Mary said:
"Secondly, following Karl Wolff's link to the Creation Evidence Museum,
I'd like to point out that the museum is described as "packed --
literally, to bursting" with visitors. Can't think of many other
traditional museums where that's the case. Why are people flocking to
such a museum? Right there we see why we should consider this issue a
little more seriously."
I expect that these museums are quite literally tapping into an untapped
audience of persons who would otherwise not set foot in museums. And at the
risk of being woefully pessimistic, I don't think we're going to rope them
in, no way, no how.
Candace Perry
-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Rizzo, Mary
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 4:54 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The Creation Museum
Not to weigh in on the worth or lack thereof of a creation museum, but I
think there is room for comment on some of the larger issues regarding
what counts as a museum. Certainly many scholars argue that all museums
contain ideological messages, subtly or not. As the NY Times article on
the Creation Museum points out, the very idea of the museum as a place
where the world is categorized into significant and insignificant
objects is ideological. Or we could think back to controversies like the
Enola Gay exhibit which was wrapped up in ideologies of national history
and memory. A great text on this is Barbara Kirschenblatt-Gimblett's
_Destination Culture_ which looks at how and what is given value by the
museum.
Secondly, following Karl Wolff's link to the Creation Evidence Museum,
I'd like to point out that the museum is described as "packed --
literally, to bursting" with visitors. Can't think of many other
traditional museums where that's the case. Why are people flocking to
such a museum? Right there we see why we should consider this issue a
little more seriously.
Finally, I'd like to also address the concept of kitsch. I think its too
easy for museum professionals to dismiss kitsch as worthless of our
regard (after all, it wasn't that long ago that professional historians
and others dismissed women's history, working-class history, popular
culture, and so on, as unimportant). Kitsch has an important place in
our consumption-oriented society. Usually it's the detritus of popular
culture, thrown by the wayside and reinfused with worth by someone else.
What that suggests is that one person's kitsch is another's dear
treasure. Dismissing something as kitsch often shows a particular
cultural, intellectual and class orientation that doesn't ask the
important questions about how society is working. I'm thinking about
this for an article I'm writing and I keep coming to the same
conclusion: museum professionals, public historians, etc should try to
understand the role of kitsch rather than merely dismiss it. Clearly,
there's a large proportion of the population out there that is very
interested in these kinds of things.
Best,
Mary Rizzo
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . 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).
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . 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).
|
