MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-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:
Caitlin McQuade <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:17:16 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
I’d like to understand the reasons that art museums choose the exhibition
techniques and programming that they do. Perhaps choices that look as if
they’re motivated by elitism have some other impulse behind them. And if
those who’d like to reform art museums understood the motivating forces,
maybe we could find techniques and programs that satisfied both “old” and
“new” standards.

Here’s a speculative example:  In a history or science museum, an object’s
significance depends a lot on information not inherent in the object——its
historical or scientific context. Exhibit techniques and programs therefore
work hard to provide visitors with the context. In an art museum, an
object’s significance lies much more (though not exclusively) in inherent
qualities of the original object. A priority of the interpretive work in an
art museum, then, is not to obscure the object. Hence the minimal labeling.
What kind of interpretive tools could help visitors enjoy an original
artwork’s inherent qualities without obscuring them?

Another example: We’re familiar with the “temple” model of museums. If those
making decisions about a museum’s environment want to attract more visitors
while still creating a place for meditation, how might they design their
spaces and programs?

Of course, there are people who disagree about the fundamental purposes of
art museums, so naturally the interpretive methods they choose would be
incompatible. Is criticism leveled at art museums in this thread as deeply
rooted as this, do you think?

In the end, it may be useful only up to a point to talk about “art museums,”
in general. As someone pointed out, the Metropolitan, the Louvre, the
national galleries in D.C. and London——these places don’t suffer from
attendance problems. And I have appreciated the label-less Barnes or
Pulitzer foundations’ displays just as well as the (tiny!) interactive
gallery at the De Cordova. People go to art museums for different reasons;
art museums exist for different reasons. Variety is good. Let’s figure out a
way to make more.

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2