As you say, museums
each have a mission which identifies what their focus area. I'm not
sure that museums should be treated with such reverence -- although I would hope
they all generate some form of "oh wow" in the visitor. NASCAR is
not such an outlandish idea for a museum. One of the most
interesting museums I've visited in the last year was the Unser Racing Museum in
Albuquerque. Well laid out, lots of accessible information and cool
cars.
janice
Janice Klein
Director,
Mitchell Museum of the American Indian
Attracting wider audiences is something
that museums struggle with, but museums usually have a mission, a narrowed
focus of what they are about. Every museum is not supposed to cater to every
person. Although, it seems that we have to do that more now in order to stay
afloat.
Museums are not commercial. Granted, to survive we need to
think more that way, but at what cost? When you think of a museum you should
have a silent, reverent feel at the word. Museum. That word should mean
something significant. It was always meaningful to me, even when i was a kid.
It was a place of learning, wonder, boredom and excitement. I don't ever want
to feel about museums the way i feel about the mall.
And that's a lot
of money to spend on the tastes of the moment. Why do companies spend so much
money on consumer testing? Because the fads come and go so fast. To sell your
products you must stay on the crest of that wave. That is not financially
feasible for museums. Yesterday wrestling, today nascar, tomorrow who knows?
To me, the job of a museum is to preserve what is culturally significant. Is
Nascar significant? Ask me in 20 years. Museums gamble on that every day. What
young artist do they invest in? Should they accession the old office
macintosh? What are people going to be interested in years from now?
In
this world museums are competing with TV, video games, themeparks, shopping
centers, and so on. Does competing mean we have to emulate them? Every museum
in America could host a traveling exhibit of the newest and biggest sensation,
but should they?
I haven't really answered your questions . . . but I
really don't think there are any good answers out there. At the very base, you
have to ask: What are museums? What do they do? What are they for?
My
best answer is that no museum can be everything to everyone. Let your mission
guide you.
Marie
Micah Zender
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Being
an outsider looking in (a contractor, and corporate donor) I find that
museums often shy away from creating exhibitions that cater to the greater
publics interests.
I'M GENERALIZING HERE!
Why?
I know
that having an "art of Nascar" exhibition may not fit well into the lineup
of exhibitions next to say: Early Female Expressionists, or Decorative
Indian Pottery. But there's a great following behind nascar, and may bring a
new audience to the museum.
Some of the institutions see this as
petty, or not 'culturally significant', but isn't the core mission of most
museums to bring culture, and appreciation for the arts? (Or something close
to - I'm generalizing again) And isn't part of doing that reaching out to
people that aren't in the upper-income bracket or aren't already
artistically versed? (Super generalizing)
My corporate clients spend
a great deal of time, and money on 'consumer understanding) research, trying
to figure out how to reach their customers effectively, do museums not do
the same? Or want to? Are these practices considered 'dirty' - because
companies like P&G use this information to sell more tampons, or soap,
or dishwashing detergent - is this research not a fit for museums for moral
reasons? "We don't want to trick people into coming here"??
I'm
interested in your thoughts/oppinionms.
Apologies for the
generalizations I write with the purest of intentions.
Thanks
Micah Zender
Micah A T Zender .
Com