Heleanor Feltham wrote:
> Rather than putting us out of business, the virtual museum is surely more
> likely to have the same effect as the books did - strengthen the desire to
> see the real thing - rather than become a substitute for the museum itself.
>  It's a great second best, but its definitely SECOND best.



Not the real thing? You bet. Second best? I dunno: we're already beyond that
question. Though we may visit museums in person, we're wearing Air Jordans, not
sneakers. We've already bought into experiencing culture as a commodity
manufactured by our information service economy.

The challenge for museums--both virtual and meat--isn't so much about figuring
out
which kind of experience is better or which will win out, but which is which.
Understanding itself in its own terms, any museum has a fighting chance to
deliver
the goods.

Ray
***
"is it me in here,
or is it just me?"