Museums should provide a platform for underrepresented histories

Museums must embrace this form of dialogue if they are to remain relevant. To do so requires radically different models of leadership than we’ve had until now.

Present art that exposed the underlying power structures of white establishment culture, corporate America and the federal government.

There are now two incompatible art worlds: one committed to inclusion, artistic freedom and change, the other driven by money and entitlements.

Selfless investment and fortitude are required. So is a willingness to endure discomfort. To move forward, the entire ecosystem must devote itself to a longer game.

If museums want to continue to have a place, they must stop seeing activists as antagonists. They must position themselves as learning communities, not impenetrable centers of self-validating authority.

Classical music, ballet, etc. is not part of the culture of minorities

For those of us who visit the Met regularly as members, the economic crisis has been only too clear. Many of the older staff have taken buyouts and others have been laid off. The lectures I enjoyed in the auditorium every week or two have almost completely vanished. Those that are offered often have a hefty charge. We even lost our three little free cookies in the Patrons Lounge.
As sad as these things are, I cannot fault the management as financial security is a necessity.
I can give you a fairly good description of the demographics of the visitors and the "black and brown bodies" do not attend except as part of a school group. One very rarely sees them in the museum as adults and I suspect this would be the case even with no admission charge. Museum going along with classical music, ballet, etc. is not part of their culture.
David, Flushing, March 1, 2018, NYT comment

High prices are a result of the monetizing of what should be a right

“I understand that people would think it should be free, as I do,” said the artist Ross Bleckner. “But in reality, a museum can only squeeze so much out of the Kochs and the Sacklers and then you’re on your own,” he added, referring to two major donors.
“It’s a symptom of a systemic problem: monetizing things that should be a right, like health care, education and, now, culture,” he continued. “Why wouldn’t people expect culture to catch up with the rest of it all, and the mall-ing of New York City? We will get used to it. Sad but true.”
Prepared for Bumps, the Met Starts Charging Non-New Yorkers
By Robin Pogrebin, March 1, 2018

Museums allow their wealthy, white founders to display wealth & status

Those with "black and brown bodies" don't attend museums because doing so "is not part of their culture." Seriously? Perhaps a lack of interest in museums on the part of people-of-color has been the very short-sighted, decades-long choice on the part of those very museums to exclude such potential visitors. American art museums were formed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries only partly to house collections and educate the public. They served just as much as a means for their well-to-do, white founders and donors to display their wealth and social status, a situation that has only recently begun to change. I am a member of the Detroit Institute of Arts, whose very existence, due to the city bankruptcy, was recently threatened. The DIA, even before that, made a conscious outreach to residents of its majority-black home, and has continued to do so since. Its publicized galleries of African-American art, among other attractions, have greatly increased the number of families of color I've seen in the museum in the last couple of years...While I agree that the proportion of visitors of color has, historically, been low compared to white museum-goers, I feel that imbalance has more to do with the priorities of the museums, stated or implied, than any lack of interest on the part of potential dark-skinned patrons.
Michael,  Michigan, March 1 2018, NYT comment