Well, I think it depends on what kind of "behind the scenes" exhibit
you're talking about.  I don't think your analogy between book publishing
and museums necessarily holds because museums are dealing with objects,
which can be intrinsically interesting in ways that the printing process
for a book is not. (Although actually, I've been to the press room of a
big printer and it *was* fun to see the presses in action.
But a few minutes of that was enough.)  But an exhibit that pulls
seldom-seen stuff out of storage can have an
enjoyable "rummaging through the attic" aspect.  Also some of the things
that museums do have a theatrical quality that the preparation, printing and
binding of a
book do not.  For instance, take the dramatic transformation that skilled
conservation can effect on a work of art, or the ways that experts
distinguish authentic objects from forgeries, or museum-sponsored
archaeological digs that unearth long-buried artifacts.

One of my most vivid memories from high school (we're talking *many* years
ago!) is a 3-day workshop I was
lucky enough to attend at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC.  They
took a group from our school on a behind-the-scenes tour of the storage
and conservation areas.  I still remember a lot about it.  Maybe that says
something for how interesting that kind of experience can be.

--Helen Glazer, Exhibitions Director
Goucher College, Baltimore, MD, USA
[log in to unmask]

On Tue, 3 Dec 1996, Eugene W. Dillenburg wrote:

> I of course agree with everything that's been said.  I, too, work in a
> museum, know about collections-based research, and believe it is very
> important.  But I have my doubts as to whether our audience wants or needs
> to know about it.  Are we in our self-referential exhibits and programs,
> like this thread, merely preaching to the converted?
>
> Allow me to play Devil's Advocate for a moment.  When I buy a book, I have
> no particular interest in Gutenberg and the history of books in Eropean
> tradition; or in the business of publishing (setting type, printing,
> marketing finished books, etc.); or even in the author him/herself, beyond
> a tiny blurb on the back jacket.  That's not why I buy books.  I buy them
> to read what the author has written.  And if every book contatined these
> other distractions, I'd get rather annoyed.
>...
> By foisting this information on the unsuspecting reader, what need is
> filled -- beyond the publisher's self-gratification?
>...
> Substitute "museum professional" for "book publisher," and tell me if the
> analogy holds any water?  Or am I all wet?