 |
 |
I would second all of these points, and
would add the enormous financial burden faced by those of us who try to be
active in both organizations. This was always difficult, but it’s
now becoming almost prohibitive. It is also ironic, in that we need the
interaction of our various constituencies more now than ever before. We have so
much to share with each other, as was amply demonstrated at this year’s
SEI. But we seem to be two organizational trains on two parallel tracks that
rarely, if ever, arrive at the same station.
Eileen Fry
Indiana University
From: ART LIBRARIES
SOCIETY DISCUSSION LIST [mailto:
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 2:00
PM
To:
Subject: Re: [ARLIS-L] VRA &
ARLIS
Maryly, Susan Jane, and ARLIS Members,
I realize that this addresses much larger issues, but I am amazed at
how VRA & ARLIS can have such close and normal relations at the local
levels regarding how our chapters interact but at the national levels we cannot
manage to have a joint conference more than once in twenty-five years. I
recognize that our associations do relate in other arenas (SEI, joint
sponsorships, shared position papers, etc.) but this strikes me as a minimal
cooperation, not one that recognizes that anymore we are the same audience,
drawing upon the same issues, the same pool of volunteers, the same experts,
etc.
I remain impressed by Sherman Clarke's Distinguished Service Award in
I have personally felt for many years that ARLIS and VRA should enter
into a federation of sorts, one that preserves our individual strengths but
steers us toward our common goals as art information professionals, a
federation where a joint conference is the norm, not the unlikely. Yet it
happens year after year that we are no closer to such relations. Why is this
so? Is it that this relationship is not working, or is it that this is the way
this affiliation works? I do not have the answers, but the questions have never
been formally asked.
Furthermore, if the questions cannot be asked at the board levels (for
whatever reasons, but it goes beyond any one board or any one organization),
then as members we should seek answers under a member-driven arrangement
(petition? blog?). Is joint conference registration the best we can do?
Thanks,
Mark
Mark Pompelia
Director,
Dept. of Art History
Editor,
VRA Bulletin <http://www.vraweb.org/>
Past President, ARLIS Texas-Mexico Chapter
<http://www.arlis-txmx.org>
e: [log in to unmask]
p: 713-348-4836
f: 713-348-4039
URL: http://arthistory.rice.edu
At 12:12 PM -0400 6/29/06, Susan Jane Williams wrote:
I agree with Maryly.
I understand that this opens an even more complex set of issues, but since the ARLIS board and membership are going to reconsider Chapter issues, I would strongly urge that they take a look at the important symbiosis between VRA regional chapters and ARLIS chapters. I think we can do much better than a conference discount in terms of real reciprocity at this critical time of change in both the librarian and visual resources professions.
Since Ann has been president of VRA and is now president of ARLIS, I think she has the background information necessary to help this process and I would hope for a simple solution along the lines of a slightly more expensive per meeting charge for "cross-over" attendance (which would equal annual chapter dues if two meetings were attended). I don't think the benefits of such interaction can be boiled down to only revenue.
Best,
Susan
Susan Jane Williams
Data Specialist and User Services Liaison
Saskia Ltd./ Scholars Resource, Inc.
susanjane_williams@hotmailcom
or