Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sat, 30 Mar 1996 11:44:37 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I don't understand why the definition of museum has to be so narrow and
exclusive. Both a museum of fine arts and something grimy and pedestrian
like an airshow are part and parcel of material culture, conservation (to
different degrees), and education. Why does a museum have to be indoors,
in a controlled environment, etc.? Because standards for accreditation
are geared to that environment? Can the following functions occur in
both environments: acquisition, conservation, study, interpretation,
display of objects? Yes, they can and do. IMHO, a museum exhibit can be
lots more than what we've traditionally been shown -- even if it's not in
a conventional "museum," it can achieve similar purposes through much
different means. In this sense I regard an airshow as a potentially
educational exhibit, and the whole event as a sort of ephemeral museum.
Doug Lantry
........................
Doug Lantry
University of Delaware
[log in to unmask]
On Fri, 29 Mar 1996, David Haberstich wrote:
> I don't understand why so many people are so confused about what a
> museum is. No, an airshow is not a museum exhibit. There is no point in
> trying to turn all language and communication on its ear. Does an
> airshow have certain aspects in common with a museum? Of course. But it
> ain't a museum. --D. Haberstich
>
|
|
|