According to Ross Weeks, in his posting about MN's planned
article on museums and funding/operating difficulties,
< Another writer mentioned the difficulties at the Valentine in
Richmond, now being run in effect by a consulting firm.>

Actually, the Valentine is being run by its board of trustees
and its staff, headed by director Bill Martin.  The former
Valentine Riverside reverted to Ethyl Corporation, which owned
the property all along.  I don't know what "consulting firm"
Mr. Weeks is thinking of, but the Valentine is doing very well
in getting itself out of its difficulties.  The last three
years were unsettling, difficult and emotionally draining, but
the board and the staff stuck it out and have put the museum on
a reasonable track.

But does it seem that museums have mis-interpreted what the
visiting public wants/expects?  Declining attendance (or overly
optimistic expectations of attendance) have threatened so many
museums and historic sites, that perhaps museum professionals
should examine their assumptions.  Nauticus, Valentine
Riverside, Baltimore City Life Museums, Historical Society of
Western Pennsylvania, New-York Historical Society, even
Colonial Williamsburg--does anyone see a pattern?

Any thoughts?

--
Barbara C. Batson
Exhibits Coordinator
Library of Virginia
804/692-3518
[log in to unmask]