Artifact preventive care at exhibits

[Tarn Stephanos]

From the 5 exhibits I worked, the artifacts were contained within their respective display cases, and outside of the dehumidifyers in the various exhibition halls, the environmental controls were limited.
Under the artifacts was a panel where we had a container of a substance that was supposed to draw moisture from the air, but who knows if it worked..
There was no protective film on the cases, as they were regular glass, but the exhibit lighting was kept dim so as to protect many of the artifacts from fading...

In theory, the artifact cases were supposed to be airtight sealed and humidity controled, but that wasnt always the case...

In Boston we watched the jar of perfectly preserved olives turn from green to gray...

In St. Paul once the mooring bollard tank burst, that artifact crumbled before our eyes, which proved to me some of the artifacts were too large and delicate to survive the strain of transport on the road.
All the more reason a permanant museum needs to be found for the artifacts.

Conservator Joe Sembrat did a stellar job conserving the Big Piece- but the conservation on that artifact was supposed to be ongoing...It should be getting occasional conservation ''check ups', but is not, as such costs money.....

These days many of the artifacts not on display are in storage in a GA warehouse, as litigation within RMS Titanic Inc drags on, which pretty much sums up the current attention , or lack therof, given to proper conservatiuon of the artifacts.

Tarn Stephanos

 

[Deborah Russes]

Why is there such a problem with own "owns" the artifacts that are being fought over? It seems almost disrespectful to me and any of the descendents. I imagine it all goes back to money.

It seems so sad for the artifacts to be locked away in a dark warehouse. I would rather have the things in a museum (even if the artifacts are divided between two or three museums). It would seem like more of a tribute to those who lost their lives as well as those who lived through the tragedy.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>Why is there such a problem with own "owns" the artifacts that are being fought over? It seems almost disrespectful to me and any of the descendents. I imagine it all goes back to money.<<

Yeah...but who's money and property? This may seem a bit hard to grasp, but ownership of a vessel and her contents doesn't end as soon as the hulk slips beneath the waves. Ownership and all the attendant property rights remains. That's why RMSTI is legally referred to as "The Salvor in Possession."

They have custody of the wreck and the artifacts, but ownership remains with the people who owned the ship, or the heirs, assigns, and anyone else who may have a lawful claim on the vessel and her contents. This would include the insurance companies or the corperate decendants of the insurance companies which paid off on any claims made.

It can be quite a mess to sort out too, but at least the lawyers get a little job security that way.

 

[Deborah Russes]

I think I do understand. I guess part of what I mean to ask is why are some of the artifacts on display while others are packed away in a warehouse? How does someone determine which ones are "allowed" to leave a vicinity and travel.

One other question...I understand who owns the ship...but the passenger items, they can't belong to the people who owners of the ship...I know that it is hard to prove who owns a pair of shoes or a bracelet...isn't there, at least, a separate organization that represents the passengers? If so, do they own the personal items that passengers brought on board with them?

Picky questions, huh?

 

[Hillary Kidd]

Hi Deborah~

>>I guess part of what I mean to ask is why are some of the artifacts on display while others are packed away in a warehouse? How does someone determine which ones are "allowed" to leave a vicinity and travel.<<

The reason some of the artifacts are still in storage is because they still need to be preserved by a conservator. Treatments need to be done to stabilize the deterioration that has been done from laying at the bottom of the sea. Until that is done they shouldn't be allowed to go on exhibit.

peace, Hillary

 

[Claire McConville]

I recently visited the Titanic Exhibition at the Science Museum in London and can say they go to great lengths to keep the artifacts preserved in good condition whilst on display. I was nearly blown away by one of the big fans on the wall... I didn't notice it until I walked in front of it and lost my breath in the process Brilliant exhibition it was too it was just a shame that I couldn't stay for the film "Ghosts of the Abyss" as I was on a schedule to get back for children from school.

 

[Paul Lee]

Hi Claire,
Glad you liked the Science Museum exhibit - I used to work there! The museum does take great care to preserve the exhibits, and the fans and air conditioning units were installed because of numerous complaints about it being too hot in there...nothing to do with the artefacts at all!

The only "bad" thing that happened to was shortly after the exhibit opened. The lanyard holding up the ship's bell snapped. The security crew (it was about 8.00am one morning) heard a tremendous "clang!" and rushed to see what had happened, to find the bell on the floor. Amazingly, the bell survived!

best wishes

Paul

 

[Tarn Stephanos]

Hi Paul
Wow, thats rather a shock about the accidental dropping of the bell- almost as shocking an experince as watching the Mooring Bollard disintigrate in St. Paul...
I hope the bell wasnt damaged..
regards

tarn Stephanos

 

[Paul Lee]

Yes, the bell survived without a scratch on it. Very tough little blighter!

Paul

 

[Claire McConville]

Paul,

Good thing I wasn't there at the time.... I might have been tempted to stick it under my jumper imagine having a piece like that on display in your living room