Primarily a lurker, I do read much of what comes up here and I want to
thank Mike, and John and others for their approach on this topic. The
subject of the exchange that initiated this thread is not uninteresting or
unimportant. My own objection was, shall we say, the tone. On both parts.
We call such to and fro "discussion" or "debate" but there seemed neither
discussion or debate intended.

I am not a museum professional, but am very interested in the institutions
of society and believe deeply in their necessity. I look to you as both an
introduction to new subjects and information, and to illuminate unexpected
views of things I thought I knew pretty well. The best exhibits are visual
and interactive essays - thesis, examination and conclusions. I have never
been swayed by an "argument" that was all conclusions, nor have I
remembered ones that were just stuff, only facts with no guidance.

In this instance I want applaud those who did look beyond the cant to focus
on the important matter of how to look at the subject in a way that
engenders less dogmatic responses and suggest that there is a place in
educational and cultural institutions, through many disciplines to present
controversial issues - ask the questions - and provide guidance in
reviewing the many answers that people have come up with over time. Mike's
points are well made, but what came to mind is that the solutions he has to
come up with would have been vastly different twenty or ten years ago and
are changing as we type.

I'd like to think there is a constituency between the strident groups at
both ends of the political correctness spectra who are trying to do the
best they can in the very grey and often conflicting contexts of family,
school, church, state, and everyday reality. I want to encourage this
constituency to hold the line against those who would prefer to run your
messy life on their absolutist models

Margot Jacqz


At 27 11 01, you wrote:

>There is a problem with discussing political topics in a political newsgroup.
>  There is usually very little sympathy with the point of view of an archivist
>or historian.
>
>I work with a small museum covering communications technology that is in the
>final stages of obtaining a full charter by our state education department.
>Questions often arise about what to do about political correctness.
>
>For example, an objection made to the format of a similar museum was that it
>did not give proper weighting to the contributions of the American Indian to
>the development of electronic communication.  All we could think of was the
>Navajo Talkers during W.W.II. What is the proper weighting for this in that
>vast field?
>
>Another problem is that many of the artifacts in this field were constructed
>of materials like asbestos and mercury that are essentially banned from
>public places even though people my age have handled them with impunity for
>more than 60 years.  Should these be destroyed like the images in Afghanistan?
>
>I, for one, am really interested in knowing how much others who are concerned
>about preserving the past feel that politics and government policy should
>influence what we present to the public.
>
>Mike Csontos
>
>=========================================================
>Important Subscriber Information:
>
>The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
>http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
>information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail
>message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should
>read "help" (without the quotes).
>
>If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
>[log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read
>"Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).