I think that your response to this issue is useful, pointing
          out the continuum between libraries and museums. I would,
          however, question your distinction that a museum is not a
          museum unless it owns original objects. In the United
          States, this has been a bone of contention, choking a
          dialogue instigated by the American Association of Museums.
          (BLOCK THAT METAPHOR!) They were drafting a code of ethics
          for museums professionals and boards, and got totally hung
          up, as I recall, on this particular issue. There was a
          recent issue of curator magazine (published by the American
          Museum of Natural History) where Bob MacDonald, from the
          Museum of the City of New York, and a former president of
          AAM, eloquently spoke for the need for the distinction you
          offer.  Just as eloquently, and I think ultimately more
          convincingly, Alan Friedman of the New York Hall of Science,
          disputed the importance of the distinction between original
          object-owning and more interpretation-based museums.
 
          Alan was of course, arguing that science centers were
          museums for all intents and purposes (mostly
          funding, I speculate), while Bob argued for the importance
          of owning original objects is defining museums.
 
          Lots of heat, little light.
 
          Eric Siegel
          [log in to unmask]