USA Today had a thought-provoking article a few days back ont he challenges facing large living history museums. Much in the article is potentially relevant to our institutions. It's sobering to realize that places whose programming depth we aspire to (at least some of us) have problems of their own. "Build it and they will come" or "Schedule it and they will come" look more and more like potentially flawed assumptions.



Putting life back into living history
eledbetter@rypn.org

> USA Today had a thought-provoking article a
> few days back ont he challenges facing large
> living history museums. Much in the article
> is potentially relevant to our institutions.
> It's sobering to realize that places whose
> programming depth we aspire to (at least
> some of us) have problems of their own.
> "Build it and they will come" or
> "Schedule it and they will come"
> look more and more like potentially flawed
> assumptions.

Here's the real kicker from that piece:

"Every historical attraction in North America has these sleeping assets they're fumbling because they don't present them with courage and guts," he says. "The audience does not know your story when they walk in. You have to take them in your hand and give them high emotional impact."



teamzurg@earthlink.net

Yes - it is right on. A must read for every museum member and leader. The usual "But we've always done it this way" will not cut it anymore. Either we change or die.

But history organizations, and especially railroad fans - hate change!

I'm dragging them kicking a screaming so far!

Jim@psrm.org

> USA Today had a thought-provoking article a
> few days back ont he challenges facing large
> living history museums. Much in the article
> is potentially relevant to our institutions.
> It's sobering to realize that places whose
> programming depth we aspire to (at least
> some of us) have problems of their own.
> "Build it and they will come" or
> "Schedule it and they will come"
> look more and more like potentially flawed
> assumptions.

In the 1920's when old Williamsburg rose from the ashes most people had never traveled very far from home and there was no television. Williamsburg, the Disney parks and many others benefitted from the baby boom years in the '60's and '70's, when parents threw the kids in the station wagon and drove off to amusement parks and historic sites. The last of the boomers became adults around 1983, and they do not have four or six or twelve kids like their parents/grandparents did. Almost everyone lives close to a place where folks dress up in old clothes and make candles, grind corn to make flour, or perform "traditional" music,dance,etc.
Frankly, while educational, some of that stuff was always boring and you can watch it on tv for free from the comfort of your home. Out of desperation, nearly every dead downtown area in
America is a "historic district" even if nothing much ever happened there.
Admission charges at some attractions have gotten
ridiculous. I first visited Walt Disney World in 1973. My cost for admission, food and everything for a day was probably about fifteen bucks. Wages and costs have of course gone way up since then but I suspect some companies are putting more in their pockets. To take a family to Biltmore House in Asheville,NC could eat up one or two house payments for the average Joe, even if the drive was short. I should add that in my own experience railroad themed attractions have been consistently less expensive than those of other kinds.
Americans today have more money to spend on leisure than they used to, but I think they are pickier about where they spend it.
While you can't blame them for trying, I don't think a disco exhibit is going to attract any large numbers of people. Those of us from that era remember it all too well and the younger set couldn't care less.
mw

p_michael_warren@yahoo.com