Category Archives: Museums

High Museum of Art, Atlanta

Weeks ago I posted about my trip to Atlanta to see the Oscar de la Renta exhibition at SCAD FASH and the Iris Van Herpen show at the High Museum of Art.  For some reason I neglected to show my other photos from the High Museum.  It was the first time I had been to the High Museum in years, and I was lucky in that they also had a special exhibition, Hapsburg Splendor, Masterpieces from Vienna’s Imperial Collections.  That show has ended, but I still want to show you some of the incredible items they had on display, all borrowed from the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna.

The painting above, by Gyula Eder, is of the Crown Prince Otto and Queen Zita arriving at the last Hapsburg coronation in 1916.  It was painted thirteen years after the fact, eleven years after the Austro-Hungarian Empire had been dissolved.  The young crown prince, or  Franz Joseph Otto Robert Maria Anton Karl Max Heinrich Sixtus Xavier Felix Renatus Ludwig Gaetan Pius Ignatius, as he was christened, lived until 2011, but never ruled.

At the end of WWI, the royal family was forced into exile, but someone took good care of their things, including the brocade and ermine outfit the four-year-old crown prince wore to his father’s coronation.

There were some spectacular clothes in the exhibition.  This poor photo of an truly outstanding dress can’t begin to show the richness of these royal clothes.  This dress was worn by Empress Elisabeth, or Sisi as she was often called.  The wife of Emperor Franz Joseph, she was known for her slim figure which was emphasized by the styles she wore.  Sisi was assassinated in 1898, and did not die immediately because her tight corset kept the stab wound from bleeding.

This 1905 court dress belonged to Princess Elisabeth Kinsky, who was lady-in-waiting in the Hapsburg court.  The train was detachable, which made the dress a lot more useful.

It wasn’t just the ladies who got to dress in fine clothing.  This jacket belonged to an imperial and royal chamberlain, around 1910.

And it wasn’t just the humans who got to dress in finery, as the horses were also decked in gold trimmings.  This horse and sleigh took up an entire display room.

The high also has a wonderful permanent collection of art and decorative objects.  I have focused in on the ones that are fashion and textile related.

Above is Alma Sewing, by Francis Criss, 1935.  We see Alma in her sewing shop, surrounded by her tools.  We also see Criss, reflected in the bulb of Alma’s lamp.

Two Ladies Testing the Water, by Jacob Wagner, 1891.  One lady is corseted, but the other appears not to be.

The Blue Mandarin Coat, Joseph Rodefer DeCamp, 1922.  This is a stunningly beautiful work, with the use of color and light.  The name of the model is, unfortunately, not known.

The High Museum has an impressive collection of American quilts.  This one Freedom, was made by Jessie Telfair in 1975.

I was thrilled and surprised to see this quilt, which I’ve posted photos of here in in the past in my review of American Quilts by Robert Shaw.  It was such a treat seeing it in person.

Is it just me, or does this snake seem to be smiling?  The maker of this circa 1875 through 1900 quilt is unknown.

In case you can’t tell because of the lack of perspective, this is a full-size chair.  Called Crochet, the chair is made from cotton crochet doilies dipped in resin.  Made by Marcel Wanders in 2006, I thought it was interesting that an item that was used to decorate chairs in the past had been used to actually make the chair.

And finally, the dog-lover that I am could not resist this huge portrait of a shaggy fellow. Thanks to CMJ, I know this painting is Wrecks 2 by Alex Katz.

I must say that I loved my visit to the High Museum.  It is worth a full day of exploration, even without the special exhibitions.  My one concern is the high cost of a visit.  Tickets for adults are $19.50, and parking is an additional $10.  I felt like the price was worth it, but can’t help but wonder if the cost might keep some people from taking advantage of this great resource.

 

13 Comments

Filed under Museums

Iris Van Herpen at the High Museum of Art, Atlanta

Today I’ve got something just a bit different from the usual fashion history post.  It’s New Years Day, a day when we all look to the future, so I thought I’d give a look at some very futuristic design, that of Iris Van Herpen.  Van Herpen is Dutch, and she is renowned for her use of  unusual materials.  Her first collection, Chemical Crows, was in 2007, and the museum has a selection of three designs from each of the shows she has created through 2015.

I’m not going to go into my usual analysis of the clothes, other than to give the name of the collection, and the materials used.  Other than that you are on your own.

If you can’t get past the thought that these clothes are unwearable, let me tell you that Van Herpen’s collections also contain clothing made of more conventional materials.  More conventional, but still stunning in a way that is rarely seen these days.

Chemical Crows, 2007:  wire umbrella ribs, industrial yarn, leather

Refinery Smoke, 2008:  metal gauze, leather

Mummification, 2009: leather strips, ball chains,  laced metal eyelets

Radiation Invasion, 2009: strips of leather

Synesthesia 2010: metalicized leather strips, metal eyelets

Crystallization, 2010: Plexiglass, leather, metal chain

Escapism, 2011: hand processed plisse fabric

Capriole, 2011:  transparent acrylic sheets, tulle, cotton fabric

Hybrid Holism, 2012:  3-D printed polymer

Micro, 2012:  3-D printed polyamide with copper treatment

Voltage, 2013:  mirror foil, acrylic sheets, viscose fabric

Wilderness Embodied, 2013:  laser-cut fabric

The work is astonishing, to say the least, and I suggest that if this show comes to a museum near you that you make an effort to attend.  The show will be traveling to other museums in North America, but I have not been able to find a schedule.

Iris Van Herpen: Transforming Fashion, at the High Museum of Art in Atlanta through May 15, 2016.

10 Comments

Filed under Designers, Museums

Oscar de le Renta at SCAD FASH

As I neared completion of my history degree one of the career paths I considered was museum work.  I even applied to several institutions in the Southeast, and was invited to interview and tour the facility of one.  I went, but did not get the job, and went into teaching instead but I’ve always had a great interest in how museums work .

Had I gotten that job in 1976, I’d have lived and worked through some huge changes, especially when it comes to the display of clothing.  Clothing in museums was still a relatively new concept at that time, and the idea of a museum completely devoted to fashion would have been laughable to many in the field.  The idea had been tried in New York City, with the collection that became the Costume Institute at the Met, but that collection survived in part due to its absorption by the larger, respected institution.

Fast forward almost forty years and fashion museums are thriving.  The latest addition to the fashion museum world is SCAD FASH, which is owned and operated by the Savannah College of Art and Design.  While the main campus is in Savannah, Georgia, there is a branch in Atlanta, where SCAD FASH is located.  For several years SCAD has been doing fashion exhibitions in Savannah, but it was exciting to hear they had located their fashion exhibition space in Atlanta.

Their inaugural exhibition was the expansion of one that was curated in Savannah soon after the death in 2014 of designer Oscar de la Renta.  It made good sense to bring the show to Atlanta to open the new exhibition space.  Even though the exhibition opened in October, I waited until last week before making the trip because there was another fashion exhibition that recently opened at the High Museum of Art (more on that later, of course).

I can’t say enough about what a great job the people at SCAD have done with this first show.  The exhibition hall is quite large, and it circles around to make good use of their space.  The mannequins are, for the most part, arranged so that visitors can get very close to see the details, and to see the backs of garments as well.  Student docents were positioned around the hall to answer questions and to show photos on an ipad of the women who lent the garments.  This dress belongs to singer Taylor Swift, who wore this dress to the Charles James Gala at the Met in 2014.

I do look at any exhibition with the bias of an historian, and unfortunately, for me, this is where the show came up a bit short.  I realize that this is a museum of design, not of history, and so I have no right to expect the museum to be something it is not. Still, the older works of de la Renta were under-represented.  The oldest dress came from the first collection he designed under his own name in 1965.  It is the dress in the center, and my pictures cannot begin to tell you just how great this little black dress is.  That white satin sash is not a sash at all; it is a built in waistband.

(I believe this is the Oscar de la Renta for Jane Derby label, though the docent could not confirm this.  She was not there for the instillation, and did not see the label.)

There were several dresses from the late 1970s and early 80s, all donated to SCAD by Cornelia Guest, in honor of her mother, C.Z. Guest, to whom the clothes belonged originally.  Unfortunately, none of these were actually dated, something that could have been achieved with a bit of time and research.

The remainder of the garments in the exhibition dated from 2000 or later.  Even though these clothes are not vintage, they are an excellent representation of the work de la Renta did over the course of his long career.  And most importantly, it shows why these clothes are so special.  In order to see it, you have to get up close.

Click to enlarge

There was a lot to love in the eighty-four garments on display, but I really do think my favorites were these two, both owned by Bee Shaffer.  The amount of handwork on each was amazing, with the embroidery being engineered in order to fit the pattern pieces.

The coat on the left is owned by Bee’s mother, Anna Wintour.  I looked very carefully, and could not tell if this was made from an antique paisley textile.  Seeing as how it was made by de la Renta when he was doing couture for the French House of Balmain, it is possible.  The embroidered coat is owned by Mercedes Bass.

An interesting aspect to the show is that it includes dresses from the designer who took de la Renta’s place after he died, Peter Copping.  These dresses are part of the Oscar de la Renta archive and were lent to the exhibition by the company, a practice that is not universally embraced by museum critics.  In this case, however, it does allow the observer to closely compare the work of the two men.  The two dresses on the left, and the one on the right with the ruffles are by Copping; the white and black coat is by de la Renta.

Click

This close-up of the coat shows not only the craftsmanship of the house of Oscar de la Renta, it also points out the power of seeing these pieces in person, in an environment that allows one to get really close.  A coat that might look as though it is made from a print is revealed to be constructed of grosgrain and rick-rack on a base of tulle.

This great little dress of checked silk is from the fall 2015 collection by Copping, and it is on sale on the ODLR website for $1395.  The flowered print dress to the left is also for sale on the site.  It does seem to be a bit odd to have garments that can still be seen in stores in a museum exhibition and tend to blur the line between exhibition and commerce.

Look carefully at the photograph to see Karl Lagerfeld and Oscar dancing the merengue, 2002.

Here are two more ensembles from the closet of Mercedes Bass.  I adore this coat and matching dress made of red silk appliqued on black.  The coat closes with large snap to the waist, and I’m sure it looks like a one-piece garment when it is closed.

This embroidered cashmere coat was worn by First Lady Laura Bush to the 2005 presidential inauguration.  Several of her garments were on loan to the exhibition from the Bush Library and Museum.  I remember when she wore this beautiful coat, and it was a real pleasure seeing it.

This hall of mirrors made a stunning backdrop for a collection of de la Renta evening gowns.

This gown was inspired by the Marie Antoinette film of 2006, and the star, Kirsten Dunst was photographed in the dress for Vogue. The mirrors allowed the viewer to see the front, side and back of the dress.

The dress in the center was the wedding dress of Miranda Brooks, and is unusual in that it is made from cotton.  The embroidered flowers symbolize her daughters, Poppy and Violette.  The more obvious wedding dress, to the left, was designed by de la Renta for his step-daughter’s wedding, and the suit to the left was worn by Annette de la Renta, the mother of the bride.

This silk velvet gown with diamante straps was designed by de la Renta for Balmain Couture in 2000.  The coat is also Balmain Couture.

This visit was especially enjoyable because I was able to share it with Liza of Better Dresses Vintage, a fellow member of the Vintage Fashion Guild.  It was a treat having someone with whom to discuss each design.

One thing that we both remarked on was the display of a gown belonging to Oprah Winfrey.  It was displayed on a skinny seated mannequin which did the dress no favors at all.  The bust was droopy and just sad looking, and the dress deserved so much more.

I have really high hopes and expectations for SCAD FASH.  This first exhibition was beautiful and fun, and I loved the accessibility visitors had to the clothes.  Another real plus was a little exhibition book that was given to visitors.  It all makes me excited to see what SCAD FASH has in store for us next.

 

18 Comments

Filed under Designers, Museums

Daughters of Revolution, Grant Wood

Click to enlarge

One of the best surprises at the Cincinnati Museum of Art was this painting by American artist, Grant Wood.  You are probably aware of his most famous (and most parodied) work, American Gothic, but Daughters of Revolution is probably the work of his that has the most interesting backstory. What looks like at first glance a simple statement of the  patriotism of three women is actually a statement about hypocrisy.

Wood painted Daughters of Revolution in reaction to an conflict with the Daughters of the American Revolution.  In the late 1920s Wood had been commissioned to make a stained glass window for the Veterans Memorial Building in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.  Because he was not happy with the quality of glass available to him in the United States, he obtained the glass from Germany.  When the local branch of the DAR heard about the German glass, their protests kept the work from being dedicated until many years after Wood’s death.

Thankfully, Wood was quick to show the country what he thought of this interference.  The painting shows three daughters, one who looks suspiciously like George Washington and another like Benjamin Franklin, posing in front of the famous patriotic painting, Washington Crossing the Delaware.  To Wood it was significant that the painting was made by German American artist Emmanuel Leutze, who painted it in Germany using the Rhine as a stand in for the Delaware.  One daughter is wearing pearl earrings (from the Orient), another is holding a teacup (made in England using a Chinese design), and the other is wearing a collar made of fine lace (Belgian, perhaps?).

His point made, Wood continued his assault by making his subjects look like anti-revolutionaries.  What could be more common and sedate than three little old ladies sitting around in their nice clothes drinking tea and talking about their glorious ancestors?

I’ve noticed on the internet a trend toward referring to older people as “cute” or “adorable.”   I think a close examination of this painting shows the folly in that practice.

A side note:

Daughters of Revolution originally belonged to actor Edward G. Robinson, who according to one source, bought it directly from Wood.  The Cincinnati Art Museum obtained the painting from Robinson’s estate in the 1970s.

11 Comments

Filed under Museums, Viewpoint

High Style at the Cincinnati Art Museum, Part II

Click to Enlarge

High Style is one of those exhibitions that has a surprise at every turn.  The black (actually dark green, but it looks black)  dress is by Elizabeth Hawes, and it was dubbed “The Tarts” dress by its creator.  Dating from 1937, it was thought to be suggestive, with that arrow pointing toward the breasts.  On the back of the dress there is a purple arrow that points downward to the butt.

The white and black dress was designed by Madame Eta Hentz.  Lynn at American Age Fashion recent wrote about visiting the Madame Eta archive at the FIT library.  Interestingly, one of the garments Lynn showed was the dress above, so I really enjoyed seeing it.  One thing I’d not noticed in the photos I had seen of this dress  is that the over-lapping “wings” were semi-detached, and so there would have been a bit of movement in the design.

Click

The exhibition was not just about dresses; accessories were well represented.  All the hats above are from milliner Sally Victor.  The hat in the middle looks like an elaborate braided hairstyle and dates from 1937.  The red and green hat at the right had the green jersey forming a turban in the back.

Click

Even sportswear can be high style, especially in the hands of Bonnie Cashin and Carolyn Schnurer.  The plaid ensemble is from Cashin, and looks as if it could be from the late 1960s.  The date is actually 1943, which shows how Cashin remained true to her design aesthetic throughout her career.  Note the little matching spats.

Carolyn Schnurer designed resortwear based on textiles she found in her international travels.  The two garments above were from her “Flight to India” collection of 1950.  You can see the Indian influence in the sari-like draping and in the textile.

Click

I hate that this photo is so blurry, as this ensemble from Claire McCardell is so wonderful.  The striped hooded top is made from jersey, while the skirt is cotton poplin.  The hooded coat is reversible, with one side being jersey, and the other brown poplin.  No wonder her designs were so popular.

Click

All three dresses above were designed by Gilbert Adrian.  The two on the left show how Adrian worked with unusual colors combinations, much in the way an artist would.  The tiger striped dress reveals Adrian’s roots as a Hollywood designer in a design that would have been right at home on an actress.  Actually, all three dresses belonged to an actress, Adrian’s wife, Janet Gaynor.

Click

Here are more hats from Sally Victor.  On the left is one of the hats Victor made based on the art of Mondrian, and next to it is one with Matisse-like cutouts.  The hat that looks a bit like an upside down pie crust was actually called the “Airwave” and was designed for First Lady Mamie Eisenhower in 1952.  The First Lady had the hat in several color combinations (the lining being in a contrasting color) and it was available to the public as well.

Click

Most of the designers represented so far in my tour have been women, but men designers were featured as well.  The dress on the left was designed by Geoffrey Beene around 1965.  Would it be too matchy-matchy to have worn that Sally Victor Matisse hat with this dress?  Look carefully at the hem to see that it was scalloped, and that it was lined in bright pink.

The dotted bubble hemmed dress with the red coat was designed by Arnold Scaasi in 1961.  Next to it is a 1955 silk evening dress from James Galanos.  That dress looked to be so light that it would be blown away in a slight breeze.  And finally, there is a pants for evening ensemble by Norman Norell, a revolutionary idea in 1970.

Click

One of the highlights of this exhibition was the inclusion of quite a few garments from Charles James along with the digital deconstruction videos that were developed by the Met for the big Charles James show in 2014.  These videos incorporated x-rays of the dresses which showed the complex structure of the garments, as well as pattern pieces that magically formed the finished garment on display.  It was highly effective.

Two of the celebrated “Four Leaf Clover” gowns were on display.  As with some of the other dresses, this one had no visible means of support, and you could see the interior of the bodice.

I’m not much of a lace-wearer, but for some reason I love seeing techniques of lace application.  The way the lace was molded to the dress was truly amazing.

Click

Another highlight of the James display was the inclusion of some of the original working  muslin patterns.  On the left is one of his ribbon dresses, a development of an idea he had gotten from a stash of wide antique ribbons he found in Paris.  On the right is his pattern in muslin.

The pieced “ribbons” on the right continue around to the back of the dress where they come to a point, with the back pieces fitting neatly under the front.  High style, indeed!

If you are planning to see High Style at the Cincinnati Art Museum, I suggest that you plan for the whole day.  To see High Style, taking your time and taking in all the information presented takes at least two hours (unless you were in the tour groups that breezed through in twenty minutes).  Plus, the rest of the museum is really great.  I was there four hours and could have stayed longer.

Admission to the Cincinnati Art Museum is, incredibly, free, though parking is $4.  They do have a nice gift store, and I’m sure they depend on it to help support the museum.  I bought the companion book  to the exhibition at the museum though I knew I could have gotten it cheaper through Amazon.  I consider the extra price to be a donation.

 

18 Comments

Filed under Designers, Museums, Road Trip

High Style at the Cincinnati Art Museum

I spent a lot of time this past spring and early summer looking at the Instagrams of people in San Francisco and being really jealous.  That’s because they were torturing me with their fantastic photos from a traveling exhibition from the Met’s Costume Institute, High Style: The Brooklyn Museum Costume Collection.  So I was delighted to hear that the last showing was to be in Cincinnati, which is only a five hour drive from me.

We decided to wait for a good weekend weather-wise, and that gift came earlier than expected.  Last week we loaded the car and headed north to take in the exhibition, and to explore Cincinnati, a city we’d never before visited.  I’m not going to beat around the bush.  If you are anywhere near Cincinnati before January 24, 2016, when the show closes for good, you must see this exhibition.

This is especially true if you did not have the opportunity to see the Met’s Charles James: Beyond Fashion show last year.  Much of the James material, including some amazing computer deconstructions of the clothing on exhibit is included in this show.  I’ll tell more about that in part two of this review.

The exhibition covers the 20th century, and includes both fashion from Europe and the United States.  Above is the back of a Jeanne Lanvin silver lamé dress, summer 1923.  Many of the garments were arranged so that the front was on view, and then you turned a corner to see the back.  To me the back of this dress was the most interesting, with the obi-like train and its (barely visible) Lanvin blue lining.  The embroidery was made with very thin ribbons.

Click to Enlarge

Here are what are probably my favorites in the entire show.   The two capes or wraps are from Liberty & Co. of London, and they are effectively displayed over Fortuny dresses.  Both capes are silk brocade, woven in a peacock feather pattern, a design by Liberty textile designer Arthur Silver.

To the right you get a glimpse of two Callot Soeurs ensembles, both made for Rita de Costa Lydig circa 1913.  Lydig was a collector of antique lace which Callot Soeurs used in their work for her.  Note that the “dresses” under the lace vest and tunic are actually pants.

Click to enlarge

In the center are two 1920s dresses.  The lace dress is from Jeanne Lanvin, 1925.  The red is from the lesser-known Suzanne Talbot, but it is a real stunner.  Also from 1925, it is made from one long length of silk.

Click

The simple frock on the left is from Jean Patou.  Patou was known for his sports clothes, and was very influential in establishing the sporty look of the 1920s.  The middle evening dress was not attributed, but proves that a dress need not have a label in order to be fabulous.  The beaded and embroidered dress on the right is from designer Edward Molyneux, 1925.

And just in case you were wondering why I included a photo of the Patou, here’s a close-up of the details.  It is a not-so-simple, simple little frock.

Click to enlarge

Both of these dresses are by Elsa Schiaparelli, who was well-represented in the exhibition.  That is a very good thing, as Schiaparelli garments are rarely seen, so it was a real treat to see not only the dresses, but also some of her surrealist jewelry.  The butterfly dress and parasol date from 1937. The blue dress is actually appliqued using cut-outs from a fabric printed with seed packets, one of which forms a pocket.  There is an exposed zipper in the back, a common Schiap treatment, one that  has been repeated in recent years.

One of the real stars of the show (no pun, seriously!) was this Schiaparelli jacket from her 1938 Zodiac collection.  The embroidery was by Lesage, the Rolls Royce of French embroiderers.  Simply amazing.

Click

The lovely Grecian creation on the left is from Hungarian-American designer Eta Hentz.  Manufacturing under the name Ren-Eta Gowns, it’s a bit hard to imagine that this dress was ready-to-wear.  1944.

One the right is one of the many Elizabeth Hawes dresses that was in the Brooklyn Museum collection.  When the collection was taken to the Met in 2009, many of the Hawes pieces were deacquisitioned and sent to auction,a move I did not understand considering the rarity of Hawes pieces.  But it is obvious they kept the masterworks if this dress is an example.  Look closely to see that there is gold piping between the pieces that shape the waist, and the shaping continues to the back where the pieces seem to ripple like a waterfall to the hem.  It is a stunning dress.

Click

The dark pink dress (and jacket)  is from Madeleine Vionnet, circa 1935.  It is, of course, made from a bias-cut silk.  The black dress is also by Vionnet.

The white evening dress is from Madame Alix Gres, 1937.  It’s construction is interesting, as each half (left and right) is actually just one long length of uncut fabric that goes from the hem in front, is folded to form the peplum, across the shoulder, folded again, and then to the hem.

The copper dress is also from Madame Gres, and is maybe the oddest Gres I’ve ever seen.  Still, there is plenty of her trademark pleating and volume.

I’ll continue my tour of High Style in my next post.  I want to finish this one by saying what a great job the Met and the Cincinnati Art Museum have done in making this exhibition such a great experience.  The exhibition space was spread out in such a way that one could view the clothes without feeling crowded or rushed.  Most of the clothes were not behind glass, and so it let the visitors get really close to examine the details.  It was simply a great fashion history experience.

15 Comments

Filed under Designers, Museums

Greensboro Historical Museum

We spent a pleasant afternoon at the Greensboro Historical Museum, which is a lot more than just the holder of that fantastic Dolley Madison collection.  I’ve been to a lot of museums, big and small, and I’ve found that the measure of a good one is how it tells the story it sets out to tell.  In this case, it is easy; the story is the history of the City of Greensboro and the surrounding area.  And this little museum has a very good exhibition that tells that story with artifacts and interactive displays.

I always tend to focus in on the parts that tell women’s history and the history of textiles and clothing.  Above are pictured artifacts from the Woman’s College of the University of North Carolina.  Founded as a normal school in 1891, WC is now the University of North Carolina at Greensboro.  At one time it was the largest college for women in the country.  Men were admitted starting in 1963.  My friend Carole who attended Women’s College before the name change still refers to UNC-G by the old name.

North Carolina is historically known for textiles, and Greensboro in particular is known for the production of denim.  There were interesting displays showing the large producers of the area – Blue Bell, the maker of Wrangler jeans, and Cone Mills, maker of denim fabric.

Considering the importance of textiles to the growth of Greensboro, I’d have expected a bit more about the industry.  But though the exhibit was small, there were lots of interesting things to see, and I learned a bit more about Cone.

There was a display on mill towns which included some photos and quotes about how children and education were valued.  Some mills provided kindergartens for the workers’ children.

On one floor the museum has set up a replica of some of the old town that has historical significance.  Writer O. Henry was a native of Greensboro, and he worked at a drugstore that was owned by an uncle.  He became a licensed pharmacist, a skill that helped him years later when he was imprisoned for embezzlement.  He was able to work in the prison hospital, away from the general prison population.

I can imagine that school groups really like this little town vignette, as it is a bit like going back in time.  There is also a hotel and a school with all sorts of things to explore.

There were a few exhibits that were a bit puzzling.  There was a room full of pottery from the Jugtown potters, which is not located in nor associated with Greensboro.  They also have a huge collection of Civil War guns that was exhibited in a very large area that prominently  displayed the names and portraits of the collectors.  Even my husband, who has a great interest in old firearms, admitted that it was gun overload.

I don’t know the circumstances of these items in the museum’s holdings, but one thing that many museums have to grapple with is the way their collections fit in with their mission statement.  I know that it must be difficult to say no to a donor, especially one who is also willing to donate money, but in this day and time when museums have moved beyond being mere cabinets of curiosities, it is important to stick to the purpose of the institution.  Personally, I’d have liked to see more of the Dolley Madison collection and less of the firearms.

As much as I love the great museums I’ve visited, I can’t say enough about the value of a museum like this one.  All places are unique, with interesting people and stories that need to be heard.  I urge you to seek out the small museums in your area and support them.

 

9 Comments

Filed under Museums, North Carolina