Don’t get me wrong, the downfall of a two-timing governor is fascinating. Typically, I’d be all over that story, but Wednesday’s The New York Times (NYT) had more thrilling tales buried deep within…

What could possibly be more captivating than a bona fide sex scandal? If you peel yourself away from page 1 and dig deep into the paper, past sections B, C, and D, and continue all the way to section H, you’ll find the NYT’s annual special section on Museums. It’s 44 pages dedicated to the art, business, and people of museums.

I’ve spent the majority of my short career at the IMA, so I’m not sure what other museums do on the fateful Wednesday in March when the Museum section is published, but I am fairly certain that the scene is similar. For the first 30 minutes in the morning, there is a hush that settles over the administrative and curatorial offices. Everyone is silent as they comb through the articles – coffee in hand – searching for articles that mention the museum. By 9:30 am the silence is broken with the first flurry of emails. If your museum is mentioned, these emails have subject lines like: “Kudos”, “Congrats”, and “Have you seen this?” The organization then settles into a collective afterglow for the next few hours as the business of the day is tackled. The second round of emails begins after lunch as folks begin to read rather than skim the articles. These emails usually are a bit more critical with comments such as “that is an interesting quote they used,” “I wonder why they chose to feature fill-in-the-blank museum in this article?” and my favorite from this morning, “Who knew there was a cryptologic museum?”

I love the NYT’s Museum section because I love museums. On the morning it is delivered, I get so excited that I can’t do anything else but read it cover to cover, over and over again. Office door shut, eyes glued to the words, I anxiously flip the crisp, thin pages as I search for details or nuances I may have missed the first time around. It’s pure, unadulterated Museum-geek porn for me. Sure the picture of the IMA’s Design Curator, Craig Miller, in yesterday’s article titled “A Curator Who Even Considers the Office Chair” isn’t as sexy as a Playboy centerfold spread, but I think it’s pretty danged exciting. My knees went weak when I read the first line of the article, “Killer Statue – Psyched about the Site.” Dan Frost opens with “THE Indianapolis Museum of Art has its own video channel on YouTube.” YES!!!

For most people, I’m sure that the sex scandal on A1 yesterday was a bit more titillating than the article about museum research on H1. However, if for no other reason than to discover what earthquakes, slumber parties, and Eddie Izzard all have to do with museums, you should read the articles in the Museums section.

Are Museums more interesting than a political sex scandal? I guess it’s a matter of personal preference. I’ve told you what I think. Tell me what your thoughts are.