> ... Museum "railroads" that make every move
> slowly and hesitantly are not a particularly
> realistic recreation of how railroading
> really was. ... we need to think
> about how we "preserve" and
> interprete some of the human aspects of
> railroad history.

Museum staff often get too caught up in the pretentiousness of 'playing museum' instead of re-creating human history and maintaining artifacts for future generations to use and learn from. Steam engines were designed to be used, maintained, repaired, rebuilt, and to last for generations. They would have too if short sighted 'oil mania' and the 'diesel revolution' hadn't killed steam power.
You're right - it's supposed to be about people, in the past, present and future.

mike211@yknet.ca

> It's likely that the "disposable"
> mentality may be the first thing that has to
> be tackled.

You're right. The "throwaway" mindset and the squandering of resources it entails is the biggest challenge we face as a society. Unfortunately the money mongers have conned most into believing that the 'health' of the economy is based on this premise. However it's not sustainable and therefore anything but healthy if one takes a long term perspective.

It's very important that we preserve and maintain steam technology; at the present rates of oil and gas depletion, our great grandchildren will need to know how coal fired steam power works.


mike211@yknet.ca

> Museum staff often get too caught up in the
> pretentiousness of 'playing museum' instead
> of re-creating human history and maintaining
> artifacts for future generations to use and
> learn from.

I don't get the distinction between "being a museum" or worse "playing museum" and "maintaining artifacts for future generations to use and learn from." That's one of the things museums do.

What's the point of setting the one against the other? Are we really arguing that preserving railroad equipment and skills is in opposition to, and can't be accomplished in the context of, being a museum? If so, why not?

It is a source of sorrow to me to see a strain of hostility to museum professionalism running through part of our community. Why would we not want to learn from the hard-won experience of colleagues who have been learning to care for and interpret other kinds of collections, some similar to ours, others not so much so? In my opinion, we should be striving to learn from and exchange views with the broader museum movement, instead of setting ourselves up in opposition to it.



eledbetter@rypn.org

> It is a source of sorrow to me to see a
> strain of hostility to museum
> professionalism running through part of our
> community. Why would we not want to learn
> from the hard-won experience of colleagues
> who have been learning to care for and
> interpret other kinds of collections, some
> similar to ours, others not so much so? In
> my opinion, we should be striving to learn
> from and exchange views with the broader
> museum movement, instead of setting
> ourselves up in opposition to it.

I'm trying to not get a little heated here, but please excuse me if some emotion shows up in my comments below. Its not directed towards specific individuals, but toward the "strain of hostility" mentioned above.

Ditto---well said by someone who works with and for one what many of us "horrid" museum professionals consider the most esteemed museum organization in the country, one that PRIDES itself on its member's practices. I don't know where all this "we hate anyone who gets paid for his education and expertise" began, but while volunteers and volunteerism has an important place in every museum, I, too, don't understand why there is such hostility to museum professionals. We aren't all railfan haters, nor, as I remember the Director of one the finer rail museums in Pennsylvania pointed out back at ARM/TRAIN in 2001: "I don't have to be a railfan to be the director of Rail Museum." Believe it or not, some, like Erik, K.R., and myself, ARE railfans, and try to balance our love of rail heritage with the knowledge of what it can and will take to preserve for future generations.

As for being a "professional": we are HELD to a code of ethics that volunteers are often not; we are REQUIRED to maintain our education (and yes, what "education" means, if your working for a good facility, is broad and defined by your position) and we are the ones who often have to make the tough decisions that other are both unwilling or unable to do. I know I will take flack for this, but if your museum does not have someone with some sort of professional training, your going to be in a world of hurt in the future. Most funding agencies won't even THINK of supporting you without trained professionals, from your Director right down to the guy that runs your HVAC system.

Look, its simple as this: would you let someone unqualified in steam locomotive operation operate your meticulously restored locomotive? NO. Would you let someone who never had any training as a CPA audit your books? NO. So why in blue-blazes would you let JUST ANYONE handle your priceless collection of blueprints on said locomotive, or your irreplacable photograph collection? Would you let just any jo-shmoe start tearing down your loco for a rebuild who had never done it before, without someone there who has? Guess what: I and others have seen just that happen, and MUCH to often. Professionalism is NEEDED within this community, both in the operation, preservation, AND funding areas.

I'm sorry, but if you insult museum professionals as a WHOLE (not to say that the aren't or can't be bad eggs among us) its awfully hard not to take it personally; as far as I'm concerned, you insult me too. I'm tired of it. I've spent a lot of time both on the job and amongst people I highly respect and admire learning "the rules of the road" when it comes to making sure that you have that picture of old '99 when it comes time to restore it back to operation. I highly respect those who have done without for a long time, but its time to realize that training as a welder is as important as training as curator. They are specialized jobs that require knowledge of the trade. Not to say that I don't get JUST as angry at those members of my profession who look down on volunteers or tradesman; its just as bad if not worse. But if we expected to move from the "cute weekend hobbyist" to the "respected preservationist" era, we need to be the ones to make the first step. And while I realize respect is earned and not granted, its time that we give respect to BOTH areas if we wil continue to move forward. Organizations that don't, well, DIE.

Dang. Knocked my noggin' when I slipped off my soapbox!

TJ Gaffney

tjgaffney@phmuseum.org

> I don't get the distinction between
> "being a museum" or worse
> "playing museum" and
> "maintaining artifacts for future
> generations to use and learn from."
> That's one of the things museums do.

Yes, that's what real museums do. My remarks were directed to tourist display facilities who get caught up in the details of 'playing museum' and loose track of the big picture. This is not to imply that real museums and their hard working staff are in any way our enemy.

mike211@yknet.ca

I don't
> know where all this "we hate anyone who
> gets paid for his education and
> expertise" began, but while volunteers
> and volunteerism has an important place in
> every museum, I, too, don't understand why
> there is such hostility to museum
> professionals.

Are you confusing hostility with envy?

BTW, you can be both a professional AND volunteer at the same time.

> I'm trying to not get a little heated here,
> but please excuse me if some emotion shows
> up in my comments below. Its not directed
> towards specific individuals, but toward the
> "strain of hostility" mentioned
> above.

> Ditto---well said by someone who works with
> and for one what many of us
> "horrid" museum professionals
> consider the most esteemed museum
> organization in the country, one that PRIDES
> itself on its member's practices. I don't
> know where all this "we hate anyone who
> gets paid for his education and
> expertise" began, but while volunteers
> and volunteerism has an important place in
> every museum, I, too, don't understand why
> there is such hostility to museum
> professionals. We aren't all railfan haters,
> nor, as I remember the Director of one the
> finer rail museums in Pennsylvania pointed
> out back at ARM/TRAIN in 2001: "I don't
> have to be a railfan to be the director of
> Rail Museum." Believe it or not, some,
> like Erik, K.R., and myself, ARE railfans,
> and try to balance our love of rail heritage
> with the knowledge of what it can and will
> take to preserve for future generations.

> As for being a "professional": we
> are HELD to a code of ethics that volunteers
> are often not; we are REQUIRED to maintain
> our education (and yes, what
> "education" means, if your working
> for a good facility, is broad and defined by
> your position) and we are the ones who often
> have to make the tough decisions that other
> are both unwilling or unable to do. I know I
> will take flack for this, but if your museum
> does not have someone with some sort of
> professional training, your going to be in a
> world of hurt in the future. Most funding
> agencies won't even THINK of supporting you
> without trained professionals, from your
> Director right down to the guy that runs
> your HVAC system.

> Look, its simple as this: would you let
> someone unqualified in steam locomotive
> operation operate your meticulously restored
> locomotive? NO. Would you let someone who
> never had any training as a CPA audit your
> books? NO. So why in blue-blazes would you
> let JUST ANYONE handle your priceless
> collection of blueprints on said locomotive,
> or your irreplacable photograph collection?
> Would you let just any jo-shmoe start
> tearing down your loco for a rebuild who had
> never done it before, without someone there
> who has? Guess what: I and others have seen
> just that happen, and MUCH to often.
> Professionalism is NEEDED within this
> community, both in the operation,
> preservation, AND funding areas.

> I'm sorry, but if you insult museum
> professionals as a WHOLE (not to say that
> the aren't or can't be bad eggs among us)
> its awfully hard not to take it personally;
> as far as I'm concerned, you insult me too.
> I'm tired of it. I've spent a lot of time
> both on the job and amongst people I highly
> respect and admire learning "the rules
> of the road" when it comes to making
> sure that you have that picture of old '99
> when it comes time to restore it back to
> operation. I highly respect those who have
> done without for a long time, but its time
> to realize that training as a welder is as
> important as training as curator. They are
> specialized jobs that require knowledge of
> the trade. Not to say that I don't get JUST
> as angry at those members of my profession
> who look down on volunteers or tradesman;
> its just as bad if not worse. But if we
> expected to move from the "cute weekend
> hobbyist" to the "respected
> preservationist" era, we need to be the
> ones to make the first step. And while I
> realize respect is earned and not granted,
> its time that we give respect to BOTH areas
> if we wil continue to move forward.
> Organizations that don't, well, DIE.

> Dang. Knocked my noggin' when I slipped off
> my soapbox!

> TJ Gaffney

TJ:

Well said.

Les


midlandblb@cs.com

> I don't

> Are you confusing hostility with envy?

> BTW, you can be both a professional AND
> volunteer at the same time.
Thats right! One can be a volunteer and a paid/professional at the same time! I know plenty of guys that fill this role very well!
Oh, I am also a paid person, and a volunteer!

SOUTHERN630@HOTMAIL.COM

> TJ:

> Well said.

> Les
I must agree with this! The museum that I am involved in is a great place! I really love what I do! I will say that this place can not(I dont believe)function without the paid guys and the volunteers!

SOUTHERN630@HOTMAIL.COM

> I don't get the distinction between
> "being a museum" or worse
> "playing museum" ...
> It is a source of sorrow to me to see a
> strain of hostility to museum
> professionalism running through part of our
> community. ...

A research colleague had the following experience with so called "museum professionals", and you wonder where the hostility comes from?

"I visited the xxxxxxxx Museum in August and I took hundreds of photos of the locomotives, some of them with a meter stick visible in the photo for scaling the size of details. I would be glad to share them, but...............

I had to sign a non-disclosure agreement promising that I would not share the information with anybody, that I would only use the photos and the information contained therein for building models, and that I would build no more than one model of each locomotive.

While I was taking the photos, the locomotive shed had to be locked so that nobody else would see that I was allowed to take such photos, because then other people might want to take photos, too. The policy of the museum is that photography is only allowed for souvenir purposes - systematically taking photos of artifacts from all angles is not normally allowed. Also, I was not allowed to place the meter stick on the locomotives myself, a museum employee had to do this for me, because if I did it I might damage the locomotive. I was given permission to have a few measurements taken (again subject to the terms of the non-disclosure
agreement), but I was not allowed to take them myself, the same employee took them. Again this was to ensure that I would not damage the locomotives with my measuring tape."

Is this typical?


mike211@yknet.ca

I was
> given permission to have a few measurements
> taken (again subject to the terms of the
> non-disclosure
> agreement), but I was not allowed to take
> them myself, the same employee took them.
> Again this was to ensure that I would not
> damage the locomotives with my measuring
> tape."

Restrictions on photography of artifacts in a museum collection are relatively common. One classic default version of this formula is: "Visitors are allowed to take photographs or video inside the MuseumÂ’s permanent collection galleries if the photographs/videos are intended for personal use only and not for reproduction, publication or any commercial purpose. No photography using flash, artificial lights, or tripods is permitted."

The reasoning is twofold--1. to prevent photographers with extensive equiptment from impeding the access and enjoyment of the general public. 2. to prevent the creation of images of commercial value without revenue returning to the museum in the form of a license or permission fee.

As for the tape measure, most museums prohibit anyone but staff from climbing on or touching exhibits or equiptment except under controlled conditions. Damage to the artifact is one concern, damage to the visitor is probably the other large concern. If your friend falls off the smokebox while measuring and breaks his neck, who pays?

Both these common restrictions sit hard with railfans beacuse we are used to thinking of railroads as a open-air environment with no access restrictions (even though measuring and often photographing equiptment in the wild requires legal trespass). But they are common means for controlling the general public in a museum environment--the general public including all kinds of people, many without the sense God gave a June bug. It is almost impossible to write a three-tiered policy that would read "Responsible railfans can do a, b, and c; but commercial photographers looking to make money can only do c; and idiot members of the general public can do neither a nor b nor c."

Let me rephrase the question for you. Would your friend expect to be able to measure aircraft on exhibit at the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum unmonitored? Would he expect to be able to photograph all sides and all angles of an automobile at the National Automoble Museum in Reno (including I assume getting interior images and dimensions)? I submit, probably not. But then again, he's not used to having unrestricted access to aircraft, and he probably shares with all of us the strong taboo against touching other people's cars without permission.

My point is that these restrictions look unreasonable only from a railfan's perspective. From the perspective of all other kinds of museums with all other kinds of artifacts they look pretty normal and reasonable.

You may or may not find that persuasive, but it's another perspective from which to consider the matter.


eledbetter@rypn.org

Mike:

Have your friend visit our museum. Although we do not allow visitors to climb on equipment, he could take all the photos and measurements he wants.

Les Beckman (Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum/North Judson, Indiana)



midlandblb@cs.com

I can certainly appreciate the points Eric raises. I also much prefer museums with attitudes like Les's. I guess a lot of it depends on whether the museum caters to the general public or more to knowledgeable railroad enthusiasts. We're fortunate that our local railroad is very 'railfan friendly'.

mike211@yknet.ca

Mike, it is amazing what some advance contact with the curator in charge can accomplish in making an appointment to do specific research / documentary inspections. I have never been made unwelcome by making a request for legitimate purposes through professional channels.

dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

> Mike, it is amazing what some advance
> contact with the curator in charge can
> accomplish in making an appointment to do
> specific research / documentary inspections.
> I have never been made unwelcome by making a
> request for legitimate purposes through
> professional channels.

> dave

You're quite right Dave. That's the way I've operated and always get good cooperation.
My colleague received good cooperation, but there was a general feeling that the restrictions on non-profit sharing with other modelers was a bit too much. The other factor is timing. They're generally more cooperative in the off season vs the summer tourist rush. Mike


mike211@yknet.ca