Bruce Seidel has the excuses ready.
Lucy traveled across 3.2 million years and thousands of miles to get to Seattle, but officials at the Pacific Science Center say few folks have turned out to see the world's most famous fossil.
Facing up to a half-million-dollar loss on the exhibit, the center laid off 8 percent of its staff and froze wages, President and CEO Bryce Seidl said Friday. Workers are taking unpaid days off, and the nonprofit organization suspended matching funds for individual retirement accounts.
. . .
Seidl blamed the economic downturn, which has cut into arts programs and museum budgets across the country. December's snowy weather also robbed the science center of a traditionally busy month of parties and family visits.
But I think Seidel should consider this possibility: Maybe people aren't coming because they know there isn't much to see. Lucy is an important fossil, but it is not interesting to look at. (You can see a picture here, if you are not familiar with the fossil.)
As it happens, I am an almost perfect customer for a Lucy exhibit. I have been fascinated by paleontology for years, and have the spare time to visit exhibits like this one. I even, some time ago, read Johanson's book on Lucy. I briefly thought about going to the exhibit when I first heard about it coming to Seattle, but then I thought about those pictures of the fossil I had seen, and realized that there just wasn't much to see.
I am sorry to hear about workers losing pay and benefits, and even being laid off. Seidel should stop making excuses and should admit that he made a mistake in booking this show. He should consider resigning, and he should definitely take a pay cut.
Cross posted at Jim Miller on Politics.
Posted by Jim Miller at January 24, 2009 03:14 PM | Email ThisPlus I think the Science Center is just not the sort of place people expect such things. Its not really thought of as a museum.
I went and saw her and was quite impressed. Both with seeing such an important connection to our history as a species, but also with the Ethiopian artifacts and history presented as well as the overall narrative of human evolution that is told.
They did a good job with the exhibit, but not with the pricing or the predictions of attendance. Its really too bad becasue like a great work of art or an important document its something that people really should see if they have the chance.
Posted by: Giffy on January 24, 2009 04:01 PMLucy drew about 200,000 visitors in Houston. Houton's metropolitan population is significantly larger than Seattle's (roughly 3.6 versus 5.6 million), so it was a mistake to expect 250,000 visitors here.
Posted by: Jim MIller on January 24, 2009 04:40 PM I don't know what type of national promotion it has gotten, but as the second stop of a tour, it may not have drawn in the national audiences the way the first stop might.
I have not heard people call her a hoax, though there is still some scientific debate about where she fits in our evolutionary tree. The bulk of scientists beleive her to be a direct ancestor(not necessarily her in particular but her species), while some have argued that she is more properly placed in a line that broke off from ours.
Piltdown Man was a hoax. I think you're confusing the two.
Posted by: Giffy on January 25, 2009 08:20 AMMy PhD is on anthro (archaeology) and I've studied a lot of this stuff, so I was stoked to actually see this. As I say in the post, it's not often that one gets to see the original of what is a very significant and famous (in certain circles) find.
Nevertheless, I did wonder how popular this might be when it was first announced. It's not anywhere near the level of recognition that Tutankhamun had and one wonders just how many in the general public had ever heard of Lucy in the first place. The non-paleontological parts of the exhibit are certainly interesting, but not what one would call terribly exciting.
Posted by: Frank Black on January 26, 2009 11:13 AM