Barbara

Typically for me, I kind of agree with both camps but not entirely with
either.

1 All museums communicate something. The product of communication is usually
learning, even if people just learn that you are boring. So in some ways its
a rather artificial distinction...

2 I don't think I have ever seen a museum that was not in some way partisan,
though most simply go along with the establishment and thus do not always
appear partisan as it is such a familiar viewpoint.

3 Being human, I am not sure total objectivity is possible - or that it
would be interesting if it was possible.

4 Most museums aren't big enough to cover every approach to a subject.

5 As a consequence of all this, I think I tend towards a more academic style
of 'authorship' in a way - not that text be written in the style of an
academic paper, but that we be open about who wrote something, where their
ideas come from, who influenced their thinking, who disagrees with it etc
etc. That way, we make it clear to visitors that knowledge is not complete
or unambivalent & empower them to consider the debate in an informed way and
make up their own minds.

6 I'm not advocating reams of text on walls - like most people in the trade
I'm very lazy when it comes to actually reading other people's panels so i
can't expect others to do more, but to be sensitive to the way in which any
text is written, and perhaps allow space somewhere in files or folders or
leaflets to include additional info or suggestions for research routes.

Jane


>Well, Jane, I believe the subject being discussed (whether or not it
>had something to do with the topic) was HOW (and WHY, I suppose)
>museums present art works.  Some seem to believe that museums are
>"presenters"- present the information in a clear and non-partisan way
>and let the viewer digest it as he/she will.  And others believe that
>museums are "educators"- institutions that are responsible for
>assisting the viewer with digestion of works.  (Art for art sake vs.
>art in context???)
>
>This discussion has come up again and again in my art and art history
>classes, but from a professional standpoint I am wondering which stance
>is more "popular" (for lack of a better word) among museums and museum
>staff.  And of course anyone is welcome to jump in here.  What are the
>pros and cons of each stance?  Are these opinions shifting as we draw
>near to the close of the 20th century?
>
>Curious,
>
>Barbara
>