On January 30, 1994, Craig M. Rosa wrote:
 
>In a time when museums are increasingly turning their eyes towards "community,"
>which often includes populations in the immediate area, what kinds of
>adjustments in outreach, funding language, and even the mission of the
>institution can be made to increase local involvement while still taking into
>account the fiscal reality of tourist dollars and exposure?
 
I think "community" is often used as a polite code word for minority, at
least in cities where museum visitors and the nearby population are not
significantly the same (the Detroit Institute of Art comes to mind and,
to some extent, the Brooklyn and Queens Museums).
 
But there are also communities of scholars, interested citizens and, yes,
tourists. What do we make of the "community" that lives around the
Metropolitan Museum, including, among others, Jackie Onassis, the people
of East Harlem and a great many squirrels and birds in Central Park? The
issue is, I think, access and, with that, usefulness. Museums should be
thought of as information utilities that are open to any community that will
find them useful (and, perhaps, convenient). The key is knowing what people want
from you and whether you can realistically provide what they want without
harming your mission (or whether you should change your mission).
 
Robbin Murphy
(Money doesn't talk, it swears)
[log in to unmask]