MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reine Hauser <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:08:19 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (84 lines)
>
>"many museum professionals...worry that other museums will follow suit and
>revamp their structure, resulting in more exhibitions whose broad public
>appeal is their main virtue"
>
>Um...is there something wrong with this picture?
>
Yes, actually.  If the ONLY thing museums need be concerned with  in
selecting exhibitions is broad public appeal, and they charge an adequate
admission fee to turn a profit, then why should museums be non-profit at
all?  Why don't we leave this exhibition business up to the private sector?

There are several reasons it's probably not a good idea (I say, answering
my own rhetorical question.)

  For starters, sometimes the public isn't aware of or knowledgeable about
an exhibition of work they might very well end up liking.  This is what the
educational component (not just Education departments, but the
philosophical underpinnings of a museum's mission) is all about.  There was
a tiny audience for modernist American art prior to the Museum of Modern
Art's national education programs during the 1950s and 1960s.  It then grew
substantially.  MOMA's programming didn't change (which may well be a
problem in and of itself, but that's another issue), but the public was
given a chance to understand it--resulting in the large crowds we see there
today--as at many other museums nationally and internationally that present
this sort of programming.  This is where curatorial expertise can be of
tremendous benefit to the general public.

Secondly, why do ALL exhibitions have to have broad popular appeal? Why is
an exhibition with a smaller audience unworthy or unimportant?  There was a
wonderful exhibition of Haitian art at the American Museum of Natural
History last winter.  It attracted all kinds of people, but not as many as
the huge crowds at the same museum to see the dinosaurs.  But does a
smaller crowd mean that it's inferior?  If so, then all small museums
should be shut down immediately--they may only attract a few thousand
people per year.  It would be better to devote the resources to the major
culturals that draw the biggest crowds.  Now that I think of it, why not
just shut down all museums--larger crowds watch broadcast television each
week---why don't we just focus on that?

And the whole notion of collections and holdings--if a broad audience isn't
interested in them--why bother?  It costs a lot of money to maintain
collections.

I realize I'm getting a little off the track here.  It's just that it's
fascinating to me that in this age of segmented markets for advertising,
marketing and commercial programming (cable television, the web) in which
the public/consumer markets is broken down into ever smaller areas of
interest  that museums are going in exactly the opposite direction.


And is there a difference between "consumers" and the "public" in terms of
museums?

 I'm not saying that the Boston MFA shouldn't have revamped their staff
structure--I'm not knowledgeable enough about that institution.  It's true
that sometimes an organization needs to be shaken up so that fresh
viewpoints and fresh attitudes can enliven a stagnate institution (I don't
know whether that was the case in this instance).  And generally speaking
there is no tenure in the museum world--that's available in academia, at
least for the time being.  So employees beware.

At the same time, if an individual has devoted many years to an institution
and is only a short way from retirement, it's inhumane to fire them at the
drop of a hat.  If this kind of personnel policy becomes the norm, then
there will be little loyalty to individual museums on the part of their
employees (the ones that work long hours for little pay) and less reason
for them to seek to advance the institution instead of their own careers.
This can scarcely benefit the museums in question.

Please forgive the length of this e-mail, but I hope to hear from some of
my colleagues on this subject matter.

Best--Reine Hauser

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://museums.state.nm.us/nmmnh/museum-l.html. You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2