Carol...while I agree that museums do considerably more interpretive work
via exhibits than do libraries, do you think that should be museum's sole
public function?  If so, than I would have to disagree with you.
 
Should the role of interpreter be the exclusive domain of a museum researcher
or scientist?  Why should they have all the fun?  I have watched students
here in the Naturalist Center research the data from our collections and
make their own interpretations.  And we have a hard time getting the classes
out of the facility when their hour program is over.  We even get them
coming back on weekends to use the resources for further study.  One group of
truant (disciplinary challenged?) students, whose attention span rarely lasted
over 20 minutes in a more traditional setting spent over 4 hours actively
engaged in learning directly from the objects.
 
Yes, museums need to have traditional, interpreted exhibits to present
issues that it feels are important for its visitors to learn, but
museums must begin to examine how it can make more of its "information"
accessible with minimal interpretation so more users can find the answers
to the questions that are important to them...Museums will need to help
those users develop the skills they need to "read" what's in the objects.
If a picture is worth a thousand words, then the real thing has to be
worth more than a thousand pictures...or prepared labels...
 
..anyone else need to use the soapbox?  ;-)
 
Richard Efthim, Naturalist Center
National Museum of Natural History
Washington, DC 20560
(202)357-1503   fax:(202)786-2778   [log in to unmask]