A lot of what has been discussed recently in several different threads
struck only glancingly on confronting difficult topics in museum
exhibition.  I am interesting in hearing from people whose museums have
confronted tough topics and come away with the public actually learning
something, instead of running in anger from your institution.

I am especially interested in the extent to which both live and written
interpretation gets visitors thinking constructively about these difficult
subjects.

I was at the National Archives in Washington when we were showing a
government film about the Japanese internment in the middle of an exhibit
about the Constitution.  (This film was run in a section on the war
powers of the President.)  The thrust of the film was that security
concerns led to the internment, and that the Japanese who were "evacuated"
came to the camps something like happy kibutzniks, out to "make the desert
bloom".  (The film's words, not mine.)  The film was captioned by us with
"U.S.Government film, 1943", and beyond that, the hideous irony of describing
 the internment as a happy adventure in the desert was not commented upon
by us.  The reaction was predictably bad.  The film was
interpreted by many visitors as an uncritical accounting of the internment.
Our visitors did not "get it", so to speak.  Ultimately, after threats of
Congressional action, we made the label for the film much stronger and
pointed out that this represented the "party line" of the Government in
1943, and could not be assumed to be an impartial historical accounting
of the internment.

How have you all out there avoided this kind of mistake and provided
genuine opportunities for learning and growth to your visitors?

Claudia Nicholson
Curator of Collections
South Dakota State Historical Society, Pierre

[log in to unmask]