Disposing of objects has many benefits

In recent years, our sector has seen momentous changes, as we realise that past ways of working are no longer acceptable. One significant area to be addressed is the volume of material that does not merit being in the storeroom.  

I am not thinking of the important items that tell stories of human life and the natural world, but of the things that we try to ignore – that we store on the “shelf of shame” as Claire Dean, project curator at Tullie museum and art gallery in Carlisle, calls it.

They include items left at reception in the misbelief that the museum will be interested; objects that are quite nice, but there are already 10 similar; and items accessioned many years ago for unknown reasons. Museums have become society’s attic and we must start clearing them out. 

In June, I chaired the Museums Association’s (MA) Future of Museums: Disposal event, which attracted the biggest-ever audience for an MA online one-day conference.

With the launch of the MA’s Off the Shelf: A Toolkit for Ethical Transfer, Reuse and Disposal, and panellists sharing experiences, I noticed a paradigm shift in the room. Rationalisation is no longer taboo, and disposal is becoming a routine collections management tool.

Attendees shared their thoughts on digital whiteboards. They despaired at objects in their stores, including a “mouldy potty”, “lots of portraits of rich white men”, and “mangles, mangles, mangles”. Despite fears of upsetting visitors or stakeholders, these worries were overwhelmed by a hopeful optimism for what could be. 

One delegate desired “a compact and coherent collection that we can use more easily and fully”. These are wise words, as items need to be useful (however a museum defines that) to justify their place in the collection.

Objects allow museums to fulfil the mission for people to understand the world around them and their place within it. Artefacts should not be a constraining burden, and we cannot justify the financial or environmental costs of storing material that has not proved its social worth. 

Museums must survive today to thrive in the future. The bold new disposal guidance has removed the requirement to offer objects for “first refusal” to other museums.

Another Accredited museum may be the best home for a deaccessioned object, but there is freedom to explore other areas of public access. In practice, this will be negotiated by museums in their individual contexts, as new ethical boundaries need testing in the real world. 

Delegates also shared the emotional labour of disposal. Letting go of objects is hard. We are trained to safeguard collections for the long term and disposal seems to contradict this aim.

But object removal is as old as the museum profession. Our Victorian forebears did not intend for public collections to be static, but rather shapeshifting entities that reflect contemporaneous thoughts and needs. 

As contemporary museum practitioners, we swivel between looking to the past and the future. But we must remain grounded in the present day. As society changes, it is our professional duty to reflect and respond, reassess past curatorial decisions, and move the boundaries of acceptable practice.

Within the joint “physical and mental decluttering” experienced by one delegate is the wisdom that removing extraneous objects can bring peace to the practitioner. 

I am heartened by the new willingness to share rationalisation experiences. Indeed, communication is at the heart of disposal as we bring information inwards from others, and share outwards what we are doing.

Talking about disposal lessens the emotional burden, and being honest with ourselves will tackle the incongruity of inherited collections. Disposal is hard but it will create a lighter load for us to bear, and a stronger foundation for our successors. 

Jenny Durrant is a museum consultant and member of the Museums Association’s ethics committee