The curator-conservator collaboration: remembering Roy Sieber

African Arts, Summer, 2003 by Dana Moffett, Stephen Mellor

At his memorial service held at the National Museum of African Art (NMAfA) in October 2001, it was noted that the conservation lab was second only to collection storage as Roy Sieber's favorite place to spend time in the museum (Fig. 1). Dr: Sieber shared our focus as conservators in defining authenticity and understanding the technical aspects of African art. His interests, which arose from his art historical perspective, are well known and well documented. He was intrigued by our interest in the application of technical analysis to the complexities of indigenous surfaces, construction methods, and postcollection enhancements of African objects. Dr. Sieber recognized the benefits of the relationship between curator and conservator: conservation expertise, while not necessarily providing definitive answers to his questions, could contribute to understanding the story that an object has to tell. We met these interactions in the lab with enthusiasm and knew that in the exchange we would gain valuable cultural insight to add to our own examination repertoire.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Twenty years ago, when conservation science was beginning to be routinely applied to art objects, The New York Times printed an article focusing on the sometimes antagonistic relationship between curators and conservators when considering questions of authenticity (Rostron 1980). Many curators mistrusted the use of science in their realm of connoisseurship, which they believed could only be developed by vast exposure and experience, and which required "an eye." Conservators who were eager to offer useful technical information inadvertently reinforced this mistrust, as their science could not always provide the definitive answers sought by curators. It is refreshing, then, that Roy Sieber, the founding father of African art connoisseurship in the United States, appreciated the contribution science could make to the discipline of art history.

Examination in the conservation lab routinely describes technology, identifies materials, reveals restorations, and analyzes deterioration. More comprehensive findings, however, come from directed inquiries that refer to African cultural activities and incorporate a curatorial knowledge of style, manufacturing techniques, materials, and contexts of use. One such inquiry arose when the National Museum of African Art acquired a group of Tuareg hair knives whose handles were constructed in the traditional way by laminating together discs of different materials (Fig. 2). Typically the materials would be metals, woods, and coconut shell. The curators, however, suspected that this group of objects was contemporary and asked us to identify the media. One art historian cites the use of plastic flooring as a wood substitute (Loughran 1995), and indeed, we found that a ureaformaldehyde plastic was a component of the NMAfA knives. Developed in 1928, this material is sometimes referred to generically as linoleum. Our analyses helped to establish the earliest possible date of manufacture and to identify the increasingly diverse trade network that enabled Tuareg craftsmen to use new materials in traditional ways. Thus, the dialogue between curator and conservator produced more than a simple identification of materials.

In light of Dr. Sieber's interest in the collaboration between curator and conservator, it seems appropriate, in this volume dedicated to his memory, to include a brief overview of some analytical methods applicable to the study of surface, restoration, manufacture, and materials specific to African art. When we investigate specific questions, the application of analytical techniques should flow logically from microscopic examination to imaging procedures to techniques that identify specific chemical elements or compounds in a material. One should remember that any of these techniques have limitations as well as advantages. The least destructive methods--those which do not require samples--should be employed initially.

Microscopy

Microscopy is helpful in examining both materials and object surfaces. Tools range from stereomicroscopes with high-quality optics for low to mid-range magnification (10-500x) to sophisticated electron microscopes for high magnification ([greater than or equal to]100,000x). Specially mounted stereomicroscopes can be easily maneuvered to view surfaces at difficult angles and allow for three-dimensional, detailed visual examination. Other stereomicroscope systems, equipped with fixed viewing stages, permit detailed observation of minute samples removed from objects. If equipped with polarizing filters, these microscopes can also facilitate the identification of fibers, pigments, and particles. Rather than using visible light, electron microscopes form detailed images by directing a beam of high-energy electrons onto the surface of a sample. The depth of focus and high-resolution magnification yield data about technology and composition. Electron microscopes are usually equipped with an analytical system that also allows for simultaneous elemental analysis of the sample's surface.