FOH

I’ve been thinking about the importance of Front of House staff recently. They can make or break a museum visit, through being knowledgable, friendly and approachable.

For example, a trip to Blickling Hall last year was made infinitely more enjoyable by some very knowledgable FOH staff, who challenged my mother and I to guess what a strange porcelain bowl on legs, decorated on the inside with koi, was. After throwing around some ideas – toilet, for one – we decided it was a fish bowl. And we were right! Challenging us meant we had to think out of the box and discuss our ideas with each other. It made the trip much more fun, and meant I was really engaging with other objects, too.

The lack of FOH staff really disappointed me on a recent trip to Rome. In two museums, rooms were barriered off, presumably because there was not enough staff to cover them, so we missed out on some excellent paintings! I’m not sure whether this was because of funding issues, but that seems likely – and with workers at the National Gallery only just breaking their strike over privatisation (the root cause of which, of course, is funding issues) it had me worried about British museums, too!

http://www.museumsassociation.org/museums-journal/news/26052015-national-gallery-workers-enter-10-day-strike

FOH staff are so important to visitor experience, and so to visitor learning and engagement. It’s so important that we value FOH staff and treat them well, so they are as motivated and excited to be in the museum as visitors are.

Museums of brands

Following a recent trip to Amsterdam (I went for the culture! I swear!) I started thinking about big brands and faux museums. Some examples of these, off the top of my head:

-Cadbury World, Birmingham

-Warhammer World, Nottingham

-Ritter Sport Chocoworld, Berlin

-And of course, the Heineken Experience, in Amsterdam.

I began to think about why these big brands have created faux museums. I’m sure its important to them to have a place to store their history – but why bother to teach the public about your history/product? I think these brands are using the ‘authority’ of the museum – the perception of the museum as a place of ‘knowledge’, ‘culture’ and ‘truth’ in order to promote their own brand. Indeed, the ‘propaganda’ I experienced in the Heineken Experience was blatant (“the beer is golden because it is the best beer in the world!”). It seems obvious to me that museums of brands only exist to promote the brand – so why do people still go?

The visitors to the Heineken Museum were certainly very different to the visitors of the Rijksmuseum when I went the next day (I did do culture! See!). On the whole, they were a young adult crowd, one difficult to attract to museums, especially on a Friday night. Is it the draw of the name? The promise of free samples (as at the Heineken Experience)? Or the promise of something interesting (and indoors) to do (which can also be associated with museums)?

On the flip side, if these faux museums are so concerned with being museum-like, why don’t they use the ‘museum’ in their names?

It seems that places like the Heineken Experience are trying to capitalise on museums’  association with objectivity and leisure time, without getting bogged down by their boring name; attracting a different type of person to one who goes to museums, and is probably already a fan of their product!

Repatriation

I read this article this morning (http://museumsassociation.org/museums-journal/q-a/10082015-q-and-a-with-henry-mcghie) which reminded me of an assessment I wrote for my Masters back in 2013. Its a pretty simple analysis of current debates surrounding the repatriation of human and cultural remains. Here goes…

BBC News ‘Maori head in Guernsey museum to return to New Zealand’ 8^th October 2013

The return of a Maori tattooed head, ‘Toi moko’ from Guernsey Museum and Art Gallery to New Zealand raises two main issues; the repatriation of cultural material belonging to groups which had been colonised, and the display of human remains. Both of these issues are extremely complex and museums often find there is no easy solution to either.

British museums can contain human remains not only from ancient cultures but also from cultures in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; historically these were used in two ways – scientifically, to research the evolution and lifestyles of cultures; and as curiosities, to incite wonder and spark knowledge – examples include shrunken heads and the ‘Toi moko’ discussed in the article.

Over the last 25 years, there has been a change in attitude towards the display and retention of human remains in museums[1] out of respect for the remains’ surviving cultures. Simpson wrote in 1996 that “museums in New Zealand have removed tattooed heads from display.”[2] A survey of British museums from 1994, commissioned by the Museums Association, found that of 24 respondents, 19 museums still had human remains on display, but none of these remains were of indigenous peoples.[3] Indeed, the article quotes the director of Guernsey Museums as saying that the Toi moko had “been in our store for several decades now” and recognised that “it is considered offensive to even display a photograph of a Toi moko” – thereby acknowledging the importance of present-day Maori culture. The question of ownership is more clear-cut here than with older artefacts, and modern-day communities are deemed to have a “moral stake”[4] in their cultural objects in museum collections – hence why they have been largely removed from display. This feeds into repatriation: if artefacts aren’t deemed suitable for display, are they suitable for a museum?

The repatriation of cultural material and intellectual property from colonisers to colonised has only come about with the emergence of indigenous peoples as a political force – “the cultural and political climate has enabled individuals to take pride in their ethnic identity,”[5] in a way that was not tolerated by 19^th and early 20^th century political policies and societal attitudes.

The act of taking human and other cultural remains was a physical and symbolic act of ownership over the colonised cultures, which indigenous groups are now wishing to correct. This can be seen in the article when it mentions the setting up of the repatriation project run by New Zealand’s National Museum in 2003.

The fact that the Guernsey Museum contacted the National Museum and offered to repatriate the remains raises the issue of the sufficiency of other British museums’ policy surrounding the repatriation of remains.  It has been argued that the UN ‘Draft principles and Guidelines for the Protection of the Heritage of Indigenous Peoples’ guideline on this is too broad, and issues should be raised on a case by case basis,[6] but Simpson has said that “it is not acceptable for museums to disregard alternative cultural values” and allow legislation to prohibit them from deaccessioning material.[7] A balance between these two must be found, as repatriation is a complex issue with no simple answer[8] – and it is for this reason that Tapsell has argued for the collaboration of indigenous groups and museums.[9]

[1] “The audience for museum holdings has gradually grown and diversified since the 1970s, fostering increased awareness among indigenous peoples of the nature of museum collections” – Jaarsma 2002, p. 4

[2] Simpson 1996 p. 182

[3] The remains were archaeological – none displayed Indigenous American, Australian or Maori material of human origin. Simpson 2002 p. 205

[4] Brown 2009 p. 150

[5] Simpson 2002 p. 203

[6] The guideline states that “Human remains and associated funeral objects must be returned to their descendants and territories in a culturally appropriate manner, as determined by the indigenous peoples concerned.” Schanche 2002 p. 57

[7] Simpson 1996 p. 227

[8] This case is further complicated by the possibility that the Toi Moko was acquired by the museum illegally.

[9] Tapsell 2002 p. 284

Virtual Reality Interpretation

At E3 last week the new Microsoft Hololens was announced. It was used to augment Minecraft, and it looks incredible!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgakdcEzVwg

I’m excited for about ten years’ time when it might finally be affordable enough to get one!

I got to thinking about how virtual reality headsets like these could be used in a museum as an interpretation tool. I’ve already written about Minecraft in the museum, and those who know me will know that I bloody love Minecraft, so obviously VR could be used to make any Minecraft in the museum 100000x more exciting, interactive and engaging. But how else could it be used?

• I was excited by the idea of being able to rent a lens, as we rent or pick up audio equipment now, and then use it throughout the whole museum (on certain exhibits or throughout). I think this could be really exciting if you were able to interact with historical people or really get into the
• You could keep a VR headset in a fixed place, like a viewfinder. I thought this would work nicely in somewhere like the Pergamon Museum in Berlin, where a ‘VR viewfinder’ could be placed in front of the Ishtar Gate, for example, and visitors would be able to stand within a 6ft square area and look around with the VR headset on. The Ishtar Gate would look as it did when it was built and the surrounding area would look like Babylon. There would be people walking around and you would be able to hear and see a live reconstruction virtually.

I think this would be really good as people come to expect the digital in their everyday lives. For Generation Z (those born in 1994 and later) who have grown up with smartphones, tablets and pretty unlimited internet access, there will reach a point when a museums technology isn’t exciting enough to engage. We may even have reached that point already, as museum technology (excepting in the biggest museums) always lags behind tech innovations as a whole. So something like a Hololens, and staying at the forefront of digital technology in a museum is really important to keep people interested.

There are some setbacks. At the moment VR technology is in its earliest stages and it would be extremely expensive to use. But as technology improves it always becomes more efficient and cheaper. Also, for VR to work in a space, you need to map it with infra-red – for a museum-wide headset, this could be tricky and time and cost expensive.

I would never advocate for a purely digital interpretation strategy – it suits some people but not others, and I think the museum object should always be at the forefront. But I think virtual reality offers some really exciting opportunities in the future for engaging Generation Z and beyond.

The problem with “Good Curatorship”

Recently I’ve come across the “Campaign for Good Curatorship”, a campaign started in order to highlight the necessity for specialist-subject knowledge in museums. I first came across it at the “Curator of the Future” conference at the British Museum, and I wasn’t convinced then, and having heard the campaign’s founder speak again at a recent Collections Trust seminar, I felt the need to write my objections to the campaign. So, here goes…

1) Specialist subject knowledge isn’t the no. 1 priority – now, don’t get me wrong: without knowledge of a collection, a museum is pretty useless. But to me, it’s more important that a curator is able to assemble and spread knowledge than to have it personally. This includes being able to work with specialists, be they ‘amateurs’ or academics, and help them to grow knowledge of the collection through research. (Including applying for grant money, etc.) To me, it is more important that a curators’ time can be spent creating displays, and, to use that terrible cliche, “telling stories”, so that the public can benefit from the knowledge, and the experience of being in the museum. The public themselves, the individual, everyday visitor to the museum, doesn’t come into contact with the curator, and even if the curator were to speak to the public, the public would still only come away learning so much, that may be forgotten in a week or two; it is the experience of the museum that is the priority for the visitor, not what is ‘learnt’, and enabling an excellent experience should be the priority for a curator.

2) It isn’t practical – in most museums, the collections are too diverse, and curators are spread too thinly, for a curator to be a subject specialist on their collection. This is best illustrated in some regional museum services, where a team of, say, four curators may be “in charge” of a collection of 2 million objects across five sites. It simply isn’t practical to recruit a subject specialist to that museum service, because they are responsible for too wide a variety of objects, and the priority for the curators skills is different, as outlined above. Aside from anything else, with the way the economy is affecting the sector at the moment, curators, along with most museum staff, are at risk of having their roles chopped and changed at any moment – it makes more practical sense to employ an all-rounder, someone who is good at communication, has a customer focus, and knowledge of museum theory, rather than a subject specialist.

3) Diversity – the sector is, rightly, becoming more and more concerned with diversifying the workforce. New monetary incentives are encouraging museums to hire more types of people than your standard white, middle class woman, through offering alternative entry points into the sector, etc. But, if you start to demand a PhD or even a post-doc qualification for your curator, you are vastly cutting down on the people that can be appointed. Statistically, those with PhDs in a specialist subject are most likely to be white men. That’s just true. White male privilege will get them that far. So instead of diversifying the sector, you would end up turning it into what it has been throughout the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries – a club for stale, pale, males (who, even worse, probably think they got there on their own merit – *barf* – and not because society is stacked against everyone else).

4) Devaluing Museums Studies courses – I touched on the problems with recruiting in the museums sector in my last post. But I wanted to conclude that a good museums studies course, with a practical, work-based focus, to me, gives a better grounding in the museum sector than a PhD in fossils. Really contemplating *why* museums exist and being able to practice what I’d learnt as an intern gave me the kinds of knowledge that I think you need to be a good curator – communication, a visitor focus, and an understanding of why museums are important. You don’t get that by intently studying stalagmites for seven years.

So, I will not be signing the campaign’s petition. I will be sitting in my office, aware of my own ignorance on parts of the collection, trying to create a museum that provides an excellent visitor experience.

It’s been a long time… whoops!

I realised recently that it’s been a really, really long time since I wrote anything on this blog. Life caught up with me, I got busy and I let this slide. Whoops!

I’m going to try to start writing again every now and then, as long as I feel like I have anything of importance to say!

So here goes..

Recently I just finished “Unwrapping Ancient Egypt”, a study on why the Ancient Egyptians wrapped statues as well as bodies, and what it means that we unwrap them. It was a really interesting read, particularly the chapters on modern unwrapping of bodies and statues – that in revealing what was underneath we were (and are) focusing on a scientific understanding and letting other ways of knowing go, particularly of mummies, but that at the same time our museums, where the material is housed, rely on concealing and secrecy. The back-of-house areas of museums are secrets that only certain people (curators, etc) are allowed to share. And the drive toward accessibility over recent years has not diminished the secrecy, only made more people aware that there *is* a secret, an area that they are not allowed into – that people can have access to online, for example, through a digital catalogue, but cannot see, touch, smell, experience in person.

On Thursday I attended a seminar on Developing Skills for Collections Managers. Aside from feeling like I urgently need to begin my own CPD at work(!) I was left mulling over this idea of secrecy in museums in terms of the people we allow to work in them. As with all seminars, lectures and workshops on museums I have attended recently, this seminar at points descended into despair about recruiting in the sector – too many over qualified graduates wanting a job, but museums feeling pressed (rightly!) to offer alternative ways into the sector (in part in order to diversify the workforce). So who do we allow to know and perform the secret of the museum? What qualifications do they need? What experiences? I applied for a job recently for which the ‘essential’ qualification was GCSEs, and the ‘desirable’ was a Masters. Seriously. But that whole mess might have to be another blog post!

So, I’m going to try to blog again. It might not be very often, but I’ma try! I still work at the SADACC Trust, part time. I volunteer as a shop assistant in a charity shop and as a bartender at a theatre bar. I am about to begin an online programming course, so I can get to grips with Java and (maybe!) end up making my own video game. And I’m training for a 10k. <end life update>

Keep an eye out for more posts!

Shopseums

This is interesting, and needs more exploring…

I currently work at the SADACC Trust, so research on shopseums is v interesting and relevant at the moment!

http://museoscope.com/some-thoughts-on-shopseums/

Accessibility

I’m a bit late to the party, but earlier in summer Norfolk Museums Service released their new collections search website, with access to nearly 90,000 object records.

http://norfolkmuseumscollections.org/#!/home

It’s a great improvement on the old one, and an example of good digital access across a museums service. I feel strongly that as much collections knowledge should be available online as possible, to aid researchers and the public in their learning and perhaps even attract new visitors.

The museum I’m currently working in has a long way to go before this is possible – AdLib records for all objects would be a good start! – but once that has been achieved, I would love a searchable online database to be a long term goal!

P.S. I’ve been learning SQL as a way to better understand museum relational databases. I’m better at it than I thought I’d be!

Essay – What are the biggest challenges facing museums over the next ten years?

I wrote this essay as coursework for my MA – it outlines what I consider to be the biggest issues facing museums over the next ten years – which all boils down, essentially, to funding. (It got 68% by the way – it’s not perfect, but it is personal).

What are the biggest challenges facing museums in the next ten years?

The biggest challenges facing museums and heritage organisations over the next ten years are key in the fight to continue to survive and remain relevant at a time of extreme financial difficulty. The challenges can be broken down into social, political, technological, environmental and economic elements, which often overlap or are linked. The uncertain financial future of museums in the next ten years will be the biggest challenge as it affects the museum sector’s ability to overcome all other challenges.
This essay will outline what it identifies as the six biggest challenges facing museums and heritage organisations over the next ten years, and will focus on British museums to provide examples of the ways that organisations are already tackling these problems.

Definitions of ‘museum’ often primarily cite the housing and care of objects as one of their primary motives – however, the rationalisation of artefacts is one of the greatest issues facing museums in the recent future. Before the introduction of Acquisition Policies, museums were rarely discerning about the artefacts they accepted into their collections, with the result that there are often multiples in collections (for example, there are nine mangles in the Lynn Museum’s collection ), items of poor quality or condition, and artefacts that are not relevant to the current acquisitions policy and mission statement. Rationalisation is therefore of the upmost importance; museums do not have the space to store endless artefacts (at least, not properly), and those who work in museums do not have the time to do so (and as museums become more financially constrained, this will only get worse, as shall be discussed later). In order to guarantee the sustainable future of collections, to improve accessibility and make the museum more effective, inconsistent artefacts must be removed.
Of course, it is important that rationalisation is done ethically and legally, and in conjunction with the Museums Association’s guidelines – items must be thoroughly assessed to see if they fit the criteria for rationalisation, and then where they go must be assessed, based upon the desired outcome for the rationalisation. It is not a quick process and can take years, but is an extremely important process to assure public benefit in the future.

Intellectual and physical accessibility is a hugely important challenge for the future of museums and heritage institutions, in terms of collections being accessible to researchers and the general public. Good documentation is an extremely important factor in accessibility, and ties into both digitisation of records and the reorganisation of stores.
Digitisation is one aspect of this. If the current trend is anything to go by, then over the next ten years the internet will become an even greater part of everyday life, and it will be increasingly important that collections are available to view digitally over the internet. This could be used by researchers as part of an investigation into the resources available for a project or it could even be used by members of the general public as a deciding factor in whether they wish to visit a museum or not. Part of this digitisation will have to involve the scanning/photography (both 2D and 3D) of artefacts so that records are thorough, and those using the records can find out all the information they need from them; over time, the availability of digital images of artefacts will aid their conservation, as they will need to be handled less. At the Lynn Museum digitisation of artefacts from the stores has begun, as volunteers are scanning sketches and paintings so that their records are more complete.
The importance of well-organised stores in increasing physical accessibility cannot be over-emphasised. For example, Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service received a grant of money in early 2013 from the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation to aid in the reorganisation of the superstore at Gressenhall, which holds larger items in the NMAS reserve collection. This collections review project was named ‘Shine a Light’ and meant that, over the course of 2013, each of the artefacts in the superstore has been examined, condition checked (and adjustments made to its storage if necessary), and re-stored in an organised fashion, including thorough updates to MODES records. The Shine a Light project has meant that it is now possible for researchers to visit the Gressenhall superstore, and be able to find the artefact that they wished to see with ease (thus saving museum staff time). From March 2014, tours of the store will be available to the general public. The reorganisation of the stores has allowed for much easier access by both museum professionals and the public.

In conjunction with the digitisation of collections, another challenge faced by museums and heritage sites over the next ten years will be the sufficient, innovative and appropriate usage of digital media – both in terms of marketing via social media sites, and in terms of education/access via mobile apps and specialist websites, in order to become an open, flexible institution. This could involve the production of mobile guide apps for people to use with QR codes as they walk around an exhibition (“bring your own device” ); the capability for the museum to live stream seminars and conferences; or the maintenance of an active, popular blog.
The ACE has said that “the potential of art and culture within the digital space is being realised, with many organisations now using new technologies and digital infrastructure to reach audiences here and across the world” but this needs to go further if it is to keep up with changing technologies and the increase in smartphone use in the next 10 years. Digital media use can revolutionise people’s experiences of museums as it means that the curator becomes the facilitator of multiple interpretations of collections, rather than remaining the figure of authority in the museum, dictating knowledge. Displays which privilege experience, and are not based on abstract reasoning, have the capacity to reach people with less cultural capital – thus the use of digital media can create the ‘constructivist museum’, which Hein identifies as being entirely accessible to all visitors.
Digital media in museums and heritage organisations can operate during a visit, but also pre- and post- visit. For example, many visitors may now look at the museum website before visiting to plan the key displays they wish to see, and find out access and facilities. Apps have been developed like “Capture the Museum” at National Museums Scotland, which the museum encourages visitors to use during their visit. It is a live team game played through the museum, described as “Trivial Pursuit on a massive scale” which uses a mobile app to find clues in order to answer puzzles and riddles, first launched in May 2013. Similarly, the Tower of London released a puzzle-based app, “Escape from the Tower”, in 2010. The “Nature Plus” app for the Natural History Museum encourages visitors to use the app, through which they can scan their favourite displays during their visit, and upload their ‘collection’ to the Nature Plus website when they have returned home. Thus, digital media use can aid learning and encourage (re)visits. Practically, this does necessitate that in the future, all museums are equipped with Wi-Fi so that visitors can have full access to the internet, however, creating an app for smartphones has the advantage that the museum then does not have to invest in, or maintain, expensive equipment.
Different types of institutions suit different types of media – on the whole, however, new technology, like the use of mobile apps, is unobtrusive and, used well, “can have both physical expressions and material effects” – can capture, complement and match both curators’ and visitors’ expectations of a museum experience. As technology improves, the importance of digital media in museums and heritage institutions is only going to increase, allowing for new types of accessibility and multimedia installations.

Environmental sustainability and the idea of engaging the public about environmental issues are concepts that have grown in importance in recent years, and will likely continue to become subjects at the forefront of museum and heritage thinking over the next ten years, as the urgency of the issue increases. Sustainability is not a one dimensional concept, and all members of the museum team must be involved in it; responsibility for a sustainability strategy “comes at both the individual and group level.”
Many museums and heritage organisations have the capacity to interest visitors in nature, science and sustainability through their collections, and the capability to act as examples of sustainable living. Even art museums have the ability to do this – during the summer of 2013 the Foundation for Art and Creative Technology in Liverpool contained an art installation intended to bring visitors face-to-face with the realities of fracking. The preservation of heritage and the conservation of nature are beginning to be seen as less distinct topics.
The Museum of East Anglian Life is one example of a museum which is paying attention to issues of environmental sustainability. It is part of the Transition Network, an “initiative aimed at steering communities towards a low-energy, resilient way of living” and the Happy Museum Project, which has a strong social aspect, (“a triple bottom line, of financial, social, and environmental return” ) involving issues of sustainability linked to wellbeing. Day-to-day examples of this are that visitors receive £1 off admission if they have cycled or used public transport to get to the museum, and that volunteers are heavily involved with the cultivation of the grounds and wildlife conservation, through which they can gain qualifications.
In 2009, the Science Museum ran an exhibition called Prove It, in the context of the Copenhagen conference on climate emissions. Visitors could go to the exhibition itself or the accompanying website and explore the evidence surrounding climate change and the key issues from the Copenhagen conference. This exhibition was designed to open up dialogue about climate change, and although an internet poll conducted during the exhibition found that around 7 times as many visitors wished to be “counted out” of the statement “I’ve seen the evidence. And I want the government to prove they’re serious about climate change by negotiating a strong, effective, fair deal at Copenhagen”, a Science Museum spokesperson said: “Three thousand responses in just three days shows how important this subject is in the run up to the Copenhagen summit. Prove It! has mobilised both sides of the debate and this was one of the aims of the project.” The Science Museum provoked debate about climate change, which they felt was important in at least raising awareness of the issue. In the future, many more museums will likely hold exhibitions based around the idea of climate change/the environment as it becomes a more important issue, and the public may become more receptive to the idea of museum exhibits having such a political standpoint.

Another challenge museums and heritage organisations face is one of analysing who their audiences are and encouraging different audiences to enter the museum, both in terms of geography and societal groups (such as visitors with disabilities and visitors from lower socio-economic backgrounds). The purpose of this would be to reach more people in terms of informal education, and to open up new areas of revenue.
It is currently possible for museums to research who audiences are by using data from visitor surveys, and data from interactions with the museum on social media, e.g., the kind of people who follow the museum on Twitter.
The ACE has written that museums have “an ambition to increase and demonstrate their social impact.” It is possible for them to construct a culturally diverse society, through community representation. This has been a focus of new museology for the last 25 years, as the museum has become a more democratic institution (and will no doubt continue to do so over the next 10 years thanks to the democratic power of digital media and increased accessibility). Although museum theorists have not always agreed on the outcomes of the museum acting as a social agent (Clifford/ Bennett, as outlined by Witcomb ), it is clear that museums must be attentive to the needs of their audiences – communication and contact with communities is key; in fact, the post of Museum Activist was created at the Museum of East Anglian Life for exactly this purpose.
For the Social Justice Alliance for Museums, led by National Museums Liverpool, encouraging new audiences into the museum is already a concern. The SJAM is fighting against “exclusivity and elitism” in museums, instead advocating “modernizing and opening up our institutions to a diverse public.” Although financial difficulties for museums will make the idea of returning to institutionalism and social indifference appealing, 30 museums and organisations worldwide have already signed up to the SJAM charter. It is doing this by encouraging programs like Meet your Muslim Neighbour – Discover Islam at the Museum of Liverpool, where Muslim volunteers introduced non-Muslim visitors to Islamic traditions, culture and belief systems.
There has already been much literature written about museums and their communities, and the benefits of museums using their social agency to contribute to the fight for social equality. Social inclusion strategies for the next ten years could include the development of an app that could act as a useful guide or interpretation device for people with visual impairments; the modification of collections policies to allow for the collecting of artefacts of interest to local minority groups; or the adoption of policies to encourage the diversification of museum staff.

All of these challenges are financially dependent; with sufficient funds they can be overcome, but in the current financial climate, with museums seen as an expendable luxury, museums are under increasing financial pressure. Over the next ten years, this seems unlikely to completely dissipate – economic growth is slow, as would be any change in people’s attitudes to museums.
The Arts Council England wrote in its 10-year strategic plan that “Arts Council investment has provided stability during a time of change and has given arts organisations the space to plan ahead, to continue to be ambitious and to experiment.” In order for museums and heritage organisations to continue to survive and remain relevant in the future they will need the stability that comes from receiving sufficient funding.
The Arts have been receiving budget cuts for some time – the budget for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport was cut by 7% in a recent government spending review; the ACE itself and national museums faced a 5% cut. A recent report found that there were disparities in public funds to regional museums in England compared with those in London, with regional museums facing the brunt of the cuts and so struggling the most. Lack of funding has already meant that many museums are cutting the positions of paid staff and replacing them with volunteers and interns, resulting in years of knowledge of museum collections being lost. School visits are down by 31%. If cuts to the arts sector like this are to continue, it will become harder for museums to fulfil their basic functions, like the proper care of collections and the exhibiting of temporary displays.
Museums must have clear long-term financial plans – the delay or oversight in producing these “is one of the major reasons that strategic planning efforts among non-profit cultural and educational institutions so often fail.” This long-term financial strategic plan must take into account all plans museums have in place to face the challenges approaching them. Well-developed financial plans may discourage cuts from local authorities or the ACE, and may even encourage donations by philanthropists. It cannot be overstated how damaging the cuts are to museums; as much as the idea of the “triple bottom line” is preferable, ultimately museums need money to survive – to allow for the staff (time) and resources to fulfil all the functions that are expected of them. Museums must strike the balance between what they would like to do, and what they have to do in order to obtain funding.

The Arts sector, especially museums and heritage organisations, bring in income to their local areas. It is unreasonable to expect philanthropy to replace government spending, and without it, museums will be unable to overcome the challenges that face them over the next ten years – accessibility (in terms of digitisation and improving stores), rationalisation, the use of new and exciting digital media, becoming environmentally sustainable and bringing in new audiences. Economic hardship is going to make it extremely difficult for some museums to survive in the next 10 years.
Museums must be businesses, custodians, educators, and social activists, and so each of the challenges mentioned here cannot be separated from the others; overcoming one challenge will often mean being half way to overcoming another, and the key will be a ten year strategic plan that recognises this and can be adjusted accordingly.

Curating the Curator 2 – Image

Tincture of Museum

I have been reading a lot about curators recently, and coming hot on the heels of Ask A Curator day on Twitter, it feels the right time for another post on that most intriguing of museum artefacts – the curator. My first post in this series was all about Curator Engagement and was inspired by Extreme Curator, that particular episode spawned a whole Lego curator alter ego which you can read about here. No Lego this time I promise, instead I am linking curators with something equally as surprising and a little bit different – gardening – bizarre I know, but I hope by the end it will all make sense.

View original post 1,726 more words