{"title":"《美好的事》","authors":"Neil Handley","doi":"10.14434/HINDSIGHT.V50I3.27565","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses the origins of the British Optical Association Museum and how it increased in prominence. Its value for matters such as historical research, pride of possession of members, publicity, recognition of the status of the profession, and demonstration of the long and distinguished history of the profession are examined. The arguments in support of the museum in the first half of the twentieth century by John Hamer Sutcliffe, and later his protégé George Giles, are highlighted.","PeriodicalId":377268,"journal":{"name":"Hindsight: Journal of Optometry History","volume":"115 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"A Splendid Thing\\\"\",\"authors\":\"Neil Handley\",\"doi\":\"10.14434/HINDSIGHT.V50I3.27565\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper discusses the origins of the British Optical Association Museum and how it increased in prominence. Its value for matters such as historical research, pride of possession of members, publicity, recognition of the status of the profession, and demonstration of the long and distinguished history of the profession are examined. The arguments in support of the museum in the first half of the twentieth century by John Hamer Sutcliffe, and later his protégé George Giles, are highlighted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":377268,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hindsight: Journal of Optometry History\",\"volume\":\"115 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hindsight: Journal of Optometry History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14434/HINDSIGHT.V50I3.27565\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hindsight: Journal of Optometry History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14434/HINDSIGHT.V50I3.27565","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper discusses the origins of the British Optical Association Museum and how it increased in prominence. Its value for matters such as historical research, pride of possession of members, publicity, recognition of the status of the profession, and demonstration of the long and distinguished history of the profession are examined. The arguments in support of the museum in the first half of the twentieth century by John Hamer Sutcliffe, and later his protégé George Giles, are highlighted.