MAKING MUSEUMS~CZ~TTER sions, of course; but one museum can also

harbor a multitude of values. As Stephen

By Stephen E. Weil. Washington, D. C.: Weil writes, “Museums are almost infinite
Smithsonian Institution Press, 2002,273 in their variety and occupy a field with fuzzy
pages. Hardcover: $40; Softcover: $18.95. edges. What is understood to be true and
’9

useful-or useless and irrelevant-is

Reviewed David associateprofes- regarded so for different in differ-
so4 School of Information and Library
ent institutions, and sometimes for differ-
Science, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hid ent reasons in the same institution.
Robert Martin, recently said that after
arriving as director of the Institute of
Museum and Library Services, he discov-
ered that the rich array of museum profes-
The challenge of writing a single sentence sionals, unlike the professional librarians
bearing relevance and truth for all kinds in his experience, have relatively few com-
of museums, their collections, administra- mon areas in their preparations and expe-
tors, curators, researchers, educators and riences. This sometimes makes a single
volunteers is difficult to appreciate until form of approach challenging.
one has tried. Mastery of that challenge Professionalisms (plural) in the muse-
means that the writer sees the museum as um are governed by adherence to differ-
a human construction, a system of objects, ent, and often conflicting, disciplines.
works, and engagements, where people Sometimes the voices of the field don’t
take and share responsibility for the com- speak the same language, even when
mon institutional weal. Objects, works, speaking to each other; and when they do
engagements and responsibilities are cer- abandon their isolation to converse, the
tainties of the day to day, part of the unex- occasion often provides abundant evi-
amined current that moves us all along. dence that any two museum perspectives
Any writing that addresses the life of an are unlikely ever to match. Though
institution has a mandate to speak from museums are different in their visible
the ground-and the ground floor main- and functional ways, however, they all
tenance closet-up. Writing for this pro- must stand as equals on the common
fession asks for a clear and yet critical planes of integrity, ethics, and public
voice that helps all of its people to respect engagement. This is why we need muse-
their work, their communities, and their ums where entire staffs will read and dis-
institutions. cuss a book like this, or gather in a forum
The varieties of working experience in to consider the insights of Weil’s essays,
museums are separated by high fences of “The Museum and the Public” or
perspective, content, scholarship, and “Romance versus Realism,” or actually
stance toward vague and variable audi- conduct small exploratory exercises, like
ences. Many museums mean many mis- “Fantasy Islands” and “(F)FeTMu,”

314

CURATOR44n APRIL 2001
about the (Famous) Ferd Threstle Muse-
um. (These exercises, including an exten-
sive set of “lkenty-One Ways to Buy
Art”, are examples of a provocative,
playful and exhilarating wit that almost
never appears in museum literature, and
that may be worth the price of admission
alone.)
Disparities, insularities, earnest but
limiting disciplinarities-and an inability
to play. These are four reasons why our
institutions need writers who work to pro-
duce a focused literature that above all
else creates the grounding for a truly com-
mon sense of the museum world. Writing
well for all those people, so that their days
are enriched with new concepts or
encouraging visions, is the most we might
ask for as we read Stephen E. Weil’s eclec-
tic collection of occasional pieces and
speeches, Making Museums Matter. The
collection holds two dozen chapters, sev-
eral of them originally written as presen-
tations at distinguished gatherings, but
journal pieces and occasional essays are
here as well. (Attentive readers may have
seen some of them in Museum News.)In
this collection, museum workers in need
of thoughtful discourse and the attention
of a wise philosopher and historian are
given much to treasure and use.
The collection is provocative, intellec-
tual, and authoritative, reflecting a finely
developed perspective on museum history
and literature over time, and the high
skills of a sophisticated writer. Essays
appear under four section headings, “The
Museum in Pursuit of Excellence,” “The
Museum as Workplace,” “The Museum as
Palace,” and “The Museum in the Public
Sphere.” The third section is the least sub-
stantial; its contents might have been
redistributed, rather than appear under
21516952, 2001, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2151-6952.2001.tb01170.x by University Library of Pecs and Centre for Learning, Wiley Online Library on [20/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
315
the stale “palace” rubric. Further, the sev-
eral “warm-up exercises” and copyright
pieces might well have been woven
together, and several of the talks would
certainly benefit from a tighter, more
essay-like tone. A smaller book-say, sev-
enty-five percent of this one, or even sixty
percent-would have been a more solid
work. I also would have liked an index,
and footnotes for every essay. One finds
repeated citations and other redundan-
cies. But then, one need not read every
piece included here to feel satisfied, and
Mr. Weil’s themes are worth repeating.
Mr. Weil obviously understands the
challenges of the contemporary museum,
from his early curatorial and legal work,
his twenty-plus years of leadership at the
Smithsonian’s Hirshhorn Museum, and
his subsequent period of observation from
the vantage of the Center for Education
and Museum Studies, where he is now
scholar emeritus. Given the public and
ethical quandaries that museums experi-
ence, it is also valuable to note Mr. Weil’s
perspective as a lawyer. When discussing
obscenity, Holocaust-related art thefts,
and copyright (four chapters), he makes
informed, dispassionate cases. His allu-
sions and experiences evoke the some-
times austere intellectualism of the art
museum. But at times these honorable
qualities-the lawyer’s voice, the view of
the experienced administrator, the con-
noisseur of nuance, and the remoteness of
the senior scholar-make a reader want a
bit more robust passion, and a view slight-
ly less grounded in the Smithsonic.
There is, however, much valid ground-
ing here. Mr. Weil wisely cites the great
community genius, John Cotton Dana (as
we all should, daily), and evokes his voice
on several pages. (By the way, I sometimes

316
think it is an error for any of us to quote
the testy Mr. Dana directly. Embedded in
our nice contemporary sentences, Dana’s
stem words often sound like the crisp,
commanding dicta of an ayatollah. 2 fin-
ished museum k a copse, and so is a fin-
ished collection,’’ Mr. Weil quotes Mr.
Dana, 2 museum to be of any value must
grow; and it must. . . change its objects, their
manner of presentment, and its method of
management that it may meet the ever
changing needs of a changing order of soci-
efy. ” Not surprisingly, Mr. Weil does not
sound this direct; nor does any one of us,
likely to faint when juxtaposed to the
whip-tongue Dana style.)
We should be very grateful that the pri-
mary messages of this volume are much in
accord with the ideas of Dana, and extend
them valuably to current generations: the
museum must matter to its world; an insti-
tution embodies more than its collection;
we must ask the difficult question; our aim
must be, citing Dana, “an open workshop
of delight and learning,” a “&ll and rich
utility. ” The title of Mr. Weil’s book itself,
the idea that museums must matter, and
can be made to matter, is clearly an idea
that can be traceable directly to Newark,
New Jersey. Like every idea that Mr. Weil
addresses, “mattering” stirs continuously
below the tense surface of museum work,
and it is worth addressing in evaluating a
few of the best essays here. Three essays
in particular are extraordinarily pointed,
generously developed, and superbly illus-
trative of the sensibility implied by “mat-
tering.”
The title of the first of these, “From
Being About Something to Being For
Somebody,” reminds us of the power of
prepositions, and the difference between
something and somebody. Entire museum
21516952, 2001, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2151-6952.2001.tb01170.x by University Library of Pecs and Centre for Learning, Wiley Online Library on [20/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BOK REVIEW
studies curricula could be forged out of
the need to understand these differences.
The essay is subtitled, “The Ongoing
Transformation of the American Muse-
um,” and a good deal of it is a history of
the museum becoming an instrumental
institution, “exhibiting for the living cul-
ture.” (The essay appeared originally in
the Summer 1999 issue of Daedalus that
was dedicated to museums.) Mr. Weil
takes the idea of transformation to its
essential stopping point, the desk of the
leader, and while standing there he asks
pointed questions:
At the level of institutional leadershb, the most
important new skill will be the ability to envi-
sion how the community’songoing andlor
emerging needs in all their dimenswns-physi-
cal,psychological, economic, and social-
might be sewed by the museum’sparticular
competencies.%museum has tremendous
technicalfacility in assembling, displaying, and
interpreting objects, and a well-interpreted dis-
play of those objects may have enormouspower
to affect what and how people think or know or
feel. What then can the museum contribute?
Can it be a succes@l advocatefor environ-
mentally sound public policies? In what ways
might it he& the community to achieve or
maintain social stability? Or energize and
release the imgimtive power of its individual
citizens? Can it sewe as a site for strengthening
family andlor otherpersonal ties? Can it triger
people’s desiref o r w h e r education or training,
inspire them toward proficienq in the creative
arts or the sciences? @. 48)
Again, this is why we need such writ-
ing. To answer yes to any of Mr. Weil’s
questions must of course be followed by
another question: So, what now must we
do? (Notice how the comma makes a
 21516952, 2001, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2151-6952.2001.tb01170.x by University Library of Pecs and Centre for Learning, Wiley Online Library on [20/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
CURATOR 44/2 => APRIL 2001 317

difference in the traditionally abrasive taking on the idea of the “good” museum,
“So what?”) At least this is how I naively and its opposite, the “ b a d one.
envision the conversation that must fol-
low among museum workers who have Bad museums should be of greater concern to
read this essay together and gather to dis- the community of good museums than has
cuss it. generally been the case. They tie up old
The idea of mattering and the so-what resources and divert new ones, and they tend
follows almost directly in another essay to diminish the high esteem in which muse-
(unfortunately titled to inspire visions of ums ought to be held. . . . It is frequently just
blue books and final exams), “Museums: such museums that are-because of their
Can and Do they Make a Difference?” weak leadershiehe most reluctant to put a
Mr. Wed continues to generate “postulti- quick and decent end to themselves so that the
mate” questions: valuable public resources they still hold might
be released for more productive use by other
I f museums do matter; if they can make a dif- organizations. (p. 73)
ference, to whom do they matte<and what are
the differences that they might make? Who The logic of this discourse, its necessity
determines, and when, and how, whether theyas a rational prospect to consider, reaches
are, in fact, making those differences?And,pretty near to the bone. We are reluctant
to notice that not all museums are good
perhaps thorniest of all, how much of a differ-
ence must any particular museum make, and museums, or needed museums, or useful,
over what length of time, for some well- well-led museums. “The very things that
informed observer4 donor or an influentialmake a museum good are its intent to make
legislator-to consider a museum to be suc-a positive difference in the quality of peo-
ple’s lives and, through its skillful use of
cessful, to consider it as having demonstrated
resources under determined leadership, its
itself worthy to receive ongoing support? @.
56) demonstrable ability to do exactly that.”
Even Dana could not improve much on
In this essay, not published before, Mr. this.
Weil boldly suggests the transfer and Ultimately in this essay, Mr. Weil
application to cultural institutions of eval- addresses the reasons for optimism that,
uation concepts employed by the United at the top of this review, appeared as rea-
Way-concepts such as “hope” and sons for distress.
“expectation”-as ways to understand the
benefits and behaviors a museum aspires Having said that all good museums are in one
to influence. sense alike, we can also say that, in another
‘Following in the wake of United Way,” sense-in the mix ofpurposestheypursue-
Mr. Weil writes, “we can begin to identifr they almost all differ from one another:It is
the initial attribute of a good museum: It is that variability, it seems to me, that makes
an institution that is operated with the hope museum work so exciting, even magical. So
and expectation that it will make a positive long as a dedication to public service is its
difference in the quality of people’s lives.” drivingforce, a museum can be a good one in
Then Mr. Weil becomes even bolder, by an almost infinite number of ways. (p. 74)

318
The details of such magic and infinity
cannot be articulated frequently enough.
Late in the book, Mr. Weil addresses “the
museum of the near future” (in “The
Museum and the Public”) in a way that
moves our attention to the challenges of
newly-transformed experiences of living
in the twenty-first century. “The museum
of the near future,” Mr. Weil writes,
. . . Will in itself be an ideologicallyneutral
organization.It will in essence be one of a
mnge of organizations-instruments, really-
available to the supporting community to be
used in pursuit of its communalgoals. As an
intricate and potential&powerful instrument
of communication,it will make available to
the communig, and for the community’spur-
poses, its profound expertise at telling stories,
eliciting emotion, triggeringmemories, stirring
imagination, and prompting discoveiy-its
expertise in stimulating all those object-based
responses. @. 200)
It is clear to the contemporary mind
that the strength and goodness of a cultur-
al institution-not unlike the strength and
goodness of a person, or an intellect-will
be determined by an ability to collaborate,
21516952, 2001, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2151-6952.2001.tb01170.x by University Library of Pecs and Centre for Learning, Wiley Online Library on [20/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BOOK REVIEW
to communicate, and to be generous with
its gifts. This is not, of course, in the
“near” future, but in the now.
The audience for this book, or for
selected essays in this book, is the vast
professional body of museum workers,
from chairmen to docents, who assume
that they understand what their museums
are, and do, and have been, and will be in
the future. Mr. Weil’s work will assist us
all to understand that even our most
enlightened assumptions require daily vis-
its if they are to be fresh. And, it seems
clear to me after experiencing this collec-
tion, such visits must not be paid alone,
but in groups of colleagues from across
every museum stratum. For a museum,
the greatest value is the discussion of val-
ues; and more than that: the way to
become an institution that matters is to
carry out our best arguments over values
out loud, over time, among others. We
must work to keep our assumptions open.
In valuing the many stimuli in Mr. Weil’s
Making Museums Matter, we might easily
paraphrase Dana, who would be quick to
tell us that a finished argument is a
corpse.