After these discussions we were able to arrive at mutually satisfactory decisions on each, but the experience revealed substantial challenges in applying the system to actual exhibits. Still, we were able to assign these categories fairly comfortably based on the overall thrust of the review, even while identifying some minor sub-texts that reflected an alternative stance. Our analysis found that the criticism published in these three journals overwhelmingly followed the Yankee Trader model. The theorizing that Houdini and LEGO criticism entails would then be left to more academic outlets, such as those journals that focus on the concerns of a specific discipline or museum category. For example, the Journal of American History and Museum Anthropology regularly feature exhibit reviews and may be more apt to critique exhibits explicitly in terms of the theoretical concerns or key perspectives of their particular discipline.
Theory is of practical consequence to exhibit work today.
Certainly traditional Yankee Trader criticism still has value, and can still do much to help us learn from the experiences of others. But newer forms of criticism, that are explicit in their attention to theory, are also of great importance and should appear with equal frequency in the mainstream journals of the museum field. A Treasure at the Walters. Inside Public Art Museums. Kukla, Fran and Ollie.