Beyond the obvious constraints of space and budget, I think  
that there are two that deserve more attention than most museums give  
to them. The first is the amount of time that the visitor intends to  
spend in the museum. At the Smithsonian's National Museum of American  
History in Washington, DC, we learned from visitor surveys that most  
of our visitors intended to see two other Smithsonian museums on the  
day that they visited us, which meant that they were trotting though  
our museum's corridors at about 70MPH. We tried to design exhibits in  
such a way that they would be lured into them and persuaded by what  
they saw near the entrance to revise their schedules and slow down.  
Of course, this might not be a constraint in a museum that is the  
only attraction in town or that is a sole destination.

      The second, and perhaps far more important because it is a  
universal constraint, is the amount of information (or  
misinformation) about the subject of the exhibit that the visitor has  
in his or her head when they enter the exhibit. At the National  
Museum of American History, we tried to get at visitor's  
preconceptions through surveys and focus groups and even by studying  
the way that standard history textbooks treated the subject, but I do  
not think we were ever entirely successful. Yet I am convinced that  
what the visitor brings into the exhibit is the most important factor  
in effective communication with exhibits. We just need to devise more  
effective ways to get at this.

      To give one example - several years ago the National Museum of  
American History opened an exhibit about the Star-Spangled Banner,  
the flag that flew over Fort McHenry in Baltimore during the British  
bombartment in 1814, the sight of which inspired Francis Scott Key to  
write the poem that became our national anthem. The flag itself, an  
enormous banner 30' x 36', was the centerpiece of the exhibit. A  
prominent introductory label identified it and explained what  
visitors were about to see, and subsequent labels explained that it  
had been made in Baltimore in 1813 by a lady named Mary Pickersgill.  
There was a portrait of Mrs. Pickersgill and a copy of her receipt  
from the government for payment for the flag in the exhibit. Yet  
after the exhibit had been open for six months or so a visitor survey  
revealed that slightly more than half of the people who went through  
the exhibit thought that they were viewing the first American flag,  
the one allegedly made in 1776 by Betsy Ross, an event for which  
there is absolutely no historical evidence. The myth of Betsy Ross  
(which has been repeated in innumerable school textbooks) was so  
powerfully established in visitors' minds that it distorted what they  
saw in the exhibit.

      I hope that these thoughts are helpful to you.

Lonn Taylor
Fort Davis, Texas
On May 22, 2006, at 8:38 AM, louise hayward wrote:

> Dear List,
>
> My name is Louise Hayward and I am currently undertaking a masters  
> in Archaeological Heritage Management at York University.
>
> I am writing a dissertation on Museum Interpretation, the  
> constraints placed upon it and the affect that such constraints  
> have on interpretation. As well as reading a number of texts on the  
> subject, I am also consulting a number of people involved with  
> interpretation within museums, by interviewing interpreters and  
> contacted mailing lists like this one. I have a few key questions  
> in mind:
>
> 1.What do you feel are the constraints placed upon/considerations  
> that need to be made regarding interpretation/creation of new  
> displays?
> 2.Are there any constraints/considerations that are relevant only  
> to your museum?
> 3.How do such constraints/considerations affect your interpretation? 
> Is there a large gap between what you want to and what is  
> physically possible due to such constraints/considerations?
>
> Basically, I'm trying to identify the key problems faced by the  
> interpretator and to what extent these prevent an interpretator  
> from carrying out their job to the best of their abilities.
>
> I wondered if any of you had any comments to make/any helpful  
> suggestions etc. Also, if anyone makes any comments/statements,  
> would you be happy for me to use your comments in my dissertation  
> and would you prefer them to be anonymous.
>
> Thank you for you help, and apologies for the length of my email.
> Regards,
>
> Louise Hayward
>
> =========================================================
> Important Subscriber Information:
>
> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/ 
> museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the  
> listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to  
> [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read  
> "help" (without the quotes).
>
> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail  
> message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message  
> should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
>

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).