| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| Museum Professionals https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8198 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Peter Schmidt [ Sun Jan 18, 2004 7:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Museum Professionals |
Recently there has been several messages posted about "museum professionals" vis-a-vis "volunteers". When discussing differing point of view, it always helps to be sure that everyone understands the meaing of the terms used. Unfortunately the term "professional" has at least three different meanings. Originally it referred to someone practicing one of the "learned professions", medicine, law, engineering, etc. and implied extensive academic training at a university, usualy involving post-graduate studies. Now the term often just means the individual is paid to do their job, such as a professional baseball player. There is no connotation of any academic training. The third meaning is in reference to someone who does something with great skill, whether paid to do it or not, such as a "professsional complainer". Would one of you posting here who self-identifies as a "museum professional" please define what you mean by the term? This should go a long way in avoiding misunderstandings in future discussions of the issue. Pete Schmidt pjslks@ix.netcom.com |
|
| Author: | Ted Miles [ Sun Jan 18, 2004 11:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Museum Professionals |
Let me say that most people use the term these days to refer to a person who does a museum job for money. Especially here in afield that has mostly volunteer positions. I qualify for the first part. And I have a four year college degree and additional graduate work on top. Many people these days have Masters degrees in various forms of museum work. People have told me I am good at what I do; but I think of people like Kyle Watt and Kurt Bell as those folks who really do the railroad museum field proud! One other thing, most of the folks who get paid by a museum that I know, started as volunteers. Ted Miles ted_miles@nps.gov |
|
| Author: | Bob Kutella [ Mon Jan 19, 2004 9:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Museum Professionals |
The third meaning is > in reference to someone who does something > with great skill, whether paid to do it or > not, such as a "professsional > complainer". Hi Pete, Now I do not want to COMPLAIN about your post, but it is nice to finally know I have a skill set that can be referred to as 'professional'!! In my opinion when we refer to a museum professional it is something more than merely a paid position since I have seen many paid employees that I certainly would not dignify by referring to them as 'professional'. It implies a level of expertise and performance, usually backed up by some credentials in the form of academic achievements and/or experience based accomplishments that justify the use of the "p" word. I would class it as merit based and definitely complimentary to the person under discussion. And if they do not meet the expectations, do not call them a perfeshunal, even in sarcasm, since someone will surely take it out of context and use it as a quote on a resume. Bob Kutella 68trolley@comcast.net |
|
| Author: | Erik Ledbetter [ Mon Jan 19, 2004 9:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Museum Professionals |
> Would one of you posting here who > self-identifies as a "museum > professional" please define what you > mean by the term? This should go a long way > in avoiding misunderstandings in future > discussions of the issue. I don't self-identify as a museum professional, since I don't work at a museum in my workaday career. That said, I think the other posters are onto something when they cite pay and academic training in museum studies as the two hallmarks, but I'd actually say it's something broader than that. I would point to a fault line between those who embrace and advocate the kind of conceptual tools and procedures and perspectives taught in museum studies programs and museum professional meetings like those run by AAM or ARM, and those who feel that most of these concepts have little application to railway preservation. A good example is the donneybrook that breaks out over the concept of "conservation of original fabric." This idea (that a museum's job is to alter the physical condition of an srtifact a little as possible, so as to preserve it for future study) amounts to "received wisdom" in most museum studies programs, but it's highly controversial within our field. Many people feel that it violates the nature of railroad artifacts not to restore them to operating condition, and that the concept of original fabric is therefore silly applied to, say, a steam locomotive. I guess I'm trying to say the two sides of the debate are drawn up along friendliness vs. hostility to some concepts of what a museum is and what it should do, and that this goes beyond paid vs. volunteer or academic training vs. OJT/self-taught. eledbetter@rypn.org |
|
| Author: | ge13031 [ Mon Jan 19, 2004 11:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Professionals ..on the stand |
Just thought I'd mention ...witnessed as a by-stander in Federal Court ... No matter what your credentials were, if you got a paycheck, you were a professional, if not you are an amateur! lamontdc@adelphia.net |
|
| Author: | dave [ Mon Jan 19, 2004 12:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | museumology |
I think it is worth mentioning that traditional academic museum study degree programs do not as a rule focus on, nor were they developed to deal with, the realities of large mechanical artifacts whose interpretation can only be truly done within the context of use and consumption. This sphere is evolving now that the industrial revolution and its physical components are old enough to become objects of historic interest. When I worked for Colorado Historical Society as a director of a program to develop a large mechanical artifact restoration shop, my supervisor was a highly trained and very professional fabrics and textiles conservator. Our discussions were enlightening to say the least.....and I earned a lot. It probably goes without saying that there is more than adequate room for both extremes as well as all the gray areas in between. No doubt some hunks of old rusty iron are significant in themselves to be best conserved in their current condition. Others may be more generic in nature and used and consumed with fabric replaced as required. Which are which depends on your POV. Kennesaw as case in point: is GENERAL an 1855 Rogers or a 1961 Paducahbuilt with some used parts? In one case it is less significant that the more original Glover dinkies sharing the facility, in another case less. What is wonderful is that we are taking the time to actually consider this now - a sign of maturity within our industry. dave irondave@bellsouth.net |
|
| Author: | Ted Miles [ Tue Jan 20, 2004 1:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: museumology |
It is now possible to cite publications like the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Vessel Preservation Projects or Historic Buildings. I understand that the airplane people use our Historic Vessel standards quite a bit. I wish that there could be one for railroad equipment! Here is one for you: the Wheeling 39 at Seashore Trolley Museum was a stripped car body, but is now rebuilt with decades old trucks, motors hardware and the same kind of structural parts that the original builder put into it. i am sure it will run some day soon. Ted Miles ted_miles@nps.gov |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|