^Aren't you forgetting that the miniature has already been on display in the museum for over 38 years? When it was donated to the Smithsonian in the first place, they chose to put it in the NASM rather than some other museum. They displayed it prominently in various NASM galleries from 1974 to 1993, and aside from loaning it to the Hayden Planetarium for a year, they've never displayed it in any other Smithsonian museum except the NASM. I just don't understand the argument that it doesn't belong in that museum when that's the museum where it's been for most of its lifespan. If they haven't objected to its inclusion in their own collection for nearly four decades, who are you to say it doesn't belong there?
No, I'm not forgetting that at all; I already took that into account.
While the artifact inspires the public to become involved in air and space, and by extension come to the museum,
the mission allows it. Should it overall cease to serve that role in the eyes of the general public, the stated
I'm willing to accept the possibility
—if not the probability—that, in earlier decades, the model was more inspirational to the general public than it is today. If make-believe artifacts are to go in the museum for other reasons, like telling historical narratives, then amend the mission statement.
It's really clear cut.
As for who am I to say it doesn't belong there? Well, first of all, I never said it doesn't belong there, did I? And second of all, who would I have to be anyway to have an opinion about where it should
go? Everyone has a right
to believe it doesn't belong where it is. It's appalling that that should be called into question.
Myself, I think there are fair arguments on both
sides of the issue, of whether it should
stay or go, as I've already elaborated. However, I've essentially said that, if
the mission statement is to remain unchanged, then, yeah, the model doesn't belong where it is, because it's simply incongruous.