I'm not sure that I understand the basic argument. Is it that every
light in the room that goes out suddenly, plunging the place
into Stygian darkness . . . save for the dim glow of the "Exit"
signs? No long argument needed to make the case for that likely
being a safety hazard, and possibly illegal (though not a
felony), and just plain upsetting to the folks around. Or is it
that the lights trained on exhibit material go out if no motion
is detected, leaving the background gallery lights, the lights
in the foyers, restrooms, etc., uninterrupted? And actually, employees
would be unlikely to be caught under the first state of fact, since
surely they would have learned to keep moving . . . wouldn't they?
According to David Haberstich:
>
>  I'd like to add a belated echo to Helen Glazer's objection to motion
> detectors turning off lights in museums. I mentioned this to a safety
> specialist, who thought it was a terrible (and possibly illegal)
> idea--as I suspected. It's more than just a question of "disconcerting"
> a museum visitor "deep in contemplation"--having lights turn off
> unexpectedly could represent a safety hazard to both visitors and
> employees. You can't trade human safety for the preservation of museum
> artifacts. --David Haberstich
>