I wrote the following letter to the Boston Herald after a column by the Working Stiff. Thanks to the Herald for cleaning up the language slightly. The parts in bold(approximately half of the letter) were printed in the paper on Friday August 25, 2006:
Dear Editor,
Actually, there have been protests in front of the Museum by me on several occasions and on one occasion someone actually joined me(“Where are the protesters at Body Worlds?” Aug. 16).
I believe that many of those who are uncomfortable with the exhibit vote with their feet by not going. There is also the enormous propaganda machine that the creator of the exhibit and the museums have spun around the subject to try to avoid dealing with the issues. The failure to admit that there is an issue of human dignity here strikes me as "See no evil, hear no evil."
The use of real bodies here may be fascinating, but is hardly necessary to make an educational point. Thus they are being used to attract attention and to bring in the crowds. There are very effective ways to educate with out using real objects-and museums and textbooks and audio-visual media (movies, TV, Radio) do this well, as do successfully all the time, not to mention newspapers. The museum's claim to the contrary make me wonder its management is in the wrong business.
No one can give you permission to do something wrong, and it is absurd for the museum to hide behind the permission of the deceased. It is the same as when Johnny explains that he hit Billy because Joey told
him to. Is this the level of morality at the Museum of Science?
This exhibit deprives the deceased of their humanity. The propaganda in the exhibit that tries to convince one that it the latest and greatest technique is abhorrent, and it is baloney.
I feel so strongly about this that I have created a website to explain what is wrong with this exhibition. Unlike the Museum I have also posted the comments of people
that do not agree with my point of view. Perhaps the Museum of Science could learn something about what education is about, and cut out responding as if this is an inconvenient public relations problem.
Why are the leaders of the Museum avoiding the issue of human dignity? Perhaps, in their heart of hearts, they actually agree that the exhibit is wrong.
Aaron Ginsburg
Sharon, MA