From a foreign point of view this discussion seems fairly exotic, but does
deal with issues of relevance to museums in other parts of the world.

In Carlquist's opinion a museum that has in its charter that "all
exhibitions must be open to every citizen" cannot have an exhibition not
open to minors. My guess is that this charter originally was meant to
secure the access of all groups, independently of race or class. But should
such a charter be used to make it impossible for a museum to stage
controversial exhibitions? Or exhibitions expressing new thoughts? Would
not that be a violation to the open-minded spirit of the charter?

I have seen the "Sensation"-exhibition as it was in London and find it hard
to believe that minors would react to the exhibition. Surely, they would
not understand much of it, but it is not a horror cabinet (except perhaps
Damien Hirst's animals, one of the few objects in the exhibition that would
arouse the curiosity of children, I guess). Generally exhibitions of
contemporary art does not in any case have minors as their main public and
most of the kids coming are part of school visits.

To me, it makes a difference whether a religious symbol is being
reinterpreted by an insider or an outsider. As far as I understand, the
madonna in the elephant-dung is made by a catholic - an insider. It is
possible to interpret the sculpture in many ways (like: as a reminder of
the humble origin of Christianity, a critisism of the religious
establishment, or - as has been indicated earlier on the List - an African
way of caring for the madonna), but it is hard to see why it should be
interpreted as an obvious insult to Christianity.

We are all learning from making new thoughts for old concepts. A long time
ago, someone in USA said that "Black is beautiful". A new thought for a
concept formerly used in contempt. Possibly a madonna in elephant-dung may
nourish some new thoughts - about what it means to be an African Christian,
perhaps?

Lastly: the exhibition WAS controversial in Britain because of one picture.
As far as I remember, the giant portrait of a child-murderess aroused
reactions from the relatives of the victims and they tried to destroy it.
The response from the London authorities was to protect the picture and the
exhibition, not to demand that it was taken down. The portrait of the
child-murderess is seemingly innocent and straightforward from a distance,
but is composed of the imprints of hundreds of small childrens' hands.
Another sensationalistic piece of art? Possibly, though you have to know
the story behind the picture, because there is nothing in the picture
itself that indicates this content.

But are these examples reason enough to attack the freedom of expression?
Hardly.

All this noise about an exhibition no-one has seen! Perhaps there IS a
conspiracy between the exhibiter and the mayor: both are getting a lot of
publicity.


Per B. Rekdal
Museumsleder/Museum Director
Universitetets etnografiske museum
Frederiksgate 2, N-0164 Oslo, Norway

Tel. -47 - 22 85 99 64
Fax -47 - 22 85 99 60
E-mail: [log in to unmask]

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

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ museum-l.html. 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).