Trains or "Trans"
What If …?
De bait has been taken and debate has taken off.
The recently publicized report by Museum Management Consultants criticized VMT for being a transportation museum and recommended that it focus solely on railroads. That seems to have stirred as much reaction as anything in the report. Since then others have been weighing in on this issue, here and elsewhere.
“Trans” or trains? Potato or potahto? Is this a critical issue for the organization’s future?
I have some opinions. Some of you are already sharing yours. Before I add my two mashed-flat-on-the-tracks cents’ worth, though, I’d love to hear from more of you, as well as learn more details from those who are already “on record.”
So jump on in and splash around some.
Whaddya think? Should the place remain the Virginia Museum of Transportation or forsake its “official” Commonwealth status and do what it seems to do best? Why?
And if you think VMT should retain its current mission, how could it do the job better? Where should there be nips, tucks or complete overhauls? What should be changed, added, subtracted, or displayed differently? How much should the railroad theme be emphasized versus other modes of transportation?
On the other hand, if you are convinced that planes and cars should be barred and wagons and trucks should be shucked, what would you do with them? Would Roanoke accept such a change after 45 years of hybrid emphasis? Do you think a rails-only attraction would attract as many visitors? And how would you reorganize to create a successful railroad museum? What would you do with trains that is not already being done?
Then there is the geographical issue. Despite the General Assembly’s designation, if it refuses to provide funds, should VMT’s collection be tailored more to this part of Virginia and its unique transportation history? (To a degree, that is already the case with the preponderance of Norfolk & Western materials.) To what extent should the focus be on what Roanokers will support?
Much of this is purely theoretical at this point. Nevertheless, it’s fun to play armchair quarterback, I mean, engineer. Not only that, such a debate serves a valuable function. Whether VMT ever changes its mission, clarifying the answers to such questions can help sharpen the museum’s focus and increase its effectiveness.
At least more people are talking about VMT again. That in itself is progress.
Labels: general assembly, Museum Management Consultants, transportation
posted by VMT-blogger @ 12:15 AM
4 Comments
4 Comments:
I have probably hogged too much space already but you asked - I think the museum should have a very tight focus on railroading, in specific, N&W railroading. The building is quite large, so temporary exhibits could be displayed from time to time on other transportation topics. This would have the benefit of attracting repeat visitors to see the new exhibits and get re-acquainted with the permanent collection.
I like the diversity of transportation artifacts and exhibits. The railroad is obviously incredibly important and relevant to Roanoke's history specifically, but also to the state's and nation's history as well. It does deserve a lot of attention and exhibit space.
But I don't think it exists in a vacuum, either. Part of the reason that people stopped traveling by train is that it became so much easier to travel by automobile, and even by airplane. To tell the story of the railroad would necessarily draw in some of these elements. Moreover, it would also necessitate exploration of ships and boats which pre-dated the railroad and now have a strong working relationship with the rails.
All that said, this is certainly a great discussion to have. The museum is at a turning point in its relationship with both the City of Roanoke and with the Commonwealth of Virginia. Unfortunately, it seems that the museum has to choose one at the expense of the other. Hopefully, there is a way to chronicle Roanoke's rich transportation history, but to also frame it within the larger body of Virginia's transportation story.
My $.02: I came and visited the museum this past weekend. We came to The western part of the state to do some hiking and camping, but we came to Roanoke to see the train part of the museum. I see no problem in focusing on what you you do best! I'll also take this opportunity to applaud how the railroad exhibits are not roped off. There is something special about touching the artifacts that I have read about or seen on video for years.
Me thinks it amazing that most responders on this blog have no idea about the origins of this museum. It was a firetruck in Wasena Park followed by the N&W number 6 that now stands in the shed at the VMT. It was created in 1963 and has always been a transportation museum. Does one remember the Roanoke Transportation Museum at all? Yes, that was its name from the beginning! And there is competition in the Railroad Museum of Virginia in Portsmouth. So those leaders in the 80's who changed the name to the Virginia Museum of Transportation enabled something to be in Roanoke( read that not Richmond, NOVA or Norfolk) so we could have something of statewide significance here in this Valley. If we are going to talk, lets make sure we know what we are talking about!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home