>Every time the discussion about "Should museums educate or
>entertain?" comes up, the prevailing debate includes the premise
>that you can only have one at the expense of the other.  If museums,
>libraries or any form of voluntary learning is to garner monetary
>support, both imperatives must be seen as complimentary, not
>conflicting, components to success.
>
>The fun and enjoyment has to come from within the ongoing,
>successful achievement of the mission of the museum, period.  If
>that isn't there from the Director on down to the newest volunteer
>working in the gift shop, no amount of public or private money will
>make your institution anything more than an overfunded mausoleum.
>
>Rich Johnson


Hear, hear, Rich Johnson!  We all know of successful museums that are fun,
widely supported in their communities, AND successfully carrying out
their missions in solid, professional, yet innovative ways.  Perhaps a
look at Stephen Weil's article "Creampuffs and Hardball:  Are you really
worth what you cost? [Museum News, Sept/Oct 1994] would help us think a
little more clearly about what museums ought to be doing.  To quote:

        "The museum seeking to articulate the ways in which it intends to
        impact its target community would be wise to observe one caution:
        concentrate on those object-related outcomes that are most
        particular to museums and don't inadvertently undermine your
        unique importance by describing outcomes that might as easily be
        achieved by some other organization."

Alas, I am not sure that there is a connection between successful museums
and higher salaries.  One will not necessarily follow the other, unless
we lobby (sometimes, hard) for higher pay.

Claudia Nicholson
Curator of Collections
Museum of the South Dakota State Historical Society
Pierre

[log in to unmask]