October 3, 1999
CONTENTS:
- ART GALLERY GHOST `SEEN BY THREE GUARDS'
- Re: library security guidelines (Steve Keller)
- Re: library security guidelines (Everett C. Wilkie, Jr.)
- concern at the number of commercial organisations using the network to promote their products (Peter Gough); plus moderator's reply
- New Security For Portrait In New York Art Flap
- Controversial Art Attracts Hundreds (commotion = promotion)
- Princess Anne's treasures stolen from palace (spate of thefts from royal palaces in London over the past decade)
ART GALLERY GHOST `SEEN BY THREE GUARDS'
301233 SEP 99
By Damien Pearse, PA News
Reports that a security guard believes he saw a ghost looking at a painting in the National Gallery were confirmed today as it emerged that more than one member of staff may have caught sight of the ghoul. Officials at the London art gallery said a guard claimed to have spotted the spook on a closed-circuit television late on Saturday night. But today sources at the gallery said the ghost was seen gazing at a painting by 17th Century artist Jan Vermeer by up to three guards in Gallery 16. "Three of the guys saw what they thought was a ghost but we have been told not to say anything more about it," the source said. It is understood that administrators were so concerned about the sighting that they have played and replayed the video footage in a bid to discover more about the apparition. The guard who is said to have originally spotted the ghost has refused to be named but told The Times newspaper that he saw a highly unusual "negative black image" sitting on a chair. "There was something out of the ordinary on the camera. When they searched the room there was no intruder," the guard said. He added that the ghost's presence was not surprising as the gallery was "quite creepy" at night. A spokesman for the Gallery would not elaborate on the sighting but said: "I can confirm that a guard did claim to have seen the ghost."
From: IntlArtCop@aol.com
Subject: Re: library security guidelines
In a message dated 9/28/99 3:18:21 AM, securma@xs4all.nl writes:
http://www.princeton.edu/~ferguson/secguide.html
Regarding the Rare Book, Manuscript and Special Collection Security Guidelines posted here recently and on the above web site, are these in the public domain, i.e., may we freely distribute them to libraries and others whom they are intended to regulate? I would like to send copies to the library clients I've served recently and would also like to send a copy to each of the members of the ASIS Museum, Library and Cultural Property Committee, some of whom may not have seen this. I would also like to link to them on my own web site. Could someone associated with the project please reply. I assume that as industry guidelines they are available for such distribution (with proper attribution, of course) otherwise they would not be very useful, but you never know so I am asking.
Steve Keller
From: ewilkie@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: security guidelines
Hi, Steve,
Technically, that document is copyrighted by the American Library Association, who will be happy to sell you copies for about $2.00 US when they're finally in print. As a practical matter, however, I think you may feel free to reproduce them off the web site and distribute them. I hope you find them useful and would be appreciative of any remarks you might wish to make on them. They're revised every 5 years or so.
Please note that the last four letters if the URL are now .html and not .htm
Best,
Everett
Everett C. Wilkie, Jr.
Core Commercial Sales, ADT Security Systems
1330 River Bend Drive, Suite 820, Dallas, TX 75247
214-689-1252; fax 214-689-1200; pager 214-898-4091
Home: 2811 Waskom St., Dallas, TX 75228
214-327-4976
ewilkie@ix.netcom.com
"No Dong"--Name of North Korean missile
From: Security Office LHBSEC@smtp.ntrust.org.uk
Subject: concern at the number of commercial organisations using the network to promote their products
I am increasingly concerned at the number of commercial organisations using the network to promote their products and services. Take, for example, the Euronova entry on 30th September for a picture alarm. Similar devices are available from many other suppliers, eg Viper*s V-Master. If we are not careful the mailing list could be filled with advertising material. Euronova claim their product will *protect the item from a snatch and grab theft*. It will do no such thing. It will make a noise when the picture is disturbed. It only provides protection if someone responds to the sound and then that *someone* may be injured in trying to retain the painting. Is this really what we want to happen? I would suggest that physical security measures are the basis of good protection, but they must be combined with an appropriate response and, if necessary, electronics (to warn of an attack) and provide a cost-effective security solution.
The degree of protection will, of course, be designed to be proportional to the risk.
Peter Gough
Security Adviser
The National Trust
+++moderator's reply++++++
This year I have forwarded three products messages, reviewed two publications (Handbook Art and Law, and The Lost masters) and one CD (Interpol CD). This really is not an overload of commercial information. All this information is subject to our disclaimer message. You may rest assure that the MSN list will never be 'contaminated' with lots of product information. As far as your comments regarding the anti-snatch alarm: You are right, this device does not protect paintings by itself. An early and loud warning whenever someone tries to manipulate your works of art does help protecting your art. And, yes I do know there are more devices like this one.
Ton Cremers
New Security For Portrait In New York Art Flap
By Grant McCool
NEW YORK (Reuters) - A protective Plexiglas shield has been placed in front of an elephant dung-stained portrait of the Virgin Mary at the center of a heated battle between the Brooklyn Museum of Art and New York City's mayor, the museum's director said Thursday. ``We are concerned for the safety of that work because of the incredibly high level of rhetoric surrounding it,'' museum director Arnold Lehman said of the piece by British artist Chris Ofili that has offended Roman Catholics, including Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. Ofili's portrait of a black Madonna, stained with elephant dung and pasted with cutouts from pornographic magazines, is part of the exhibition ``Sensation: Young British Artists from the Saatchi Collection,'' which is scheduled to open Saturday for a three-month run. As a result of the controversial show, Giuliani has threatened to evict the Brooklyn Museum of Art from its city-owned site and halt millions of dollars in funding. The museum, the second-largest in New York City, receives almost $7 million a year from the city government, about a third of the museum's $23 million budget. The museum announced Tuesday that it was taking the city to federal court over its threats and hired noted First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams to handle the lawsuit. Thursday, the city and the museum remained as far apart as ever in the week-long dispute, especially after city officials Wednesday accused the museum of ``hucksterism'' in collaborating with exhibit sponsor Christie's auction house and Charles Saatchi, the owner of the private collection. A lawyer for the city also said it would take the museum to state court later Thursday or Friday to evict it from the building and withdraw public money. Giuliani maintains that taxpayers' money should not be used for displaying a private collection that he and others find offensive. Abrams said at Thursday's news conference he ``was retained to take this case and to win it. There are no negotiations going on.'' ``Unfortunately, regrettably, sadly, it appears the only place that this matter can end is with a judicial declaration that the mayor acted improperly and unconstitutionally,'' he said. The exhibit, with its use of pickled cow parts, cut outs from pornographic magazines and human blood, is a showcase for British artists Damien Hirst, Marc Quinn, Chris Ofili and others. It also caused an uproar and drew large crowds when it opened at the Royal Academy of Art in London in 1997. The Brooklyn Museum and its supporters maintain that while the works are ``challenging and provocative'' banning them would violate free-speech rights. The Catholic League said it plans to hand out a ``vomit bag'' to each of the first 500 attendees when the exhibit opens to the general public Saturday. The American Civil Liberties Union plans a ``Stop the Censorship'' rally. The U.S. Senate meanwhile Wednesday agreed to a nonbinding measure calling for the withholding of federal funds from the museum unless it cancels the exhibit.
Controversial Art Attracts Hundreds
By LARRY McSHANE Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - If you build it - even with elephant dung, bisected pigs and a severed cow's head - and call it art, they will come. They did by the hundreds Saturday at the Brooklyn Museum of Art, where the much-maligned and mega-hyped ``Sensation'' exhibit drew an overflow crowd of art lovers, scene makers and the merely curious - all at $9.75 a head. By 7 p.m., more than 7,000 people had toured the show, filling the space to capacity. The lines persisted through the evening, and police planned remain on site until the museum closed at 11 p.m., though authorities said the scene was calm. The crowd began queuing up three hours before the opening, which attracted scores of angry protesters upset by art that was deemed religiously offensive or pro-animal cruelty. Several museum visitors said that Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's bitter opposition to the show had actually prompted them to attend. ``Rudy got me here,'' Marvin Schneider said after checking out the controversial British show. ``I was interested in seeing this after what he said.'' The controversy began Sept. 22 when the mayor announced that he was cutting off the museum's $7 million in annual funding unless the exhibit was pulled. Giuliani attacked the exhibit with escalating insults: ``sick'' ``Catholic bashing,'' and finally ``pedophiles on parade.'' Museum officials in turn sued Giuliani. The city responded by suing the museum in an effort to evict it from the city-owned building where it's resided for more than a century. Both lawsuits are pending. Cora Ferrer, 54, said the furor also brought her to the show. ``The mayor did me a favor,'' she said. ``If he kept his mouth shut, I never would have heard of this show. If I listened to him, I would have missed all the beauty inside.'' The beauty included a dissected cow and pig, castrated male dummies lashed to a tree, and the infamous painting ``The Holy Virgin Mary'' with its splash of elephant dung. A police sergeant somberly stood watch alongside the painting by artist Chris Ofili. The exhibit, which consistently stopped visitors in their tracks, was also protected by a plastic screen. ``What if this was done to your mother?'' asked a sign held by a protester outside the museum, which has generally kept a much lower profile since opening in 1823. The exhibit opened promptly at 11 a.m., with ticket buyers passing through just-installed metal detectors as the sound of protesters reciting the ``Hail Mary'' echoed across the museum's plaza. A sign outside the museum cautioned, ``Sensation. Be Warned.'' The line to get inside stretched past the museum's property, with a steady stream of visitors pouring inside. About 200 supporters of The Catholic League protested the opening, singing hymns and praying the rosary. League President William Donohue handed out complementary ``vomit bags'' to people waiting to see the exhibit. ``This is hate speech, people,'' Donohue told his troops. ``This is not art.'' Gareth Brown disagreed. He came with his 7-month-old son, whose stroller carried a small sign reading, ``Pro-art, anti-Giuliani.'' ``Art should provoke discussion and controversy, and this does,'' Brown said while waiting in line. ``Controversy is not a bad thing.'' Museum director Arnold Lehman opted not to dump fuel on the fire Saturday. ``There has been a lot of comment on all sides over the past few days,'' Lehman said. ``Today's the day to let the art speak for itself.'' There was just a single arrest for disorderly conduct when an anti-Giuliani protester refused police orders to stop blocking a sidewalk. One question that became almost an afterthought in the flap remained unanswered: was the exhibit any good? ``There were some obviously shocking things,'' said patron Schneider. ``I thought some things were beautiful. But there was a lot of art that I wouldn't hang in my living room.''
_
Princess Anne's treasures stolen from palace
David Leppard and Gareth Walsh
PERSONAL effects and items of great sentimental value belonging to the Princess Royal have been stolen from her private office inside Buckingham Palace. Scotland Yard said yesterday that the items, which are understood to include signed photographs and an Olympic tiepin given to the princess when she participated in the 1976 Montreal games, were "recently" stolen from her fourth-floor palace office. "Police are investigating the alleged theft of items from an office at Buckingham Palace. There have been no arrests and inquiries continue," the Yard said. Sources described some of the items taken as being "obviously of great, intrinsic value". Police say a number of items, including the pictures, the tiepin and pens which the Princess Royal gives away on official visits, have been stolen. Scotland Yard was unable to confirm that among lost items were jewellery, clothes and a present from a foreign head of state. As well as her home at Gatcombe Park in Gloucestershire and a state apartment at St James's Palace, the princess keeps a room at Buckingham Palace. She rarely stays there, but uses it as an office. While the palace is well protected from break-ins by outsiders, police sources say that internal security is poor. One royal security source said: "Like all the Queen's children, the princess keeps a room at the palace. But it isn't locked and it's so easy for any of the staff to go in there." The source said there had been several occasions in the past when items had been reported missing from rooms in the palace. These matters had not been reported to police to save embarrassment. The princess's room contains her own private memorabilia, including photographs of her family and horses. The source, who has seen the room, said she keeps silverware in it, as well as trinkets and presents she has received over the years. "She has what you or I would have in our lounge if we were as rich as they are," he said. "It's not uncommon for things to go missing. So much of the treasures there are not logged." There has been a spate of thefts from royal palaces in London over the past decade, prompting continued calls for security to be upgraded. In 1994 a professional cat burglar broke in to St James's Palace and stole some of the Prince of Wales's private treasures. Among the items taken, whose value was estimated at UKP.60,000, were five gold tiepins, eight pairs of cufflinks, two silver pill boxes and gold watches. One of the sets of cufflinks was a 21st birthday present from his sister. In the same year a former Buckingham Palace employee was convicted of stealing a UKP.100,000 Dutch painting, silverware and a 19th-century rosebowl from the palace. Nobody noticed the theft for two months and a jury at the employee's trial was told that security among household staff at Buckingham Palace was "non-existent". In 1989 police were called to investigate after four letters written to the princess by her future husband Commander Tim Laurence were stolen from her briefcase. In a radio interview yesterday the princess called for more support for victims of crime, including the provision of separate rooms in court buildings. She is president of Crime Concern, a national body which promotes crime prevention.
http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/
Main Indexpage