I wish to register vigorous disagreement with Peter Rebernik's line,
"It should not be the task of a museum scientist to write the
inscriptions [labels?], not even to do the exhibition at all." In the
first place, I reject that kind of didacticism. I get a little tired of
having people placed in narrowly defined pigeonholes, and hearing rules
that occupations shouldn't be allowed to deviate from predetermined
roles. This flies in the face of the vaunted teamwork which is supposed
to prevail in institutions such as museums nowadays. In the first place,
there are "museum scientists," curators, and other specialists who are
fine writers and communicators, and there is no reason they should be
discouraged from writing exhibition labels. The simple expedient of
review by a professional editor can ensure that exhibit text is
reasonably comprehensible to anticipated audiences and of reasonably
consistent style, no matter who writes the first draft. I have seen so
much incorrect, inept writing about my field by non-experts--whether
professional writers or scholars in other fields--that I am convinced
specialists MUST be in on the writing of exhibit text, at some stage.
Obvious, silly errors made by non-experts who don't even bother to
consult specialists will undermine the credibility of a museum.
Specialists MUST be involved in some stage of the exhibit text cycle.
Why not give specialists the option--to write exhibit scripts or merely
review them? But it is important for specialists to review final edits
because of all the misunderstandings and misstatements which can creep
in.

I once was horrified to see an error made by my boss when he edited
exhibit text I had written. The problem was not lack of expertise in the
field, just unfamiliarity with the specific object I was describing. He
misunderstood what I had written and changed it without consulting me.
The resultant gaffe would have been laughable to most visitors, so the
label had to be redone at the last minute. The moral is: consult
specialists, even on minor issues, in preparing exhibition labels. I
think it's a big mistake to separate subject experts from the task of
writing exhibit scripts.

I also object to the view that it should not be the task of a "museum
scientist" to "do" an exhibition at all. This makes as much sense as to
decree that a scholar or specialist should not "do" an article or book
in his or her field. If this opinion rests on the assumption that a
specialist has nothing to say--or doesn't know how to communicate it--to
a museum audience, I call such an opinion bias and prejudice.

And just because an exhibition takes an interdisciplinary approach is no
reason to ignore specialists in favor of a professional exhibit label
writer--it just means you have more experts to consult. --David
Haberstich