I agree with Yani. As interesting and informative as these online debates
have been in english, they should in no way be considered as adequate
consultation for the purpose of any ratification.
I have held back on several issues which were earlier discussed and in my
mind not adequately resolved (at least in everyone's opinion!). Now that I
see the question of digital or virtually born museums being recognized as
museums, some of my concerns have returned to the surface!
John McAvity
----- Original Message -----
From: "Herreman" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 12:14 AM
Subject: Re: Museum definition 11/6/2003
> Dear Michael, Gary; Berenice; et al:
>
> I a have been following the interesting discussions on the definition of
> "museum". Unfortunatly it seems it has been reduced to a few
> participants and all of them English speaking.
> I am a bit surprised that our collegues from ICOFOM have not
> participated...
> Anyway, I would like to share with you my own points of view. I agree
> with Gary, Michael and Geoffrey in relation to looking into a much more
> profound, deeper and overwrapping view of museums. It seems to me we are
> only rephrasing the traditional defintion of a museum.
> I congratulate Berenice because of her very objective, clear and precise
> approach. I would, appreciate though,a a more universal view. A real
> breakthroeugh that agrees with the formal and operating innovations in
> museums that are actually taking place.
> In an other mail I will transalate the definitions garthered by Gary.
> Hopefully hey will be reacted upon.
>
> Yani Herreman
> Vice President
> Executive Council.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: International Council of Museums Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Cooper
> Sent: Lunes, 10 de Noviembre de 2003 11:45 a.m.
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Museum definition 11/6/2003
>
>
> > For my understanding, are we continuing to view museums as in outward
> > projecting institutions that deal with traditional approaches to
> > objects, or should the definition give emphasis to enhancing the
> > multicultural and social diversity role of museums? Does the idea of
> > "public benefit" adequately describe this role, or is "public benefit"
>
> > just a politically or
> > socially correct expression that is open to interpretation
> > and may require a
> > second definition?
>
>
> Surely the reverse is true? "Public benefit" is a generalisation that
> surely cannot go out of fashion? It is "Multiculturalism" and "social
> inclusion" that are the current politically-correct buzzwords. The
> "public" are the public irrespective of social or cultural status.
>
> Mick
>
> Michael P. Cooper
> Nottingham Museums Registrar
> T: +44 (0)115 915 3671
> F: +44 (0)115 915 3601
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the archives
> at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the
> archives at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html
>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the
archives at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html
|
