ICOM-L Archives

International Council of Museums Discussion List

ICOM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Gary Edson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
International Council of Museums Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:43:37 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (79 lines)
Dear ICOM Colleagues:

The comments by Per and Patrick offer good thoughts on the definition of a
museum issue. Thank you! To keep my message short, I will not respond to all
the ideas, but I do want to speak to the question of why we need a ³new²
definition. Please understand, I am speaking for myself as an individual
member of ICOM, and am offering my own view of this inquiry.

Qualifications made: I think Patrick answers the question that he asks. He
asks why ICOM needs a new definition of museum, then states, ³It seems to me
that in relation to ICOM's own needs, a MUCH more urgent matter is the
continuing problem over the definition of not "museum", but of "the museum
profession" for the purposes of ICOM membership.²

In my reading of the Statutes, as they exist today, the definition of
³Professional museum personnel² for purposes of membership, which seems to
encompass the question of the ³museum profession,² makes reference to the
definition of a museum. (ICOM Statutes, Article 2 ­ Definitions, para. 1) In
turn, the definition of museum gives a shopping list of institutions,
organizations, ministries, departments, public agencies, museological
activities, et cetera that may be included within this definition.
Undoubtedly, the ³museum² list will continue to grow, thus expanding the
definition and further obscuring the lines that define the museum
profession. That obscurity allows for interpretation.

I agree completely with the need to define the ³museum profession,² but it
would seem, at least for me, difficult to define the profession without
defining the institution to which it relates, unless, we disconnect the two
and consider the museum profession as a separate activity unrelated to the
institution. One might be defined a professional health care provider
(medical doctor) without referencing the hospital, and a professional legal
representative (lawyer) without making reference to the courts. Perhaps that
is the direction ICOM should go considering the great diversity of museums
that currently exist.

ICOM as the International Council of Museums is however, by its name,
organized around the concept of the institution not the practice (although
the majority of members are individuals and not institutions). Therefore,
the definition of ³museum² addresses the central-most construct of the
organization. If it is decided the current definition is adequate and
appropriate, then it should be retained. However, as Patrick notes, the
current definition, with additions, has existed for 30 years while the
practice has changed. In reading the list of ³additions² that have been
attached to the definition over the past 10 years, it is easy to find
contradictions and qualifications that could be read to alter the ICOM
Statutes, Article 2 ­ Definitions, para. 1. (As examples: The definition
includes ³material evidence,² which is generally considered in terms of
objects (tangible evidence), whereas a recent addition includes
³intangible,² which may be translated as ³immaterial.² The definition
includes ³acquires, conserves,² and qualifies that by allowing the addition
of ³non profit exhibition galleries,² which might neither acquire nor
conserve.) Do not misunderstand, I do not oppose the intent of these
additions, nor do I question the value of these activities and institutions,
rather, I wonder whether we are attempting to ³have our cake and eat it
too?² That is, taking the theoretical high ground with paragraph 1 of
Article 2, then adjusting the definition to fit the practicalities of the
profession. 

Finally, if the General Assembly as the ³supreme policy making body of ICOM²
determines that the existing definition fits, then I, as an ICOM member,
will support that decision and promote it enthusiastically. However, it
would seem to me that this discussion is worth the effort, if it causes us
to consider the question. Rather than building a definition of a museum one
idea at a time, as we have done for 10 years, we should take a good look at
the whole statement and agree on an acceptable, usable, and quotable
(underscore quotable) definition that will stand, hopefully, for another 30
years. 

Thanks for reading this far.

Happy Holidays and Peace (by whatever words they may be defined)!

Gary Edson

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the
archives at:  http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2