Short question:

Is it ok to put up an exhibition with lots of open ended questions in the
panels or guide, and then not tell people what the answers are? does this
make it look zappy and dynamic and accessible or like the curators don't
know what thery're talking about?

Long version of the question:

I am curating an exhibition which focusses on the shared experience of
having an agricultural heritage, for a region including Kent, UK, Nord
Pas-de-Calais, France, and most of Belgium. It is made up of paintings,
prints, archive documents, photographs and museum objects, but the paintings
are the backbone.

Thing is, I'm not an art curator, and I don't have time to do loads of
reseach about the region so I don't want to get into too many
technicalities, so it was decided to stick with the issues that lead us to
this field to start with (pun not intended).

The resulting interpretative text, which I was just about happy with has
just been circulated for comment, and my line manager has responded that
there are too many questions in the text, it looks like a quiz and if we ask
that many questions we should provide the answers.

All the questions posed are deliberatley open ended and were intended to get
people looking at the exhibits with the question in mind.

For example:

WHAT BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER?

Many of the pictures in this exhibition suggest that rural life is dominated
by isolation and work. But there are other aspects to life. Wherever a group
of people share a physical place, an interest or an activity, they form a
community with a distinct culture. Their lives have a shared meaning shaped
by the events that bring them together.

What do these paintings tell us about life in rural communities? What sort
of social events have artists been drawn to? Would the people in the
pictures choose the same moment to be recorded in a picture?

Are there connections between these recorded events and the daily routines
of work shown elsewhere?