But except for expanding the Fogg, Slive doesn't see any radical changes in its future. Any change that does occur, moreover, will be made in conjunction with the department of Fine Arts. For Rosenfield, "our priorities aren't in getting things but in using what we have." As he sees it, the Fogg is a great museum and would still be so even if it never acquired another work of art. But the Fogg staff, whose job is, after all, to strengthen their muscum, might tend to see their roles in a more acquisitive light.

Conflicts of this nature led to the resignation of Daniel Robbins as the Fogg's director last year. Robbins, intent on acquiring a large collection of modern art, had plans to turn the Busch-Reisinger Museum (which is effectively run by the director of the Fogg) into a museum of 20th-century art. Members of the department, however, protested the move as being contrary to the original aim of the Busch, a museum for Northern European art.

Now Rosenfield says. "We try to diminish distinctions between the museum and the faculty." He himself is curator of Oriental Art, G.M.A. Hanfmann, John E. Hudson Professor of Archacology, is curator of Ancient Art, and Slive is Gleason Professor of Fine Arts. It's not suprising that the Fogg's director "can't see where there's a conflict between the museum and the department."

Slive doesn't really have to worry about the strength of the Fogg's collection: it is generally acknowledged to be one of the strongest university museums in the country, and in many fields--Chinese jades, early Renaissance Italian painting, 19th century French painting, and prints, for example--its holdings are among the strongest anywhere in the world. The Fogg's "friends," who have donated over 90 per cent of the museum's works, make the collection seem to grow by itself, according to Rosenfield. In the Fogg's one weak area, that of modern art, Slive plans to strengthen it, while in the field of "art and anthropology" he plans to expand it, in conjunction with the Peabody Museum.

For though he is a specialist in 16th and 17th century Dutch painting, "the breadth of Slive's sympathies is astounding," says associate professor Michael Fried, a specialist in modern art. "I can't imagine Slive won't do a tremendous job," Fried says.

But the museum is still threatened by a severe shortage of money. The future of the Fogg as a great teaching museum, depends on Slive's ability to increase its endowment, something which will enable him to assemble teaching exhibits and display them. If the museum's new director has the same effect on potential donors as he has on the Fogg's staff be should be a success for as Rosenfield says, Slive the people in the museum."