Mail letters to Letters, Santa Fe Reporter, PO Box 2306, Santa Fe NM 87504, deliver them to 132 E. Marcy St., fax them to 988-5348, e-mail them to editor@sfreporter.com, or use our online form.
THE MAGIC'S GONE
While Zane may have been a tad Draconian in his take on the role of docents in museums today (they do have their place; they can make some thorny things more accessible to the uninitiated), he is correct in observing that all US museums today seem driven, if not primarily propelled, by the "education" juggernaut [Zane's World, Jan. 31: "
" and Feb. 21: "
"].
And there is one very cogent reason (among others) that our museums may sometimes feel like nothing more than the little red schoolhouse-with "stuff."
All museums (art, science, you name it) are terrified of losing their tax-deductible status (the famous IRS "501(c)3"); the primary way museums "justify" their privileged status to many American lawmakers is to hammer home, incessantly, their role as "educational institutions."
There have been serious congressional efforts in the past to strip museums of that critical designation. It hence became very clear, early on, that savvy museum directors and boards not only had to beef up their tutelage but also tout it, constantly, to anyone willing to stand and listen!
This is the primary reason one sometimes feels positively assaulted by Education (caps intended) upon entering our museums.
Gone are the glorious days (or so this former museum director sees them) when a museum visit was a solitary and silent encounter, in a place all dust and echoing footsteps, with art or quirky objects seemingly from some world apart. Sadly, that special magic is all too often lost.
Jan E Adlmann
Santa Fe
DIVING INTO DEBATE
Well, Zane, I have decided to wade into the "docent dialogue" based on my experiences as an artist, instructor and former docent of years past. I am also the granddaughter of an incredible woman who spent a lifetime at the Metropolitan Museum in NYC enjoying docent tours and talks on art. She was passionate about the museum and revered the information that was offered to art lovers such as herself. As her granddaughter, I benefited greatly from this passion from the time I could walk.
As a former docent/artist, I enjoyed the time I spent at the Boston ICA learning about the latest exhibition, often meeting the artists, such as Wayne Thiebaud and his dealer the late Allan Stone, understanding the history and personal stories of the artists on exhibition and curatorial choices. My job helped visitors gain insight and knowledge as they looked carefully at the work.
From another perspective, I, as an artist, have often skirted around visitors at well-packed museums such as the MOMA in NY in irritation because they are listening to headphones in front of a painting I want to observe. At the same time I tell myself that it is wonderful that people want to inform themselves and engage whatever way they can with the art. Being an artist does not give me exclusive rights to view work only in the manner that suits me.
It is true that art and art history can be presented in a tedious manner that is quite separate from the dynamic of art creation, leaving out some terrific stories about the artists themselves that add to the information and interest. And often in overviews of the history of art, historians have lumped information together, missing nuances and the messiness of the process and the real truth about the initiation of an idea.
But-and there is a but, Zany (love that Julia Hunkins [Letters, Feb. 21: "
"])-the verbal grandstanding of disrespecting and belittling docents who give their time and energies freely in a wordy, arrogant and narcissistic diatribe about their imagined activities and lifestyle just to get a rise out of the reading audience is tired, obnoxious and totally off-track.
If you are truly worried about how museums inform the public, talk to some talented teachers about how they impart information and get everyone excited about learning. Then put the museums, docents and teachers together and brainstorm so everyone has input and can bring the best to the table. That is of course, Zany, if you are truly interested rather than just mouthing off at the computer. As James Carvel would say, "It's the education thing, stupid."
Diane G Rolnick
Sandia Park
APOLOGY IN ORDER
My comments about Richard Polese and the school board were unwarranted, not necessary, and I apologize for them [Letters, Feb. 14: "
"].
Since I didn't vote, I have no right to comment. And I was not a supporter of any other candidate, as I've been accused. For this election I was in District 1, and I still chose not to vote.
I feel that children can go to school if they want, not be forced, and they should have the option of working if they have someone to support financially.
Most everything you need to know in life is learned by the eighth grade. (Also the wages paid today are equivalent to an eighth-grade education.)
Dennis S Perea
Santa Fe
PROPS TO Y'ALL
I wanted to let you know that I am SUPER happy with the Reporter's current staff and the articles being written. The reading is not just informative, but entertaining as well. Thank you Emiliano, Gabe, Peter, Nathan, Patricia, Julia, Gwyneth and Zane (and anyone I may have missed)! Extra props to Emiliano for the hilarious Oscars article [Movies, Feb. 21: "
"].
Alexis Brown
Santa Fe
MORE THAN SCIENCE
I would like to respond to Walter Cohen's concerns over my cautionary views on the "unequivocal" status of climate change [Letters, Feb. 21: "
"].
As I rarely read the NY Times due to its lack of accuracy and objectivity on climate topics, I presume he is referring to the political summary of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.
My point was the dubious linking of warming to radiative forcing attributed to increases in anthropogenic CO2 concentrations. A more careful reading of this supercommittee report admits to a lack of agreement and a high degree of uncertainty in climate models, a "likely" increase in future global temperatures of 0.1 degree C per decade and an admission that temperatures would probably continue to rise even if emissions were stabilized. The effects of natural climate change are noted but not quantified. This is hardly unequivocal evidence.
Nor is this a simple scientific dispute but more a matter of belief and a wish to be on the side that makes the most noise. Your correspondent makes a good point about the Church and Galileo; however, as for wanting to know the truth, he is clearly siding with the Inquisition!
David Brown
Santa Fe
The Reporter welcomes original, signed letters to the editor. Letters (no more than 200 words) should refer to specific articles in the Reporter. They may be edited for clarity and space. Please include address and phone number for verification purposes; these will not be published.
