Museum of Sex

Huyssens essay deals with our obsession with the past and preserving the past. This brought to mind the many strange museums in existence, most memorializing obscure objects that are really just a waste of someones (the taxpayers'? money). Yet maybe the Hobo Museum in Iowa and the Ventriloquist Museum in Kentucky are educational experiences, after all isn't all knowledge good knowledge? Nevertheless, Huyssen spends ample time discussing the controversies that arise over the preservation of Holocaust history which some believe to be a commodification and exploitation of a horrific event, thus perhaps lessening the strength of its terribleness. But what effects do museums have on the objects they collect? When memorializing less serious objects, they definitely celebrate and give undeserved significance to things that are at best questionable in their importance in society.

SEX

Is that not everyone's favorite topic? Now I don't think anybody really questions the history of sex. But if there is a museum dedicated to Spam why not a Museum of Sex? The museum opened in 2002 and continues to exist. I had the pleasure of visiting the museum (located in NYC coincidentally almost down the street from my home) in 2006. So if the museum isn't teaching the history of sex, what is its purpose and what does it aim to teach? According to the museum's website: "From fine art to historical ephemera to film, the Museum of Sex preserves an ever-growing collection of sexually related objects that would otherwise be destroyed and discarded due to their sexual content."

Despite the site's proclaims of critical adulation, when it first opened, most reviews professed the attitude of "so what?"

From looking at the website it is clear the museum remains the same as it was when I went there except for the temporary addition of a history of condoms. In reference to this exhibition the website read, "Simultaneously lauded for its ability to combat the transmission of deadly diseases while also condemned by some for its contraceptive qualities, the condom has become the fore runner in moral debates regarding contraception and protection." I'm fairly certain in the year 2010 this statement hardly rings true for most of America.

I'm not here to offer my review of the museum, but I will say it was extremely boring. I found its boringness extremely ironic for obvious reasons. It basically consisted of a room of pornographic videos and a display case of sex toys. This is neither controversial, groundbreaking, nor revolutionary.

The curators of the museum have attempted to add historical and political weight to the most popular act in the history of the world purely for economic gains. But with the internet, it is virtually impossible for the museum to offer anything new or innovative. Though sex sells, they forgot that (most) don't have to pay for sex. I think one of the reasons they failed (even though it still exists I can guarantee you that it is not as profitable as they would) is because they tried to sell something that is free. Additionally, sex is not going anywhere and to my knowledge it has been practiced the same way for centuries. Although the concept in it of itself is interesting, I struggle to think of something less deserving of a museum.

I'm curious if anyone else is able to find the cultural significance of this museum.

Website: http://www.museumofsex.com/