According to Robert A. Baron:

> rather difficult to understand how anyone could think that these marvelous
> institutions have museum-like functions. The missions of museums and theme
> parks are quite distinct, even when they seem to use the same materials and
> subjects. In short, museums (with varying degrees of success) profess to
> some kind of scientific purpose, that is, to present the world of
> observations and creations as they are, and to represent what they mean for
> better or worse.

That's a good point.  I used to work for a local nature center
and we were under the department of "Parks and Recreation," as
are most local nature centers.  We could never figure out why
parks had to go with recreation, almost assuming that a public
park can't exisist solely on it's own merit but must have some
recreational componet with it to make it worthwhile.  It's a
shame because even though the local nature park is heavily used
with it's bike and jogging trails, I bet only a small
percentage of the people that use it actually are aware of all
the different flora and fauna they pass by every day.

>Theme parks, on the other hand, use historical references
> and scientific phenomena to weave a web that defines a world as they wish
> it to be, or, perhaps, as they wish you to think it is.  Everything in
> Disneyland is focussed on creating an impression, from the theatrical
> manipulation of experience during rides, to the way they hide the length of
> lines from public view, to the creation of never possible images of Americana.

Don't get me started about how militant Disney is with their
dress and conduct codes even while people are off duty on their
own time.  I'm from the area that fought heavily against
"Disney Americana", that abomination of a 'theme
park' that was planned outside of DC.

To add, a local columnist in the Washington Post wrote a
commentary agaist the Newseum's (the new interactive museum of
the news media) new ad campaign.  It shows a picture of the
famous portrait of Whistler's Mother with the caption of
"Snoozeum" next to a picture of one of their high tech
exhibits.  The point was made that museums should not be
putting down other museums since we're all out for the same
educational purpose.  It also made it look like traditional art
galleries are boring and they have fought long and hard against
that image.

I don't knock interactive exhibits but I got more pleasure out
of looking at Holbein's "Ambassadors" in person at the National
Portrait Gallery in London than I did playing with all the
interactive exhibits at other museums.

Ars Gratia Artis (I think that's the correct Latin phrase.)

Deb Fuller