Kudos to the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board for exposing the poorly thought out “dumping” of its docent volunteer program, a group that has successfully toured the museum with students and adults for decades (“Shame on the Art Institute for summarily canning its volunteer docents,” Sept. 28).
The Editorial Board hit the nail on the head in describing the Stein letter and subsequent Zoom meeting with the nearly 100 docents, of which I am one.
Years of academic research and training, including seven years of inclusion awareness training, combined with a passion for teaching — all wasted by this management decision.
How this shortsighted decision will affect donations has yet to be determined.
I do predict, however, that there will be plenty of financial blowback to the Art Institute.
— Pam Elesh, Evanston
Outgrowing a legacy
I have no words to describe my disappointment in the Art Institute’s decision to “fire” all volunteer docents. My late mother was in the very first class of docents in the 1960s, and I recall following her around the museum as a young boy while she studied the collection and practiced her guide skills. She moved to New York and continued leading school tours at the Met well into her 80s.
I have been a member of the Art Institute since returning to Chicago in 1992 and am just sickened over this news. The Art Institute is regularly cited as one of the best museums in the world and one of Chicago’s top attractions. But if the museum has grown beyond the need for volunteers, then apparently they have outgrown the need for my support (and perhaps the museum’s nonprofit status as well). I hope that museum President James Rondeau reverses this recent move immediately with apologies to the dedicated volunteers and a redoubling of efforts to engage and train a wide pool of volunteers. If there are shortfalls in the docents’ training and/or diversity then the museum has no one to blame but itself.
— Tom Palmer, Wilmette
Phoenix fires docents
I wanted to call the Editorial Board’s attention to a similar decision taken by the Phoenix Museum of Art, colorfully described by Robrt L. Pela in this article in the Phoenix New Times.
The Phoenix Art Museum seems to have also followed the same playbook of tossing out a group of loyal, invested (in terms of time, advanced study and donations), dedicated volunteers, ambassadors, champions and art lovers.
Mr. Pela’s reporting highlights how the new style focuses on asking viewers how the art makes them feel. Someone I know, a former parent participant in a kindergarten through third grade art exposure program in the 1990s, mentioned that this was exactly the basis of their program.
By comparison, a few years ago, I spent the entire day at the Getty, trailing a docent who had spent her career teaching about Greek and Roman mythology, art history, history, language and culture. Erudite, witty, sophisticated and knowledgeable, this older, well-educated woman made ancient artifacts interesting and relevant to diverse audiences. I “felt” a lot more informed and interested, thanks to her expertise, breadth and depth of knowledge, and relaxed, interactive style. Her obvious love for the institution and its collections, as a volunteer over some decades, gave her talks extra zest, knowing her service was coming from passion, not from a salary.
— Amy Lardner, Chicago
Art is inclusive
If the powers that be at the Art Institute would look to the bedrock lessons of art, would they not realize that art knows no boundaries and needs the support of a wide community, excluding no one who is willing to put in the work needed to be a successful docent?
Let’s hope this wrongful situation is reversed and that new ways are found to increase the diversity of this dedicated corps.
— Victoria Proctor, Evanston
Autonomy has limits
Had Dr. Cory Franklin not intubated his patient against his wishes, following the principle of patient autonomy, the only one who would have suffered physically was the patient. However, when patients refuse to be vaccinated against COVID-19, they risk not only their own health, but those of their families, co-workers and anyone else they come into contact with — in short, all of society. If they would then strictly mask, social distance and quarantine, those risks might be mitigated. Unfortunately, those refusing the vaccine in the name of personal freedom are often the same who refuse to mask, social distance or quarantine.
— Randal D. Bladel, MD, Sawyer, Michigan
Join the conversation in our Letters to the Editor Facebook group.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
