I usually agree with Hank, curmudgeon that I am, but I thought he was pretty
unfair in his comments about Craig d'Arcy's suggestion that inattentive
label-readers are looking for entertainment.  I don't think it's a
"self-fulfilling prophecy" at all, nor do I think it shows contempt for the
public.  Nor do I think anyone has necessarily "failed" if an exhibit does
not attract and hold the attention of every museum-goer.  Why is it so
difficult for so many people on this list to accept as a fact of life that NO
exhibit ever has had or ever will have a snowball's chance in hell of
attracting EVERYONE?  Neither will any given book interest everyone, nor will
even a given movie interest everyone.  There are plenty of people who hate
"Citizen Kane," "The Wizard of Oz," "Gone with the Wind," or, say, "Babe."
 Does that mean the film has "failed" its audience?  Why should an exhibit
which does not "attract and hold" everyone be considered a failure?  Someone
is going to have to educate me about this concept of universal appeal,
because I just don't get it.  My spies tell me that not even sex has
universal appeal--and you certainly can't get everyone to read all the labels
(don't ask me what that means).

Mr. d'Arcy's assumption that the viewer who quits after reading a couple of
labels is seeking "entertainment" may or may not be accurate.  However, this
is no warrant for accusing him of having contempt for the public.  In the
first place, he was talking about the "average disinterested or casual
visitor," not all visitors.  To answer your question about "who has failed,"
Hank, sometimes I think it's the viewer who has failed.

All right, everyone--aim your flame-throwers.

Seriously, folks, could we use a little common sense about exhibit
label-reading habits?  I take it that most of the label-reading statistics
that have been quoted were site-specific.  Has it occurred to anyone that a
certain amount of perfunctory label-reading occurs because the visitor is
merely passing through an exhibit while on his or her way to a different
exhibit destination?  Most museums of any size have a total of many hours'
worth of displays to view and labels to read, and most visitors have limited
time to spend. They have to make choices; they can't possibly see and read
everything.  Sometimes I read just a couple of labels in an exhibit as a
scouting procedure, intending to return on a second visit for a more
intensive viewing.  This label thread hasn't even begun to scratch the
surface; the complexities involved in assessing viewer involvement in
exhibits and reading their texts are enormous.

--David Haberstich