In article <01bd3ef9$4ecedac0$LocalHost@tki173>, Barry Dressel
<[log in to unmask]> writes

>Re: How important is the Visitor?

Barry Dressel and others make a vital plea for recognition of the
professionalism of the museum worker, without which the "institution
with objects of its own" (UK MGC criterion quoted by Michael Comiskey)
cannot continue to exist.

But equally museums cannot continue to exist (at least in our democratic
systems) without a publicly accepted means of channelling funds from the
economy at large to those who bear the professional responsibility.  The
hot debate in the UK on charging, particularly by National museums
illustrates the search for public acceptance.  It is never true that
"the Government pays" for services - I pay, you pay, he and she pays
somehow.

Barry's alarm at those setting up "museums" before deciding what's in
the collection can be matched by alarm at the number of enthusiastic
initiatives to open a niche collection as a new museum on assumptions of
cost and income which jeopardise the survival of the collection itself.
Taking such risks with financial viability is surely not professional
and in the interest of the objects.  Must not an "object person" be as
concerned with "who's going to pay for my expertise" as a doctor who is
dedicated to the saving of lives?

As political and commercial decisions on the spending of money collected
via tax, profits or lotteries become increasingly exposed to scrutiny,
reflected through political and media processes (which now include
unfettered comment through this medium itself, remember) increasing
numbers of citizens ask for explicit benefits in exchange.

Barry asks: "are objects the sine qua non of your interest, AND do you
wish to work in an environment where collection and preservation of
objects is AS IMPORTANT AS research, interpretation, and education
programs stemming from the objects?" (my capitals).  Research,
interpretation and education are benefits recognised by users and
visitors, alongside enjoyment, satisfaction of curiosity and search for
new experience.  Counting heads is a necessary, though not fully
sufficient, way of giving explicit evidence of the scale of these
benefits.  And for entry-charging museums it is one measure of
sustainable customer satisfaction.

The only acceptable outcome to this type of debate is that balanced
decisions are made - balanced in terms of allowing a range of solutions
to co-exist, of skills needed, of the ideal and the achievable - and of
old and new models and methods in response to developments in all
aspects of our world.  A dynamic balance therefore, although including
risks to personal interests through the impact of experiment and change.

A balance which is implied by Barry and one which I suspect he and the
rest of us are seeking:
>>Having stewardship for collections is the foundation for many museums.
>>Caring for these objects appropriately is essential.  Making use of their
>>educational and informative potential is also essential.

--
Bob Melling
Chromus Consultants
UK