Have we taken things too far?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1323443/Museum-displays-human-remains-covered-fear-offending-pagans.html

Museums all over the world have been dealing with repatriation of indigenous objects, most recently in the US with the advent of NAGPRA, the North American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. NAGPRA and similar statues require museums that receive federal funding to return human remains and funerary goods, as well as assorted other objects, to their country or culture of origin.

Now, however, museums in the UK have taken things a step further, and have taken to covering up or hiding away skeletons for fear of offending visitors in general, and a Pagan group called Honoring the Ancient Dead in specific. Have we taken political correctness too far? Should groups to which the deceased once belonged (tribes, clans, etc) be allowed to have a say, but not others? Some museums in the UK rescinded their decision after public outcry. Have we taken things *too* far, and have come back around again, offending a large group to make a small group happy? Or is this the new reality for museum professionals, that we, as new members of the community, must simply accept?

Do Deaccessioning Standards Apply to Everyone?

Fisk College in Tennessee is in need of some serious cash, and is looking to sell the Stieglitz collection that it houses on campus, donated by Georgia O'Keefe. http://www.tennessean.com/article/20101025/NEWS01/101025078/Fisk+rejects+new+proposal+over+art+collection

The AAM states that any money raised from deaccessioning artwork (which Fisk effectively wants to do, by selling it's portion of the collection to another institution) must go back towards the collection, and not to operating costs. Is this a similar situation, even though it's a college, and not a museum in the traditional sense? What about the fact that an anonymous donor has already stepped forward and offered money to cover the care of the collection at no cost to the college (the college's argument for selling it is that it is too much of a financial burden to maintain the collection), thus the college could divert the funds currently used for collection care to operating costs. Does that change whether the college should be allowed to sell the collection?

The Art of Perception

CIA and FBI agents have been sent to the Met in New York City to refresh their powers of observation: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8086280/CIA-and-FBI-sent-on-museum-course-to-refresh-sense-of-inquiry.html

There are a couple of interesting things about this article. First, it was found in a UK newspaper, rather than a US one (in fact, that was the first place I heard anything about it.) Second, for those of you in Museums Today this semester, we learned about the medical student beginnings of this program, and the use of Visual Thinking Strategies (VTS).

So now I've seen it used in medical school, reportedly teaching future doctors how to just LOOK at a patient, observe their symptoms, and really take everything in, and have seen the FBI and CIA use it to refresh powers of observation with respects to crime scenes. Do you think VTS really has an effect on these situations, or is it just due to the participants being in a different setting? Do you think that the effects could be diminished by seeing crime scenes or patients day after day? Are there other fields that VTS and specifically The Art of Perception could be applied to?