To Elizabeth Punsalan:
I would say that the "hypothesis of this thesis" as you describe it,
is in the first sentence of your thesis statement, that museums are
somehow dysfunctional now. Then your secondary hypothesis is the
reason for this "dysfunction" viz, the conflict between managerial and
aesthetic values.
I hope that you are willing to test the initial hypothesis as well as
the putative reason behind the "dysfunction."
Is there a point of reference or comparison for this dysfunction (I
personally am not convinced by this spelling...)? Was there less of
this problem 20 years ago, 30, 40? When attendance at museums was
1/50th of what it is now, and when there were so many fewer and less
diverse institutions?
As you can tell, I am unconvinced of your initial hypothesis. As far
as I can see, all around the major cities, new museums, newly
invigorated, with new audiences, new outreach programs, and an
incredible diversity of exhibition programs, from blockbuster to
modest, are making museums healthier than they have been in my
lifetime (40 years).
At least one reason for this is the professionalism of the management
function (integrating serious financial and strategic planning into
the previous adhocracy), and the increased capability for raising
funds,
I hope that you don't only search out professionals who agree with
your negative first principal (the dysfunction of museums), but also
talk to those who are more positive about these trends. This is the
golden age of museums, IMHO.
Eric Siegel
[log in to unmask]
|