to be carefully planned to ensure that all selected objects are properly handled and accounted for. Prior to installation, a series of benchmarking sessions are advisable to ensure that the exhibition perimeter (shell) and associated interior temporary walls are constructed, cured, and stand ready to accept objects; that all objects are, or will be, on site; all mounts and casework are fabricated to specification; and objects fit as designed. Confirm that all available qualified staff (in house and contracted) are scheduled, briefed, and adequately prepared prior to the installation commencing.
The final exhibition design, together with the final checklist, serve as the instruction manual for how the exhibition is to be assembled and with which constituent parts. The floor plan specifies the exact location of objects and along with any models and renderings serve as essential tools to assist in strategizing the overall installation process, including sequence considerations. The sequence of installation is determined by either the schedule of couriers and technicians or is simply required to occur at a given point in time due to the need for a large or complicated installation before smaller, more straightforward installations are undertaken.
Follow best practices of limiting access to the installation space to only those needing access or to those who are otherwise authorized to be in the space. Once installed, a regular object and condition check needs to be undertaken to ensure the consistent accounting for all objects.
The need to establish clear lines of communication during the installation is imperative. It is advisable to have a single point person from whom all primary direction and communications originate on the exhibition floor—whether that individual is the exhibition manager, lead preparator, or registrar. There are often conflicting priorities with information coming from multiple sources within the dynamic setting of an exhibition installation. Establishing a defined line of communication and a clearly delineated assignment of roles and responsibilities from the start will ensure a well-orchestrated and executed installation.
Immediately prior to the exhibition opening, a dedicated walk-through with security, education, and programming staff is advised to ensure that everyone is adequately informed to undertake their particular responsibilities. For example, ensure that security staff know where to stand to have the optimal viewing perspective and are keenly aware of particularly susceptible objects. Confirm that programming staff are familiar with the layout of the exhibition. A preliminary introduction to the exhibition for all staff prior to the opening will contribute to the successful undertaking of their duties as monitors and interpreters of the exhibition.
Once the exhibition is installed, the work still is not yet finished! The consistent monitoring of objects on view as well as the complete gallery environment are important practices to have in place. This vigilance serves as an extension of the preservation-centric approach necessary to provide the requisite stewardship of the objects on view throughout the life span of an exhibition.
Consistent protocols need to be in place to accurately measure, record, and—perhaps most importantly—take action on out-of-range light, temperature, and humidity readings within the specific casework and the overall exhibition space. Additionally, any need to monitor, maintain, or replenish performance-based exhibition media should be properly planned (e.g., replenish or replace humidity or pollutant absorbing media).
Lastly, it is important to maintain the aesthetic integrity and plan for the regular upkeep of the exhibition components to ensure the exhibition both looks its best and is performing as designed. Regularly scheduled downtime to address pragmatic issues such as the rotation of sensitive objects, replacement of lamps, dusting casework, adjusting label copy, and so on, needs to be predetermined to ensure the consistency and integrity of the visitor experience as well as for the safety of the objects.
Although straightforward in concept, the deinstallation of an exhibition involves a similar need to approach the task at hand with a preservation-centric approach and rigor. The safe transition of objects out of mounts and casework and finally back into storage—or properly packed and shipped should they be loaned objects—needs to be carefully and methodically undertaken to ensure for the well-being of all objects included in the exhibition.
Deinstallations need to be as carefully planned and coordinated as installations. They demand the same attention to details as installations do and should remain the focus of all involved until such time as objects are safely removed. All other associated activities should be held at bay until all objects are safely transitioned out of the exhibition space. Most importantly, ensure that all objects are safely removed from the space before any other transition work is undertaken (e.g., casework moved, walls demolished, walls painted, floors refinished).
Among the last, but no less important, responsibilities of the registrar is the organization of the comprehensive exhibition documentation, beginning with the initial discussions surrounding the concept development of the checklist and continuing throughout the design and installation process. The registrar tracks and documents the life span of all objects (whether selected or not) within an exhi bition. The story of an exhibition, its development, budget, shipping, packing, installation, and eventual deinstallation should be methodically documented within the institutional archives—from when an object is first removed from storage to when it is returned to storage, regardless of its origin. All documentation connected to the checklist, including all related correspondence, packing and shipping information, photography, object-specific display instructions, and mounts and casework design documents should be included as a historical record of the exhibition.
Understanding what worked and what did not is important to document and learn from. It is imperative, therefore, to methodically evaluate how well the exhibition delivered on content and message. Equally important is to document how the exhibition design and installation process went. How well did the cases and mounts accommodate for the scheduled rotation of sensitive objects? Did visitors struggle with labels and didactic content? Did the intended traffic pattern guide visitors through the exhibition as conceived? How did the new paint selected for the exhibition hold up? All these, and more, should be carefully documented to ensure that lessons learned are incorporated into future exhibitions.
As there will be the inevitable last-minute changes—be they deviations in floor plans, additions to the checklist, or changes of wall colors—it is important to approach any installation with as much time and contingency planning as possible to ensure success. Add equal dashes of humor, patience, and flexibility for all involved, and you have got the perfect recipe for a well-planned and executed exhibition of permanent collection objects! •
1. Available at: http://www.nps.gov/Museum/publications/conserveogram/cons_toc.html#collectionpreservation.html (accessed December 4, 2018).
2. Available at: http://www.canada.ca/en/conservation-institute/services/conservation-preservation-publications/canadian-conservation-institute-notes.html (accessed December 3, 2018).