MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Nesdon Booth <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 12 Dec 2000 12:09:15 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (44 lines)
All of David's comments seem to apply primarily to history museums. There is
a disturbing parochialism in these remarks. I really don't see the harm in a
more inclusive essence. In all of the definitions of museums and in most
large museum complexes, history is only one wing. Natural history, science
and art are equally valid
subjects for a museum's enterprise.

The study of history, by its nature, must treat the past and its
representations as paramount. The study of
science and natural history, on the other hand, are barely linked to the
provenance of artifacts. The science curator must focus primarily on the
development of theory in the context of on going thinking and
research. Scientific exhibits never rely heavily on artifacts, as all
history exhibits must.

If we use David's, or John's for that matter, standards of historical
artifact preservation as essential to a "true" museum's mission,  then do we
not bias any museum toward history as its primary responsibility? Is that a
reasonable political position for our profession to take? Do we really want
to separate off history as the one true essence of museums, and relegate the
analysis and presentation of scientific ideas and the evolving natural world
as somehow lesser cousins, outside of the "true" essence of a museum? Are
they really suggesting that science has no place in a true museum because
collection of artifacts is a minor aspect of its curation?

I would never suggest that the history departments focus on preservation of
artifacts is somehow outside of the true essence of the museum which I might
define as an educational entity whose primary function is to prepare
edifying exhibits. Yet David's narrow definition does seem to suggest that
the only true object of museology is history. What I am seeking is a
definition of essence that can include these somewhat differently focused
enterprises that have traditionally been grouped together as museums: art,
science, natural history, as well as history.

Incidentally, I look forward to further discourse with my muse in the
junkyards of both commerce and museology.

=========================================================
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).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2