Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 14 Jun 1996 15:53:09 +0200 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
There must be a misunderstanding. It never was the question, any museum
should sell decorations, I rather believe it was the question why a
museum should show replicas if there ar a lot of easy ways to show
originals. So I gave the recommendation as Hank (offlist),
Gerhard
On Fri, 14 Jun 1996, Susan Wilkerson wrote:
> Hank Burchard's suggestion that a museum might prefer to sell real military
> medals rather than replicas raises more questions than it answers about what
> museum experience should be and how we want viewers to think of the exhibit
> contents. There are art museums with art rental and/or sales galleries, and
> here at Natural History we have mineral samples for sale. I have worked in
> a military museum, and we did not sell any real souvenirs of the wars. Why
> does the concept of "history for sale" seem fundamentally different than the
> sale of art and natural history, or is that just my imagination? Does the
> sale of one's subject matter in the gift shop cloud the line between going
> to the mall and going to a museum? On a practical note, might that type of
> merchandise make donors think that if they give the museum family mementos
> we might move the items out at clearance prices?
>
|
|
|