balance the met's scholarly interkt its fund-raising needs, and its obligations to a vast and rapidly chag audience. they were also empressed by his quiet self-confidence. does that ring true to you? >> i was a scholar, and probably other people have to say the rest. i mean, i went to-- i came to the met in '95 because my predecessor, philippe, had built it up into this engine of scholarship. it had the funding. it had the spaces. critically it had the sophisticated audiences that really wanted these great exhibitions. for me as a scholar in my field, european tapestry, i saw it as this great place to go and realize that, to share my passion with other people. and when i became director, that was very much kind of-- i've done that. i was happy to go on doing it, but now what i want to do is allow my colleagues to go on doing it and take it out further. >> rose: did you decide, did you say, look, philippe was who he is and had those dual roles there and, therefore, what i have to do is define my own identity as a leader of the met? >> i think it's-- it's evolved. i'd been there as a curator