BellaOnline Forums Education Museums Do we need artifacts?

Earlier today I posted an article about The Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library & Museum .

I said:

"But what you won’t find are many artifacts on display. And you know what? You will be so dazzled by the exhibits, you won’t even miss them."

When I visited Lincoln, I was struck by the lack of artifacts in their permanent exhibits. AND by how little it seemed to matter to me!

It launched me into an existential crisis. I'm a CURATOR. Part of what I do is LOVE ARTIFACTS. So why didn't I miss them? Aren't they important? Can you have an effective exhibit without them? What is the future of the artifact?

I didn't really come up with many answers, other than that I can think a bunch of conflicting things at the same time.

So what do YOU think??

The Lincoln Library sounds fascinating. Makes me wish for a reason to be in Illinois. (But no, it's not quite enough on its own to get me there.)

Today I was in the British Museum with a friend and one of things we went to see was a mummified sacred crocodile and what they'd learned from its CT scan. All the things plus the commentary could have made a video, BUT it wouldn't have had the impact of the artifacts.

So in the case of what I saw, it's the reality of the ancient artifacts that's compelling. In what you saw it was the vivid recreation that brings visitors into the story that is compelling.

A few years ago our small museum had a do-over and story boards replaced the artifacts which had been used to tell the story of the county. Only a few artifacts remain in the exhibit. Few come anymore to see this but there is a small section of the museum which is used for revolving exhibits. We recently had a black history exhibit which brought in a number of people to the museum and then there was a genealogy exhibit. Kids like hands on stuff and artifacts they an relate to. Story boards are too much to read.

When I travel and visit museums I like to look at artifacts. But there again it depends on the exhibit.