Elinor Paulus 1
The de Young Museum And Its Place In An Emerging Global Museum Network
The de Young Memorial Museum has been through several transformations since
its birth as the first museum of its kind in the western United States. One influential
project in the museum's history, the Teotihuacan Murals Project, was a turning point for
the de Young and simultaneously a step forward in international museum ethics.
Museums across the world have progressed infinitely as individual institutions and also
as a ‘global museum network,’ intrinsically tied to the cultural transformations and
globalization of society as a whole.
Two of the museum’s most apparent goals as stated in their mission statement are
“To actively involve a diverse public in all of the museum’s activities,” and “To operate
within our goals with state-of-the-art efficiency.” Since the construction of the new
building in 2005, the museum has been able to draw on much wider audiences, provide
innovative art education programs, and all within a stunning modern facility.
Despite skepticism from East Coast museums, the de Young was wildly
successful from the day it opened. Michael Henry de Young, founder of the San
Francisco Chronicle and at that a very successful businessman by the age of 45, decided
to open a museum of fine art in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park in 1894.1 At the time,
it was a general rule that no permanent buildings could be established in the park because
this would negate the purpose of the park as an escape from the metropolis. However
there were several temporary buildings constructed in the park this year as part of the
California Midwinter International Exposition. De Young seized the opportunity to
1
Wikipedia, "Michael Harry de Young." Last modified Jan 25, 2012. Accessed February
25, 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._H._de_Young.
1
Elinor Paulus 2
commission an architect to create a fantastic building in Egyptian revival style and filled
the museum with over 6,000 pieces to start.
“The wisdom of Mr. de Young’s insistence that the museum be placed in the park,
the holiday resort of the crowds, is shown in the attendance figures,” which put skeptics
of East Coast museums to shame. The Memorial Museum’s yearly attendance soon
surpassed that of the Smithsonian in Washington D.C. and rivaled even New York City’s
Metropolitan Museum of Art. On its opening day eleven thousand people came to the
museum, and in its early years Sundays often yielded 6,000 visitors in one day, and
holidays commonly exceeded 20,000. One year from its opening on March 24, 1895 the
museum had seen 500,000 visitors. From 1895 to 1920 (the last available date from this
particular report), the annual attendance fluctuated around 4-500,000 with the exception
of the Panama-Pacific Exposition held in 1915 and also the year of 1919, both of which
brought over 720,000 visitors.2
The Art Newspaper publishes a yearly report of museum and exhibition
attendance figures from hundreds of major visual arts museums across the world. In
2010, the de Young was sixteenth in the world at over 2 million visitors. The Met in
New York is above the de Young in attendance now, coming in second place at 5 million.
However, the de Young was rated number one in the category of Antiquities exhibitions,
for its exhibit “King Tutankhamun and the Golden Age of Pharaos,” with 3,332 visitors
daily. The top three in Antiquities were King Tut exhibits. At the Art Gallery of Ontario
in Toronto, 2,891 was the daily average, while the Met came in a close third with 2,890
2
M. H. de Young Memorial Museum, First. Story of Its Foundation and the Objects of Its
Founder. San Francisco: FAMSF, 1921.
2
Elinor Paulus 3
daily.3 What this tells us is that the de Young is still a strong competitor and displays
strength in certain areas over others.
Progress seems to describe both the destruction of old ways and simultaneously
paving new roads to a more egalitarian global culture.
The de Young has physically been destroyed and reborn several times while remaining
all along in Golden Gate Park. Earthquake safety required multiple demolitions and
improvements over the years. In the 1960’s a huge collection of Asian art was donated
and displayed, but now there is a separate Asian Art Museum that houses the collection.
The original building was in Egyptian-revival style and housed a wide collection of
authentic and reproduced artifacts, including several authentic human and animal
mummies. Now these objects are on permanent display at the Legion of Honor.4 The
main international art galleries at the de Young are now Art of the Americas, Art of
Africa, and Art of Oceania, all of which are curated by Kathleen Berrin. In the 1970’s
she was the assistant curator of these three permanent collections, during which time she
pioneered a collaborative project with the Mexican Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e
Historia (INAH). The Teotihuacan Murals Project, which began in 1976 and continued
through the late 1980’s, was a major event not only in the museum’s history but also in
the history of museums.5 It was unique because it was the first international collaborative
3
"Exhibition & Museum Attendance Figures: 2010." The Art Newspaper, April 2011.
http://www.theartnewspaper.com/attfig/attfig10.pdf (accessed February 26, 2012).
4
de Young: Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, "History of the de Young Museum."
Last modified 2011. Accessed February 26, 2012.
http://deyoung.famsf.org/about/history-de-youngmuseum.http://icom.museum/uploads/tx_hpoindexbdd/ICOFOM_ISS_39.pdf
5
Berrin, Kathleen. "San Francisco, Mexico, and the Teotihuacan Murals." Museum
International. 59. no. 3 (2007): 9-21.
3
Elinor Paulus 4
conservation project of its kind. The many ethical, political, and technical issues it raised
are still pertinent to museums across the globe. The relationship it established between
the Government of Mexico and the de Young has paved the way for several
collaborations since, and as Kathleen Berrin describes it, “helped to refine our
institutional identity” (Museum International 19). The Teotihuacan Murals Project marks
a turning point in history for the ethical practices of museums.
Taking an in depth look at the many transformative events in the de Young’s history as
an institution has brought to light many of the issues and forces of change that shape the
museum world as a whole.
In 1976, a private collector named Harald Wagner passed away and left over 70
mural fragments from the pre-Columbian city of Teotihuacan to the de Young Museum.
No one at the museum even knew his name, let alone his plans to bequeath his life’s
passion to the institution. Sales receipts he included showed that he collected the murals
while living in Mexico part-time from 1963 to 1968, a time when Teotihuacan murals
fragments were commonly found in public markets due to many years of looting at the
original archaeological site.6
“We anticipated that Mexico’s position would be that the murals were national
patrimony, unlawfully unearthed from Mexican soil,” Berrin said of the project’s
initiation (Museum International, 11). Indeed, by Mexican law the Government of
Mexico owns all archaeological objects. However, in 1971 a bilateral treaty between the
United States and Mexico was passed to establish the policy that all cultural property
6
Bone, Leslie. "Teotihuacan Mural Project." Western Association of Art Conservation
Newsletter. (1986): 2-7.
4
Elinor Paulus 5
must be returned to the country of origin. The treaty was not retroactive, so witnesses
proving that the murals had been in the United States since the late 60’s meant that
legally, the murals could remain at the de Young.7 Still, FAMSF approached the
Mexican Government to discuss the topic and hopefully create a joint program whereby
the museum would voluntarily return some of the murals in exchange for expertise from
Mexican conservators.
The first Joint Agreement was reached in 1971 and stipulated the rules of the
project as follows:8
1.
A minimum of 50% of the murals would be voluntarily returned to
Mexico by The Fine Arts Museums once conservation work had been
completed on the entire collection.
2.
The INAH would send highly qualified staff to San Francisco for the
purpose of assisting The Fine Arts Museums in restoring the murals.
3.
The Fine Arts Museums would pay the expenses for the restoration of
all the murals in the collection.
By the 1970’s Teotihuacan was an increasingly popular archaeological site and
tourist destination, and public awareness of looting cultural treasures was growing. One
motivation of the joint collaboration was to provide a final exhibition that would
contribute to awareness of the looting problem. In the same year as the bilateral treaty
and the joint agreement, the United Nations Educational, Cultural and Scientific
Organization (UNESCO) created the International Council of Museums (ICOM) and a
document called the Code of Ethics for Museums. All three of these documents served as
guidelines for the project, but at the same time, Berrin says, “we quickly learned that
7
Bone, Leslie. "Teotihuacan Mural Project." Western Association of Art Conservation
Newsletter. (1986): 2-7.
8
Berrin, Kathleen. "Hands Across the Border: Conservation, Politics, and Ensuing
Dilemmas." Symposium 86: The Care and PReservation of Ethnological Materials.
(1986): 90-96.
5
Elinor Paulus 6
there were no prototypes to follow” (Museum International, 10). The ethical dilemma of
cultural property was very new to international law, and the bequest of murals the first
opportunity to take it for a test drive.
Berrin described the many issues that arose between the two parties in the
collaboration. Firstly, American museums operate autonomously, for the most part, as
extra-governmental institutions. They belong to the public and exist to serve the public.
In Mexico, cultural institutions are owned and operated by the state. Therefore,
communication between the FAMSF and the INAH was unevenly balanced as it was
essentially between a city museum and a foreign government.
While Mexican law considered the murals national patrimony, “Our museum also
considered them to be world art treasures,” (Museum International) and so the
negotiation evolved. The two institutions agreed that the majority of murals would be
returned to Mexico, given that the “most important and highest quality art historical
examples should stay in San Francisco” (Museum International 16).
The conservation efforts continued through 1986 when the Mexican conservators
finished their work and brought their portion of murals back for an exhibition in February
of 1987. Despite disagreements in technique, the two institutions established a lasting
and honest relationship that has been mutually beneficial in many projects since. The
Murals Project inspired a joint exhibition and publication in 1993 called Teotihuacan: Art
from the City of the Gods. A similar exhibit is actually in circulation still, and was
popular in Paris in 2010.9 To reciprocate, FAMSF helped produce a documentary about
Teotihuacan for INAH, as well as supporting construction of a new museum in
9
"Exhibition & Museum Attendance Figures: 2010." The Art Newspaper, April 2011.
http://www.theartnewspaper.com/attfig/attfig10.pdf (accessed February 26, 2012).
6
Elinor Paulus 7
Teotihuacan to exhibit some of the 500 mural fragments still in Mexico. In 1999, the de
Young had an opportunity to purchase a Maya stela in excellent condition, at which point
FAMSF again had to contact the Governments of Mexico and Guatemala to determine its
provenance. Neither was able to claim patrimony, so the de Young restored the stela and
collaborated with the INAH again in 1999 to put on an exhibit called Courtly Art of the
Ancient Maya and published a book under the same title together. When the new de
Young building opened in 2005, FAMSF requested a loan by the Government of Mexico
of the colossal Olmec stone head. In return, the de Young loaned 300 pieces from its
permanent collection of African art for an exhibit at the main Museum of Anthropology
and History in Mexico City.10 Then again in 2010 the stone head along with many other
ancient Olmec artifacts came to the de Young for a full exhibit, this time in collaboration
with both INAH and the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA). LACMA took
on the exhibition details while the de Young took responsibility for publishing the
catalog, both under the title Olmec: Colossal Masterworks of Ancient Mexico. Alfonso de
Maria y Campos Castello, INAH general directors, say “it seems we are indebted to art
historians for much of what we know about the Olmec style,” and furthermore, the Olmec
exhibit highlights that “the search for origins is a social imperative.”11 When Berrin
spoke of the murals, she said “they are full of hidden meanings and enticements, hints
about a world foreign to ours, yet one that must be similar in some fundamental way,” but
the question she raises is a much bigger one. Often the only clues we have into the
10
Berrin, Kathleen. "San Francisco, Mexico, and the Teotihuacan Murals." Museum
International. 59. no. 3 (2007): 9-21.
11
Berrin, Kathleen. Olmec: Colossal Masterworks of Ancient Mexico. London: Yale
University Press, 2010.
7
Elinor Paulus 8
history of human culture lie in the works of art left behind from ancient times, and it has
become the responsibility and privilege of the de Young and the ‘global museum
network’ to search for the pieces of the past that tie into the present. Human beings have
been creating art and attempting to understand our place in the world for many millennia,
and the role of museums in bringing those ties together is immeasurable.
8
Elinor Paulus 9
Full List of Sources:
1. Baird, Joseph Armstrong. 1984 Directory of the Principle Art and Historical
Institutions in Northern California. San Francisco: North Point Gallery, 1984.
2. M. H. de Young Memorial Museum, First. Story of Its Foundation and the Objects of
Its Founder. San Francisco: FAMSF, 1921.
3. Ketcham, Diana. The De Young in the 21st Century: A Museum by Herzog & De
Meuron. London: Thames & Hudson, FAMSF, 2005.
4. ICOM, "Deaccession and the Return of Cultural Heritage: a New Global Ethics." Last
modified Nov 12, 2010. Accessed February 12, 2012.
5. de Young: Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, "History of the de Young Museum."
Last modified 2011. Accessed February 26, 2012.
http://deyoung.famsf.org/about/history-de-youngmuseum.http://icom.museum/uploads/tx_hpoindexbdd/ICOFOM_ISS_39.pdf.
6. Berrin, Kathleen. Olmec: Colossal Masterworks of Ancient Mexico. London: Yale
University Press, 2010.
7. Feathered Serpents and Flowering Trees: Reconstructing the Murals of Teotihuacan.
Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988.
8. Berrin, Kathleen. "San Francisco, Mexico, and the Teotihuacan Murals." Museum
International. 59. no. 3 (2007): 9-21.
9. Berrin, Kathleen. "Hands Across the Border: Conservation, Politics, and Ensuing
Dilemmas." Symposium 86: The Care and PReservation of Ethnological Materials.
(1986): 90-96.
10. Bone, Leslie. "Teotihuacan Mural Project." Western Association of Art Conservation
Newsletter. (1986): 2-7.
11. Russell, Ron. "Looted: How an Eccentric Architect with a Penchant for Pre
Columbian Relics Rocked the Antiquities World and Became the de Young's Most
Mysterious Donor." SF Weekly, Aug 30, 2006, 17-23.
12. "Exhibition & Museum Attendance Figures: 2010." The Art Newspaper, April 2011.
http://www.theartnewspaper.com/attfig/attfig10.pdf (accessed February 26, 2012).
13. Choudhury, Roy. Art Museum Documentation and Practical Handling. Hyderabad,
India: Choudhury & Choudhury, 1963.
14. Wikipedia, "Michael Harry de Young." Last modified Jan 25, 2012. Accessed
February 25, 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._H._de_Young.
9