« Spring blogroll adds, part two |
Main
| Spring blogroll adds, part three »
March 27, 2007
After Lawrence Small: What next at the Smithsonian?
Given Smithsonian Secretary Lawrence Small's resignation yesterday, here's what I hope happens next at the Smithsonian:
Acting Secretary Cristian Samper should immediately move to establish the Smithsonian inspector general's independence from his office. The IG should report to the regents (SI lingo for the board of directors) and should have its investigations funded by non-Secretary-controlled funds. Samper could institute this change almost immediately.
Semper should then ask the IG or an outside auditor to audit the Smithsonian Business Ventures unit that was amalgamted from mostly existing SI businesses (gift shops, the magazine, etc.) into a nine-figure revenue-generator in Small's tenure. SBV has never been audited.
The regents should determine that no Smithsonian Secretary or executive may serve on corporate boards.
Only after these items have been achieved should a search for Small's successor begin.
Here's what I hope happens when Small's (permanent) successor is appointed:
A philanthropically connected regent or two should start and fund a new, non-profit organization called Americans for the Smithsonian. The goal of this organization would be to raise the Smithsonian's profile, especially in the congressional districts of key appropriators and other legislators. More specifically, the organization's mission would be to increase the Smithsonian's federal funding. A few million dollars well-invested could mean billions.
For the first time since Small's hiring, the Smithsonian Secretary will have a clean slate with Congress, the Smithsonian's most important funder. As I've written here and on the LAT op-ed page, the SI has been long-neglected by the nation's legislators. The Smithsonian needs money to keep its facilities from deteriorating further, to keep the nation's collections safe, and to allow it to continue building major international-level art collections.
Congress should forget this silliness of capping Smithsonian executive pay at $400,000. The SI has zero chance of attractive top leadership so long as passage of that prohibition seems a possibility.
The new Secretary has to decide what to do about leadership at the National Portrait Gallery, the Smithsonian American Art Museum, and the National Museum of African Art. (See here.) The new Secretary should align the NPG with (or fold it into) the National Museum of American History. It is not an art museum. I'm not sure what s/he should do with SAAM. Perhaps SAAM's modern collection should be folded into the Hirshhorn (let's face it: most of the best modern art in its galleries is on loan from the Hirsh) and its pre-modern collection be transferred to the National Gallery. If SAAM can't come up with a reason for existing, it should be at least dramatically downsized.
Fix and re-open the Arts and Industries Building. It's probably the second-best potential contemporary art venue in DC, but it could be lots of other things too.
The Smithsonian Photography Initiative -- the worst bureaucratic title in the SI -- should be museum-ized. Probably where SAAM is now.
Congress should make funds -- or a new endowment -- available for the Smithsonian's collecting institutions. The American public deserves national collections of art, photography, sculpture, and other objects from our past and present. Our nation's museums must be able to tell the story of our country, and of how our country culturally fits into and participates in the world.
An independent commission should evaluate the SI's top-heavy bureaucracy to determine how many 'Castle'-level jobs are truly necessary. Money should go to programs, not mid-level managers. Decision-making should be streamlined.
Finally -- and most importantly -- the new SI secretary must make this his/her top priority: Make people in Salina, Kansas and Plano, Tex. and Seattle all care about the Smithsonian. Get Smithsonian collections -- especially of art -- out of warehouses and into (smaller, poorer) museums around the country on traveling shows. These exhibits should be paid for by the Smithsonian, of course. Show Americans what they're getting for their tax dollars. Make Smithsonian funding -- and by extension all arts and science funding -- matter to them. If the exhibition plan was strategically coordinated with 'Americans for the Smithsonian' the Smithsonian would finally have a coherent strategy for securing federal funding.
Disclosure: I have written a story that will be in an upcoming issue of Smithsonian magazine, which is operated by Smithsonian Business Ventures.
Posted March 27, 2007 8:19 AM
Tell A Friend
