This is in response to the article about the Children's Museum taking over the Buhl Planetarium Building. It is my understanding that the main opposition to this plan is not for the Children's Museum doing so, but for their specific plan to do so.
It is important for children to connect with the experiences of their parents, and not erase the opportunities to share experiences with parents, that parents had as children themselves. Most of those opposing the specific Children's Museum plan consider the Zeiss projector historically important enough to save with the theater right where it is and made an integral operating part of the renewed use of the building. This would provide a forum for quality family get-togethers as it had for decades prior. The Carnegie Science Center has no firm promise for a new theater to house the Zeiss and moving it would decrease its historical context.
Parents like to say to children, "What you see is what I experienced as a child." .This removes the disjointedness of a rapidly changing here-today-gone-tomorrow culture. An intact historical star theatre would go a long way to provide that important bond. Is not this partly what museums are for?
Francis Graham