Stephen Nowlin's comments and assertions are generally appropriate. However,
he veers off the track when he writes "When museums succumb to social or
fiscal pressures to bias their presentations, as in the Enola Gay episode,
they violate a trust that is central to their reason for existing." I am by
no means an expert on the Enola Gay controversy, but it is my distinct
impression that the ultimately-mounted exhibition was not biased. It
sidestepped the issues. And the real problem was that the originally-proposed
exhibition was biased, rather than dealing with the issues in a responsible
way.

I am the among the first to defend a museum's right to explore controversial
issues, but it must do so responsibly. Just because a museum is attacked for
an exhibition doesn't mean that exhibition was good in the first place.

John Vanco, Erie Art Museum
[log in to unmask]