Mark Dion’s installation Curator’s Office (2012–13), commissioned for the exhibition More Real?: Art in the Age of Truthiness, adds another layer to his exploration of the ways in which collections of objects are formed and used. In his narrative about the piece, Dion claims that he discovered an office that was used in the 1950s by a curator of modern art employed at the Minneapolis Institute of Arts. This office supposedly was part of the museum’s original McKim, Mead, and White building, but was forgotten after being sealed off during a renovation project. Dion’s installation—with its vintage furniture, defunct office equipment, and forgotten artworks—is thus a droll version of the archaeological site that has been discovered intact. Within the context of a museum exhibition, however, Curator’s Office also becomes a “period room,” an installation of objects, furnishings, and architecture meant to illustrate a historical moment by re-creating its interior domestic spaces. Period rooms are popular museum attractions that are both authentic (in their contents) and false (in their detachment from their original contexts). As such, these displays pose complex museological questions: How does a curator decide which moment in time to re-create? How authentic can a retrospectively assembled room be? How does one maximize both accuracy and educational impact? Because Curator’s Office highlights the ways in which one person’s obsessions, sensibilities, and prejudices shape their research as well as a museum’s collections, it can be read as a meta narrative on the problems posed by period rooms. “Today’s museums demonstrate rather than seduce,” Dion has said. In Curator’s Office, he aims to do both.