Dear Christopher,

I just produced a "blockbuster" exhibit in Jackson, Mississippi, this past
year.
"Alsace to America:  Discovering a Southern Jewish Heritage,"  was the exhibit
that
was held across the street from the "Splendors of Versailles," and "Our
Nations
Colours," two other "blockbusters."   The purpose of these exhibits was to
attract visitors, tourism, to Jackson, Mississippi, as well as to present
materials that normally would not be available in that locale.

I am giving a workshop at the Georgia Association of Museums and Galleries
annual meeting, January 20 - 22, 1999, in Americus, Georgia, on this topic.

A "blockbuster" exhibit in my definition is one that meets the following
criteria:

    --  it is of a short duration,  3 to 6 months

    --   it is designed to do something that usual exhibits produced by the
same
museum do not:   e.g., it involves bringing in loaned objects not usually
seen, or a wider variety of objects of a certain type.   For example,  the
Picasso and Matisse
exhibits held at the High Museum of Art in Atlanta and elsewhere (these
exhibits were put together by a consortium of museums) brought together a
great deal of work by these painters that normally don't get displayed in the
same location or the same exhibit.   On the content level, one purpose  was to
bring art works to the public that the audience usually doesn't get to see.

     -- a "blockbuster" is spectacular in many ways by its display techniques
that are new and avant garde, as well as by the content of the exhibit.   For
example, "Rings," the High Museum's Cultural Olympic exhibit or the
Mississippi Commission on Intercultural Exchange's "Palaces of St.
Petersburg," which were both dazzling in their display techniques as well as
their content of works that normally don't get viewed in the United States and
certainly not all in one location.

      -- the purpose of "blockbusters"  I think generally is as public
relations -- to bring attention to a particular museum, to bring that museum
to the world stage or at least, to a larger audience than normally would be
attracted to the museum -- sort  of an
audience development exercise.    A small museum,  the Museum of the Southern
Jewish Experience, brought in more staff than they usually have (such as
myself) ,
specialists, to produce a "blockbuster," so that they could get national
attention and "put their museum on the map."

       -- "blockbusters" are very expensive.   A museum's administrators and
board should think carefully about the purpose and its benefits versus putting
the same monies toward permanent improvements such as collections development
and maintenance.    "Blockbusters" are most successfully managed, on a
financial level, when enough money is raised up front to meet expenses of the
exhibit and public
relations and development activities are agressively pursued during and
immediately after the exhibit.

       --  "Blockbusters" are taxing on the museum's staff.   The human cost
of doing "blockbusters" is a factor that many museums don't consider.   One
museum I know lost 80 percent of its permanent staff after their first
"blockbuster."

Well, I've rambled on long enough.   I am also interested in hearing from
others with their definitions.

Pamela Dorn Sezgin, Ph.D.
Executive Director
Georgia Mountains History Museum at
Brenau University
Gainesville, GA