>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]