A question about which I am confused is whether the Smithsonian
exhibit was one sided and needed to be changed in the interest of fairness.
Newspaper articles (in liberal newspaper) and magazine articles have
suggested that the curators went overboard as regards POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.
Not having seen the exhibit myself I can't comment directly about its
initial historical accuracy. However, I think that we always have to keep in
mind not only the rights of curators but also of the public. Consider, for
example, how for many years museums displayed a 1 sided view of American
history relative to native Americans. Even a controversial topic such as the
dropping of the bomb can be handled so that all major points of view are
covered. Several years ago I visited the Atomic Museum (not sure of exact
name) on an air force base near Albuquerque, New Mexico. Given that the
exhibit about the bomb was on an air force base and produced by an agency
responsible for nuclear weapons, I expected a very 1 sided view. However,
the exhibit presented arguments both for and against dropping the bomb. The
numerous newspaper and magazine articles about the Smithsonian exhibit
suggest it emphasized only arguments against the dropping. If the
Smithsonian exhibit was balanced, why didn't the Smithsonian administration
stand fast against political pressure. Was the exhibit balanced--possibly
this topic should be part of your meetings.
 
        ************************************
        *  Gary Noonan                     *
        *  Curator of Insects              *
        *  Milwaukee Public Museum         *
        *  800  West Wells Street          *
        *  Milwaukee Wisconsin 53233  USA  *
        *  [log in to unmask]        *
        *  (414) 278-2762                  *
        ************************************
 
 
>From @ARIZVM1.ccit.arizona.edu:[log in to unmask] Mon Oct 17 15:01:4
1 1994
>Received: by csd4.csd.uwm.edu; id AA01203; Mon, 17 Oct 94 15:01:33 -0500
>Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
>Received: from ARIZVM1.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU by ARIZVM1.ccit.arizona.edu
>   (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2440; Mon, 17 Oct 94 12:59:56 MST
>Received: from ARIZVM1.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@ARIZVM1) by
> ARIZVM1.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2826; Mon,
> 17 Oct 1994 10:07:17 -0700
>Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 12:36:09 -0400
>Reply-To: Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]
du>
>Sender: Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]
>
>From: John Strand <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:      Curatorial process and political pressure
>To: Multiple recipients of list MUSEUM-L <[log in to unmask]
rizona.edu>
>
>We are looking for examples, preferably of fairly recent date, of
>institutions or individual professionals who have experienced political
>pressure aimed at altering or otherwise affecting their public exhibition
>process. (The most recent and most visible example, of course, is the
>National Air and Space Museum's future exhibition that includes display of
>the Enola Gay.) We want this information for an upcoming AAM Board of
>Directors meeting during which the rights of curators will be discussed.
>You may respond to the list, or to me directly, as you prefer. Discretion,
>if requested, will be guaranteed. Thanks to all for your help.
>
>
>John Strand
>Editor/Publisher
>Museum News
>American Association of Museums
>202-289-9124
>[log in to unmask]
>