Esperanza has a large (very) book collection; it also has a large collection of artwork.  Every reasonably available bit of wall space is used, and the amount in storage is close to double that.  The multi-generational, eclectic nature of the artwork makes it very hard to categorize.  Consequently, every bit of information helps.  One of the issues with an historical collection is judging the significance of a piece.  Unlike an art gallery, where the primary significance is based on the piece’s own quality and its relationship to other artwork, that is: art history and art criticism, art in an historical setting may be judged on a different set of priorities.  Questions such as when it was bought and by whom, where has it been hung or not hung become more important: that is, the relationship between the art and the response of people to it.

Important pieces of information, therefore, can be found in old inventories, photographs and other written documents such as wills or letters.  Some historic collections are relatively static, in that the collection fits the space and was modified only by one person.  The idea of ‘it has always hung there’ can sometimes be literally true.  I know of one house (Hill-stead Museum) where only one painting in the collection can fit above the dining room mantel and the room’s colours are designed to compliment that painting.   On the other hand it is more likely that pieces move around quite frequently, as has been the case in other rooms at Hill-stead and is definitely the case at Esperanza.  Knowing where they were and when therefore becomes a potential source of information for how people reacted to the piece.

The fun thing about all that is, of course, that there is no law…don’t like the painting? Swap it for another. Just record what was swapped, where, and when!