I generally agree that libraries have made their public
          service point better than museums. Here in NYC the situation
          is instructive:
 
          The libraries in Manhattan, the Bronx, and Staten Island are
          all under one centralized management. Queens and Brooklyn, I
          think (somebody correct me if I'm wrong) are separate
          entities. However, they all lobby for budget money in a
          pretty coordinated fashion. They are tremendously effective
          in getting the public to write to council-people and the
          mayor, and any other major player. Their press coverage is
          better than paid advertising: miraculously positive in this
          day and age of muckraking journalism. They have also
          positioned themselves as vital resources for schools and
          businesses, social service programs, and general do-gooders.
 
          By contrast the museums are all administered separately,
          with their own boards of directors, administrators,
          strengths and weaknesses in program and collections, etc,
          etc.  We have struggled mightily to present a unified voice,
          but our interests are quite disparate.  Even those museums
          who receive significant city funding, who have coalesced in
          the Cultural Institutions Group, all have divergent
          interests, big from small, outer borough vs Manhattan,
          living collections vs...*dead collections* (I work in a
          botanical garden, so I might have the lingo a bit skewed).
          But you get the point.
 
          The Libraries have been superb in presenting their case, and
          in providing services. They are a vital resource for
          families of all social and economic groups, they are located
          in every council person's back yard, and their message is
          clear and coordinated.
 
          The Museums are all over the map in terms of their message:
          are we economic development and tourist draws, are we
          educational resources, are we luxuries for the upper crust,
          better supported through private donors, are we dusty
          warehouses for dead white male art?  These are the issues we
          struggle with year in and year out, in terms of our own
          practices and our public's perception. Our very diversity,
          while a strength for the City as a whole, makes it very
          difficult to present ourselves clearly.
 
          As far as professional qualifications, In New York, at
          least, the level of professionalism has improved
          dramatically in the past ten years, in my experience. While
          there may be an absences of standardized certifications, I
          don't get the sense that curators are under-qualified, let
          alone administrators and educators.
 
          Eric Siegel
          [log in to unmask]