Hank Burchard ([log in to unmask]) writes:
>       And I have seen department-store displays that were more attractive,
> entertaining and informative than some big-bucks museum exhibitions. You
> can call a thing an exhibition or you can call a thing a display, but you
> will not change the nature of the thing. All the nuspeak in the world will
> not actually alter the world.

        An open, flexible mind is a wonderful thing that will take us a
long way.  Exhibit, exhibition, display...this could be a permanent,
on-going discussion, because of different interpretations of the
meanings of words.  To the original poster, who, I believe, is in school,
you may want to choose a terminology that sits well with your own
perceptions, and which you can justify with your professor.  Then, be open
to others' interpretations as you move through the museum world.
        Another aspect that has not seen light is the idea of different
TYPES of exhibits.  I start my students off with the idea of designing an
*educational, interpretive* exhibit, with stated objectives.  But this is only
ONE type of [exhibit].  A local curator here in the Ottawa region sets
aside a temporary gallery to highlight the collections (widely varied in
topic) of local collectors.  Often, these projects merely consist of
artifacts arranged in cases with object labels.  No, not much
interpretation going on, but definitely an exhibit (display? exhibition?).
        Judging from the reactions of visitors, there is room for these
light, easily-digested types of exhibit...no heavy interpretation, and an
atmosphere in which visitors may relax, and enjoy reminiscing about the
artifacts ("Oh look!---WE used to have one of those!").  I have gotten many
pages of valuable first-hand artifact research from interacting with
visitors who actually USED the objects daily, and know more about them
than I ever will (I'm only 42  :^) ).
        Dennis.