530 
and talk about art send many persons to the 
Art Museum. 
But shall the museums, holding, as they do, 
authoritative positions respecting art and 
science, disregard the fact that the amateur 
is among us with lantern pictures that may 
be better than ours? Is it not time to con- 
sider whether by continuing as we are doing, 
we may be cheapening the labors of the dis- 
tinguished specialists who cheerfully do their 
part in our own lecture courses? 
There are reasons for believing that the 
general public is pretty well satisfied with 
what it gets, and also that it is incapable of 
distinguishing between the noted authority 
and the mere amateur who has the same kind 
of pictures. Shall we continue to be satisfied 
with this kindergarten way of lecturing? 
Shall we continue to supply sugar-coated 
science until even the more discriminating 
part of the public begins to think that the 
professional ornithologist is really no better 
than the enthusiastic amateur who can photo- 
graph birds just as well? 
While there are many of our number who 
can lecture most acceptably using lantern 
illustrations, there are certainly some of us 
who habitually depend upon the effect of the 
pictures used. Lecturing with lantern illus- 
trations has so nearly superseded the well- 
prepared, authoritative discourse, that the 
latter has become a rarity. 
I am convinced that what we have come to 
eall lecturing is not the real thing, that the 
effect of the present over-illustrated lecture 
upon the audience is not what it should be. 
The presentation is to the eye rather than 
to the mind, and the audience accepts it with 
a passive, rather than an active mind. The 
audience is already lost to the lecturer; he 
does not see its face, and there is no response 
to him. 
In the experience of most of us, many a 
slovenly lecture has been tolerated because of 
the excellence of its illustrations. We con- 
tinue to endure the indifferent talk of the 
lecturer, because we seem to be getting our 
money’s worth out of his pictures. 
In such a ease the lecturer, perhaps a man 
SCIENCE 
[N.S. Vou. XXXV. No. 901 
of real scientific attainment, has actually de- 
graded himself to the level of a showman. He 
may even be content with the applause be- 
stowed only upon his achievements as a pho- 
tographer. 
But the audience, too, has degraded itself, 
by its intellectually languid acceptance. It 
will eventually tire of even the best of slides, 
and be satisfied with nothing less exciting 
than motion pictures. 
The effect of the average lantern lecture 
can be readily judged by any one who cares to 
hear the remarks of the departing audience: 
“What splendid photographs,” “ How beauti- 
fully colored.” We have all repeatedly heard 
just these words. The talk is of the show, and 
the self-satisfied showman on the platform has 
merely cracked the whip and given the signals 
to the real performer—the stereopticon man. 
Let us contrast such a performance in the 
darkened hall, before an audience of sight- 
seers awaiting the next flash of the lantern, 
with that of a lecturer addressing the mind 
of his audience. Imagine Mr. Roosevelt or 
Beecher or Ingersoll receiving such applause 
as they have received if they had stood in the 
dark explaining pictures that might have told 
their own story. Have not some of our lec- 
turers practically arrived at the point where 
the automatic lantern, carrying labeled slides, 
could do the trick as well? 
But assuming that we must use pictures, 
what shall we say of the well-informed lec- 
turer who thoughtlessly turns his back to the 
audience, and addresses the changing pano- 
rama on the screen, so that his weak voice can 
be heard only by those who sit in the front 
rows ? 
What shall we say of the lecturer, who, de- 
pending upon his pictures, has not prepared 
himself to discuss with at least a show of ani- 
mation what each picture presents, and who 
ean do little more than industriously wield 
the pointer, and inform his benighted audi- 
ence that a tree is a tree, and a wild Indian 
an Indian? 
What shall we say of the well-known writer, 
who, having no gift for extemporaneous 
speaking, mars the good effect of excellent il- 
