Memorandum submitted by the Public Catalogue
Foundation
1. SUMMARY OF
THE PUBLIC
CATALOGUE FOUNDATION'S
FINDINGS
1.1 The Public Catalogue Foundation believes
that a priority for the forthcoming Heritage White Paper should
be a call for the DCMS, MLA, Heritage Lottery Fund and local authorities
to focus more on identifying what and where our heritage is. Giving
wide access to our heritage is essential but this cannot be achieved
if that heritage is not recorded and published. A requirement
for the guardians of our heritage must be to create basic, comprehensive
illustrated catalogue records of the objects in their care and
to ensure these records are made available for all to see.
1.2 In the case of our National Collection
of oil paintings—being dispersed obscures the fact that
in sum this is a national collection—it is our finding that
this is not the case. A surprisingly large number of collections
lack a complete list of paintings with basic cataloguing information
and very few have a complete photographic record. Hardly any has
a printed comprehensive illustrated catalogue or an equivalent
online. Given that over 80% of the oil paintings in public ownership
are held in storage or buildings without public access, this means
that both the public and the guardians of our National Collection
have a poor awareness of the oil paintings we all own. What is
publicly owned is not publicly accessible.
1.3 A combination of lack of funding, insufficient
curatorial expertise and a perception that this is not a DCMS
priority are the reasons for this poor state of affairs. Our view
is that without leadership from the DCMS on the need for improved
catalogue records and the provision of funds to achieve this,
the guardians of our National Collection will continue to be overwhelmed
by the task of caring for their collections and making them accessible.
As a result we will remain ignorant of a rich and important part
of our national heritage. Moreover, over time a proportion of
this will be forgotten and will decay. This, in our view, is irresponsible.
2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION
OF THE
PUBLIC CATALOGUE
FOUNDATION
2.1 In the absence of any government (central
or local) action to address this problem, the Public Catalogue
Foundation, a registered charity, was set up to publish a national
series of illustrated catalogues of all oil paintings in public
ownership in the UK. The project will give UK public collections
and the general public their first comprehensive, photographic
record of these works of art. Subject to funding being found,
these catalogues will be put on the Net for the public to see
at no cost. Money raised from the sale of catalogues by collections
is held by them to finance painting conservation and gallery education.
At the end of the project, surplus funds will be returned to the
participating collections for this purpose.
2.2 The Public Catalogue Foundation (PCF)
was founded in late 2002 by Dr Fred Hohler. In April 2003 it was
officially launched at the National Gallery, London. In October
2003, the PCF merged with the National Inventory of European Paintings.
This project (now called the National Inventory Research Project)
is a separate but complementary project with a more academic focus.
This merger and the appointment of Christopher Wright (an art
historian who had already published an un-illustrated inventory
of publicly owned European oil paintings), to the PCF's Advisory
Panel brought together the key parties working on creating an
inventory of oil paintings in public ownership in the UK.
2.3 The Board of Trustees comprises Dr Fred
Hohler (Chairman), Dermot Chichester (Chairman of Christie's),
Charles Gregson (Non-Executive Chairman of ICAP, Director of United
Business Media), Robert Hiscox (Chairman of Hiscox Insurance)
and Dr Charles Saumarez Smith (Director of the National Gallery).
Dr Alan Borg (former Director of the Victoria and Albert Museum)
is Chairman of the Advisory Panel. Andrew Ellis is the Director.
2.4 With a permanent staff of only three and
dynamic use of freelance staff, the PCF is able to publish the
catalogue series in an extremely cost-effective manner. The team
aims to publish 10 catalogues per year. The project is based in
the National Gallery, London. The Foundation is a company limited
by guarantee incorporated in England and Wales with number 4573564
and was registered as a charity in February 2003 with number 1096185.
3. OUR NATIONAL
COLLECTION OF
OIL PAINTINGS—PCF
FINDINGS AND
CONCERNS
The National Collection of oil paintings
3.1 Our National Collection of oil paintings
is a national heritage asset of great importance and value, and
probably without equal amongst other public collections in the
world in terms of size, range and variety. These paintings are
important not only as works of art but also as representations
of our history and evolving landscape. It is difficult to estimate
how many paintings there are but our Advisory Panel conservatively
puts it as upwards of 150,000. Whilst some of these paintings
are held in our National Museums, the vast majority are held elsewhere,
principally in regional museums but also in civic buildings such
as town halls, libraries, universities, hospitals and fire stations.
The PCF is cataloguing all of these.
3.2 What unites this collection is the common
medium and the fact that these paintings are held in trust for
the nation and for future generations. "Held in trust"
implies that the guardians of the National Collection are all
responsible for recording, preserving and displaying (where possible)
the paintings in their care. Viewing this as one collection and
as a single resource should hold considerable advantages for the
collection's guardians and the viewing public. It should mean
that large numbers of paintings are available to be lent between
collections. And it should mean that information, resources and
skills are shared efficaciously between collections. However,
in our view, the guardians of our National Collection of oil paintings
are not able to fulfil this responsibility and these opportunities
are not being exploited.
The poor quality of painting records
3.3 The poor quality of data about the paintings
in the National Collection is the most surprising finding of this
project. Whereas the Office for National Statistics can tell us
how many visits we made to the cinema last year, we have no real
idea as to the number of paintings we own. This is not due to
a lack of attempts to aggregate the paintings owned by each collection;
it reflects the fact that the majority of collections simply cannot
tell you how many paintings they have. The Sheffield Galleries
and Museums Trust could give us no more accurate estimate of the
number of oil paintings it owned than that it was between 3,000
and 4,000. This is not unusual.
3.4 Collecting painting data from collections
is an important aspect of this project. Our "essential"
data requirements are straightforward: title, artist, execution
date, dimensions, medium, acquisition method, inventory number.
Of the c.150 collections we have catalogued to date only one (a
hospital) has been able to provide a complete set of data on the
first attempt. In almost all cases, it has required a number of
attempts to pull together records that often end up being incomplete;
the PCF then has to find the remaining information itself. Painting
records vary greatly in their sophistication. Larger museums typically
(but not always) have a database of records although in a number
of cases they do not have the technical expertise to export the
data from these records. For smaller and medium-sized collections,
records are either on databases, spreadsheets, Word documents
or card. In a few cases—mainly outside the museum sector
in town halls and libraries—there are no records at all.
Within collections the consistency of record-keeping is often
variable and it is common to find collections where there are
paintings without records or, worse, records without paintings.
In a few cases in the museum world there are paintings that have
not been accessioned properly and in many cases in non-museum
collections there are paintings without inventory numbers. No
collection catalogued to date has been able to provide existing
colour images for more than 50% of the paintings in its collection.
Indeed the vast majority of collections have virtually no good
quality colour photographs of their paintings.
3.5 There are a number of reasons for this.
The principal reason is that over recent years there has been
a significant reduction in the number of painting curators and
support staff able to complete records. The vast majority of museums
included in the PCF series to date do not have painting expertise
on their staff now. In a few cases, museums with significant numbers
of oil paintings do not have a painting curator. Interestingly,
(and disturbingly) collections without such expertise do not have
a county source to turn to for advice. Another reason for the
poor record-keeping in our National Collection has been, in our
opinion, a focus over the last few years on "access"
at the expense of the more mundane collection record-keeping.
Poor access to our National Collection of oil
paintings
3.6 With over 80% of UK publicly owned oil
paintings in storage or in buildings without public access, this
lack of publicly available catalogue data and photographs for
so many of our nation's paintings means that at the most basic
level the public (let alone the art world) has no chance of knowing
what it owns and engaging with it fully.
3.7 At the national level this lack of comprehensive
information about the collections we own means that there isn't
the knowledge of the stock of paintings to ensure mobility of
paintings between collections through loans. At the local level,
the lack of painting expertise within collections means that there
is often insufficient knowledge to rotate paintings within the
same collection. This is increasingly compounded by a reduction
in the number of technicians to move paintings.
3.8 Despite a national emphasis on "access",
the insufficient emphasis on record-keeping has resulted in a
reduced ability to show the paintings we all own.
Oil paintings at risk
3.9 A large number of the oil paintings
in our National Collection face an increasingly high risk of decay.
All paintings are vulnerable to incorrect or fluctuating levels
of humidity and temperature as well as, of course, accidental
damage or insect infestation. Regular checks of stores and conservation
work should be a routine aspect of collection care. However, many
regional museums and civic buildings have poor and inappropriate
storage, and no budget whatsoever for conservation and restoration.
And where budgets exist, in many cases they have been significantly
cut in the last few years. It is difficult to gauge the extent
of this but what is certain is that each year the state of repair
of the National Collection deteriorates further and the number
of paintings that it is no longer worth restoring increases. Without
a record of what they look like now, many more paintings will
fall into this category and in time be forgotten and ultimately
lost. Collections that are damaged accidentally also fall into
this category. Much of the collection in Ramsgate Museum which
was destroyed by fire in August 2004 would have been forgotten
if it had not been photographed by the PCF a few months before.
On a final depressing note we should add that we have come across
at least one major collection of oil paintings including a large
number of Gainsboroughs and Constables that appears to be uninsured
due to cut-backs in local authority support. We would be surprised
if this is the only one.
Poor access and oil paintings at risk; what is
being done?
3.10 We accept that it is impossible for
collections around the country to show all their works or even
a high proportion of them. However, it is our impression that
the guardians of paintings in collections around the country are
now so overwhelmed by the task of caring for their oil painting
collections that without external help there is little chance
of an improvement in access to this National Collection over the
next few years and there is a significant risk of further deterioration
to the paintings.
3.11 Our impression is that the focus in
the museum world on "access" relates principally to
making a small number of paintings (generally by well-known artists)
more easily understood by existing museum audiences and by audiences
they would like to attract. Whilst this is important, this focus
appears to be at the expense of allowing general access to all
the paintings (whether physically or through photographs) owned
by the public. We believe the public has every right to connect
with the entirety of the National Collection, a collection that
has been given to it or been bought for it with public funds.
3.12 In our view whilst the issue of poor
collection catalogue data is now at last being recognised (vide
the 2005 Museums Association report Collections for the
Future), the extent of the problem is still not fully appreciated.
More importantly, little seems to be being done about it. In our
view the DCMS and MLA are putting insufficient emphasis on improving
collection catalogue records. Similarly, the Heritage Lottery
Fund does not appear to believe that providing basic photographic
records of our National Collection of paintings is an important
step towards improving access. Not surprisingly, local authorities,
with apparently no statutory obligation to care for these objects,
do not have this as a high priority. Our experience to date suggests
that programmes to digitise collections (such as the New Opportunities
Fund programme) have only had limited impact. Meanwhile, as far
as we are aware, despite reductions in funding available for the
conservation and restoration of paintings, there are no centrally-led
initiatives to put a stop to the gradual deterioration in the
condition of the national collection.
4. WHAT THE
PCF IS DOING
ABOUT THIS
4.1 The PCF is producing a series of county-by-county
catalogues of all oil paintings in public ownership. Each catalogue
contains a colour photograph of every oil (and acrylic and tempera)
painting together with basic information about the painting (as
described above). At the back of the catalogue extra information
covering acquisition information and copyright credit lines is
given. Paintings are shown nine to a page and are organised first
by town, then by collection and finally in alphabetical order
of artist surname. Many collections are preceded by a curatorial
foreword and full-page reproductions appear every 10 pages. All
paintings receive the same attention whether they are by Caravaggio
or by a local Cornish artist. All paintings are reproduced, whatever
the quality, whatever the condition. It is left to the reader
to decide what is good and bad. Catalogues are priced at £20
for the soft cover and £35 for the hard cover.
4.2 Six catalogues have been published to
date by the PCF. The first was West Yorkshire: Leeds in
June 2004. Since then Kent, London: the Slade and UCL, West
Sussex, East Sussex and Suffolk have been published.
A dozen catalogues are in preparation. In total the PCF believes
that there might be around 80 catalogues in the series. The PCF
is determined to complete this work in eight years.
4.3 The catalogues are regarded as invaluable
by the art world. Sir Nicholas Serota has said "The colour
reproductions, the comprehensiveness of the catalogues and the
assembly of so much information in one volume will make this an
invaluable tool for research, scholarship and education."
Sandy Nairne, Mark Jones, David Verey, David Barrie, Roy Strong,
Brian Allen and, of course, Charles Saumarez Smith and Alan Borg
are among a long list of leaders in the art world who support
the work we are doing.
4.4 The national, local and specialist art
press has praised the project. Our work has been the subject of
a Burlington editorial. And the Editor of Apollo magazine has
said that the catalogues are "unputdownably browsable."
4.5 Following a long article in the Observer
colour supplement in December 2005 the PCF has been approached
by a number of television companies about making a series of programmes
about paintings in regional collections and the work the PCF is
doing to bring these to light.
4.6 The benefits to collections are considerable
and come at no financial cost to them. The principal benefit is
free digital images of all their paintings. This allows them to
put their paintings on their own websites as and when they wish.
Importantly, it also allows the collections to generate an income
stream for themselves from these images. The PCF gives to collections
in a county 250 soft cover copies for free to be sold in museum
shops to raise money for restoration, conservation and gallery
education related to the catalogues. The catalogues act as the
perfect art gazetteer for art lovers visiting the county and as
such raise the profile of the collections. This should result
in improved visitor numbers to the collections and the county.
Finally, the catalogues act as perfect reference works for the
collections' curators. David Beevers, Keeper of Art at Brighton
and Hove Museum (one of the largest collections in the South)
says, "I do not know how we managed without it. An open copy
is always besides me."
4.7 The PCF is currently seeking partners
in order to put the project online (Public Catalogue Online).
It is planned that access to the illustrated database would be
free at the point of use. Search facilities would allow users
to find paintings by artist, collection and subject matter. Public
Catalogue Online would in time hold images and data for all
oil paintings in public ownership—over 150,000. As a single
comprehensive illustrated database of possibly the finest public
collection of oil paintings in the world, this would represent
an extraordinary resource for a large variety of users particularly
in education. The 21st century will be the century of digital
libraries and the UK will have the first complete photographic
record of all its publicly owned oil paintings.
5. ENSURING THE
WORK OF
THE PUBLIC
CATALOGUE FOUNDATION
CONTINUES
5.1 Each catalogue costs on average £60,000
to publish including an allocation of the PCF's fixed costs. Catalogue
sales will in time provide a significant part of the project's
funding but for now this is not the case. Instead, each catalogue's
production costs are funded through donations and grants, much
of which is raised locally. In almost every case this is an uphill
struggle. As catalogues cannot be printed without being funded
in advance, our production rate has suffered (although this is
still respectable at six catalogues published in the last 18 months).
5.2 The vast majority of funds raised for
the project have come from the private sector—in total some
80%. Grant-giving trusts, foundations and societies have proved
to be the most generous supporters of the project contributing
40% of total funding to date. This is followed by companies (26%)
with Christie's PLC, Hiscox PLC, Saga and ICAP being strong supporters.
Individuals have provided 15% of funding. In the early stages
of the project, loan finance (principally from Christie's and
Fred Hohler) was important in providing the start-up capital.
5.3 Despite our focus being publicly owned
oil paintings, public money has not readily supported this project
(it constitutes just under 20% of our funding to date). After
an encouraging grant of £30,000 from the DCMS paid to the
National Gallery in 2004 to support our first two catalogues,
the main source of public money for the project since then has
been County Council grants (typically £5,000 to £10,000
per catalogue). The central MLA has not provided any funding and
only one regional MLA (East of England) has provided financial
support—£2,500 across two catalogues. More promising
has been the commitment of the West Midlands Museums Hub to give
a grant of £15,000 towards our Staffordshire catalogue with
an indication that further similar grants might be forthcoming
towards the four subsequent West Midlands catalogues. We are told
that the North East Museums Hub might also consider making a grant.
The South East, South West and East of England Hubs have indicated
they cannot support us. No other Hubs have been approached. Finally,
the Arts Council said this was not a project they would fund.
5.4 It has always been our view that the
PCF's objectives of improving access to our national heritage
and helping to preserve it are in perfect accord with the Heritage
Lottery Fund's focus and remit. However, despite encouraging noises
from senior personnel at the HLF, our "Your Heritage"
application for the funding of one county (Suffolk) was rejected.
We were told "the project does not directly deliver any activities
which would encourage new audiences to get involved in heritage,
it does not improve physical or other wider forms of access to
the paintings themselves, and it does not provide supporting interpretive
materials to help people learn more about their artistic heritage."
We would note that as a small team bent on completing a large
national project, our focus has to be narrow and disciplined.
This has precluded our being able to add interpretive material
and being "pro-active" in creating access. However,
illustrated catalogue records are a sine qua non if we
are to improve access to our national heritage. Our work provides
the essential building blocks in this process.
5.5 Poor collection records mean that we
cannot identify, preserve and make accessible our National Collection
of oil paintings, a national heritage asset of unrecognised importance.
The PCF's objective is to correct this. However, these are public
assets and the public sector should bear its fair share of the
costs of this work. The PCF urgently needs public sector financial
support. The PCF is completing this work in an efficient and cost-effective
manner. The greater the support it receives now, the faster this
important work can be completed and, ultimately, the lower the
cost of the overall project.
19 January 2006
| 
