Gene, I joined the group too late to participate in your thread, but I found your summary and comments insightful. As an "ex-professional" I have found that the self-referential nature of much of the museum profession both an asset and a liability. It produces a professional excellence and commitment that other professions would envy. On the other hands, like many professions, much of the time is spent talking to ourselves. Yes I think we belive we are doing it for the audience or the public, but mostly we do it for our owng gratification or enhancement within the profession. Such is human nature.

Your reference to book publishing reminds me of the experience of dealing with computer "techies." They too believe you want to know, even have to know, all they know and do: all about computer architecture, programming, and systems design; when all you reall want to know is how to turn the bloody thing on.

For me, an enlightening experience was stepping out of the system. One gains a vastly different perspective outside. Most of the world has quite different priorities to us museum types. "They" are more interested in the results of what we do than in how or why. What for us is an avocation, to them is entertainment, or occasionally enlightenment. Probably, it always will be. There is a lot of competition for attention. A focus on the esoterica of our professions diffuses that attention.

My two cents worth.

Barry Morrison
[log in to unmask]


On 12/03/96 11:49:29 you wrote:
>I received some very thoughtful, interesting comments.