I've been mulling over this thread comparing museums and
libraries and finally realized what's been bothering me, what
is not really comparable.
 
Libraries house books and much more that are compilations of
information and interpretations of that information. Except by
mere arrangement on shelves and databases, libraries do not author
(bad phrase, but bear with me) the information or
interpretations. Authors, writers, do that.
 
Museums, however, are the authors of the information presented.
An exhibit is an interpretation with a point of view, that
speaks through objects and images as the author of a book
speaks through words. Even collections are not "information" in
the sense that books in a library are "information", they are
more comparable to words that must be arranged in a sequence
and interpreted before they can speak. Some objects may be
whole encyclopedias of information, some are just footnotes,
but they require context and interpretation, which implies
"authorship" from the Museum.
 
Therefore, museum staff can quite legitimately come from all
areas of expertise and fields of study if the goal is
authorship, not information management, which should not
require a universal course of professional certification in Museum
Studies.
 
I hate the word "information" anyway, as if facts mean anything
at all by themselves. We need more context, interpretation,
thought, and discussion - there's enough information out there!
 
Just my more than two cents.
 
Carol Ely
Education and Exhibit Coordinator
Virginia Discovery Museum
Charlottesville