Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 3 Nov 1994 15:15:33 EST |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Thanks for that long excerpt from Twain. I have to say that
it *sounds* as if Twains ironic tone is carried through on
the wall-panel, though I don't know what the panel refers
to (haven't had a chance to get to the Battery yet).
If the panel is meant as a description of white people's
treacly romanticisation (is that an ugly neologism --
romantification...romanticizing!) of the Indians, then it is
true to the original's intent, I think.
If it is intended to be a description of the beauty of
Indian crafts, then not only is it a distortion, but it is
poorly chosen. I mean, who can read the word "dainty"
without thinking that there is some ironic intent.
Anyway, I think that your blanket condemnation of the
accuracy of museum texts, and your implicit tone that they
have all descended into mediocre PC-ness, deserves
challenging. I personally think that the attempt at being
inclusive in both medium and content is worth pursuing, and
that the intellectual level of museum exhibits and
interpretation is worlds above the blockbuster-era and
earlier extravaganzas. But then again, I'm here in NYC,
which may be different than Washington (howzabout that for
a gauntlet thrown!).
Anyway, its nice to have such an engaged and partisan
consumer of museum stuff on this list.
Eric Siegel
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|