Existing comment:
Richard Darman. This guy chaired a blue-ribbon group which reviewed the National Museum of American History and found it lacking. This from the Washington Post:
American History Museum in Disarray, Panel Finds
By Jacqueline Trescott
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 7, 2002; 2:57 PM
The National Museum of American History, the third-most-visited museum in the world, needs a complete makeover, a blue-ribbon panel has concluded.
While the museum holds some of the priceless artifacts that tell America's story, such as the desk on which Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence and the original Star-Spangled Banner, which inspired the national anthem, the story within the museum's walls is often confusing and splintered.
"It is an extraordinarily valuable national resource," Richard Darman, the chairman of the Blue Ribbon Commission on the National Museum of American History, said this morning at a news conference at the museum. "Its collections are unrivaled. And its importance is probably greater now than it ever has been. At the same time, however, the museum is falling short of its potential." The 23-member committee was appointed by the Smithsonian's Board of Regents.
The panel's analysis was done over the last year during a period when the usually quiet history museum was rocked by internal debate over the influence of donors, questions about control of content in exhibitions and the departure of several respected curators, including the director of the museum. The report did not ignore the turbulence that followed a gift of $38 million by local philanthropist Catherine B. Reynolds, who wanted her money used to salute American achievers. After months of disagreement with the staff, Reynolds abruptly withdrew the gift. The committee was neutral on the Reynolds controversy but more forthright on the general topic of exhibit content.
"The controversies needed to be answered," said broadcaster Roger Mudd, a member of the commission. The report said agreements between donors and the museum, which is part of the sprawling Smithsonian Institution, need to be carefully ironed out to restore trust in the museum. The debate over control of exhibitions did not erode the public's trust in the museum, the report concluded, but it did hamper relationships with donors and scholars.
"The Smithsonian and the NMAH should continue -- and guard as fundamental -- the policy that reserves to the museum final control and responsibility for all matters of exhibit content," the report said. The Smithsonian holds an overriding imperative to do better than others in this area, according to the report. Because of its national status and the popularity of its exhibitions, the Smithsonian should "resist the general tendency toward commercialization. The Smithsonian should not and need not be reduced to lowest-common-denominator standards."
Visitors to American History have complained for years that its displays and floor plan were confusing. Efforts have been underway for years to correct this.
This morning the panel made that shortcoming official. "It is claustrophobic, and that has some effect of displeasure," Darman said. The report criticized the lighting levels, the large number of interior walls and the cluttered arrangements in some exhibition halls.
"Perhaps because of the pressure to reflect the fullness of American history, NMAH has taken the metaphor of 'America's Attic' to a regrettable extreme," the report stated, adding that the clutter "can discourage reflection and compound the impression of incoherence."
There is such confusion that often the visitor, and even the employees, get lost. "As it is now, the museum does not seem to meet any obvious test of comprehensibility or coherence. Indeed, in the most basic physical sense, visitors frequently have difficulty orienting themselves. Even some curators who have spent their entire professional lives in the NMAH building get lost," the report said.
Smithsonian officials said this morning that they had no estimate of the total costs of the renovations but that they had $100 million from private gifts that would help start the work.
Moreover, the report said, the topics tackled in the museum do not give what the authors called "a grand sweep" of the country's record and people. And the museum's own history -- it was a history and technology museum when it opened in January 1964 -- might be partly responsible for that. Also, the report noted, the specialities of the curators are honored. "It offers a home for each major camp within the curatorial staff," said the report.
The report urged that a scholarly overhaul should include new or expanded emphasis on religion, immigration, slavery, capitalism, the growth of the middle class, cowboy culture, the Spanish-American interconnection and the experiences of Asian Pacific Americans.
Darman said he wants the museum to be both celebratory and critical but in the end to be "a worthy focus of compelling interest and a justifiable source of national pride." |