According to Ross Weeks, in his posting about MN's planned article on museums and funding/operating difficulties, < Another writer mentioned the difficulties at the Valentine in Richmond, now being run in effect by a consulting firm.> Actually, the Valentine is being run by its board of trustees and its staff, headed by director Bill Martin. The former Valentine Riverside reverted to Ethyl Corporation, which owned the property all along. I don't know what "consulting firm" Mr. Weeks is thinking of, but the Valentine is doing very well in getting itself out of its difficulties. The last three years were unsettling, difficult and emotionally draining, but the board and the staff stuck it out and have put the museum on a reasonable track. But does it seem that museums have mis-interpreted what the visiting public wants/expects? Declining attendance (or overly optimistic expectations of attendance) have threatened so many museums and historic sites, that perhaps museum professionals should examine their assumptions. Nauticus, Valentine Riverside, Baltimore City Life Museums, Historical Society of Western Pennsylvania, New-York Historical Society, even Colonial Williamsburg--does anyone see a pattern? Any thoughts? -- Barbara C. Batson Exhibits Coordinator Library of Virginia 804/692-3518 [log in to unmask]