ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************

>You may not agree with the decision to remove the
>Pendulum, many here at
>the museum didn't, but it was not done lightly and it
>certainly was not
>"cast aside." 

I am sorry. You say that the Pendulum was removed and
will not be reinstalled, and, apparently, there are no
plans to install the Pendulum anywhere else in the
huge Smithsonian complex [or, anywhere else in
Washington, for that matter]. Hence, I do consider my
characterization that the Pendulum has been "cast
aside" as being quite accurate.

>You may scoff at this "progress" all you like, but
>before you judge us too
>harshly ask yourself this:

Progress indeed! I have found that "progress" is often
simply change so new administrators have something new
to take credit for, since they cannot take credit for
an "old" exhibit or an "old" way of displaying and
teaching to the public. So, million of dollars are
spent on "progress," so these administrators [and
often, also politicians] have something to take credit
for. The old exhibits or systems of display are cast
aside, even though they were quite successful in
teaching thousands of people for decades!

>Would your institution devote three floors of its
>most prime exhibition and visitor services real
>estate to a single artifact that has nothing to do
>with your mission?

According to the link you referred me to:
< http://americanhistory.si.edu/about/renovations.cfm
>
the renovation is a $300 million project, with $200
million already raised. That is a lot of money. With
that kind of money, a way could have been found to
work around a major exhibit such as the Foucault
Pendulum, IF THERE WAS THE WILL TO DO SO. Obviously,
there is no such will; only a desire to create "new."

When the Foucault Pendulum was designed as an integral
part of your building, as it waa so designed in
Pittsburgh's Buhl Planetarium, the Pendulum becomes
part of the history of your building. To treat the
Pendulum as just another exhibit, that can be removed
at will, is denying the history of the building.

>Or, considering how many science center and museum
>iMax theaters are/did/will show such films as Charlie
>and the Chocolate Factory  Robots,
>and  Batman Begins, maybe I should rephrase:

First, let me make it clear that I have NO AFFILIATION
with Pittsburgh's Carnegie Science Center. In fact, I
do have differences with The Carnegie Science Center.

That said, commercial IMAX films, laser shows, and
even a miniature railroad and village are often not
part of a museum's mission--but these are financial
necessities so that the museum can fulfill their
stated mission!

>Would your institution devote three floors of its
>most prime exhibition and visitor services real
>estate to a single artifact that has nothing to do
>with your mission AND DOES NOT BRING A SINGLE DIME?

Ah, now we are getting to the meat of it. It is all
about money!

First, how do you know that a Foucault Pendulum does
not bring in a "single dime" to the institutions that
have one? In fact, since the Smithsonian does not
charge an admission fee, I am not sure how this could
become one of your arguments in the first place!

Anecdotally, I can easily report to you that many,
many people who visited Buhl Planetarium, over the
years, have been impressed with our Foucault Pendulum,
and remember that exhibit for many years. Now, they
may not come back just to see that one exhibit, but I
am sure that the Pendulum was ONE of the reasons for
repeat visits, particularly when they are bringing
children or grandchildren--and, when they recommended
Buhl Planetarium to relatives and friends. And, as
with Buhl Planetarium, a Foucault Pendulum is one of
the exhibits very often mentioned in promotional
literature for institutions which house a pendulum.

With the huge Smithsonian complex of museums, I am
sure that there would be someplace appropriate to
display a major exhibit, such as a Foucault Pendulum,
which, even in this high-tech world, still
successfully teaches important concepts about the
world we live on.

However, why spend a lot of money to reinstall the
Foucault Pendulum elsewhere, when you have the
perfect, custom-built location already available? If
more space is needed for the American History Museum,
then that money would be much better spent in building
an annex or addition.

Does a Foucault Pendulum degrade the teaching of
American History? I think not. Even if certain
administrators think that the Foucault Pendulum does
not belong in the National Museum of American History,
I am not so sure that the public would think such an
installation is so out-of-place.

gaw

gaw

Glenn A. Walsh
Electronic Mail - < [log in to unmask] > 
Author of History Web Sites on the Internet --
* Buhl Planetarium, Pittsburgh: 
  < http://www.planetarium.cc > 
* Adler Planetarium, Chicago: 
  < http://adlerplanetarium.tripod.com >
* Astronomer & Optician John A. Brashear: 
  < http://johnbrashear.tripod.com > 
* Andrew Carnegie & Carnegie Libraries: 
  < http://www.andrewcarnegie.cc > 
* Duquesne Incline cable-car railway, Pittsburgh: 
  < http://www.incline.cc >

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

***********************************************************************
More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at http://www.astc.org.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]