Return to `Full Text of Recent Publications'
I hope that this paper will not be seen as public recitation of private anxieties; it is an attempt to describe the ways in which the whole concept of a museum is changing: it is a request for advice from those of you who have encountered the same problems: it is equally an offer to discuss those problems with colleagues who have yet to face them.
For reasons which I cannot explain here, Britain is changing from a society based on manufacturing, to one in which the service industries are of vital importance. Culture, history and art are the commodities which we are seeking to sell to tourists. While a fair proportion of visitors to British museums and galleries display deep knowledge and connoiseurship, many others have no idea of a time scale longer than about 50 years. Many of these visitors feel a need to "act out" history, to participate in dramatic presentations, to handle and attempt to use historic artefacts and, in consequence, there is a conflict growing between "theme park" techniques of display and the more conventional styles of "museum and gallery" exhibitions. Many visitors seem to be frankly confused by having to relate objects to the information which is provided on labels and graphics perhaps as part of the all-pervading influence of TV they want demonstrations, talks and films.
Many modern museums are finding an increasing need to control the flow of visitors, and this combines with the demand for dramatic presentation to produce a completely new philosophy of museum display. In Yorvik for example, Viking material from medieval York is shown to visitors who are moved through the exhibition in a travelling car, while a well-known television personality - admittedly from the culturally up-market end of television - is heard reading a commentary. There is no provision made for visitors who may wish to linger over a specific object, either because of a specialised personal interest, or because it appeals to the imagination. Increasingly we are being asked to involve the public in museum displays, while at the same time removing any need for the use of imagination or powers of reasoning.
Any museum exists primarily as a dictionary of objects, and the duty of the curator is to protect and preserve them as well as to present and display them. If we are wise we concentrate on the objects which are the whole strength of a museum: there is a danger that wonderful audio-visual aids and copious explanatory notes will distract the visitor away from the objects. A visitor can buy a guide book and take home the text and the illustrations, the objects themselves cannot be taken home for study, and the display in the museum should concentrate the attention on them in whatever way seems most appropriate.
To return to the image of a museum as a dictionary, we may consider that the public displays form a pocket dictionary- a manageable and concise work of reference which is readily accessible to all users. Once one adds in the reserve collections and study material, we get closer to the l3-volume dictionary with historic examples, obsolete types and copious references. Some museums have sufficient space to be able to arrange study collections and open-access storage for visitors with a specialised interest. Others are not so fortunate and must keep material which cannot be displayed in safe storage.
Why can we not display the complete collection? Some particularly vulnerable items can easily be damaged by display conditions, and the responsibility for preserving them requires that they should be protected from hostile environments. Where display space is limited it may not be physically possible to show more than a small proportion of the holding. Finally, there is a danger of bringing on mental indigestion in members of the public, so that they cannot see the quality of the objects for the sheer quantity of material that is presented to them.
Material which is out of public sight is not necessarily also out of curatorial mind. Stored material can be used to change and enrich the permanent displays; vulnerable items may be displayed for short periods under strictly controlled conditions. The very depth of the collection may be of value to the specialist visitor: what looks to the untrained eye like a boring selection of duplicates may reveal significant patterns of variations when examined by an expert. The reserve collections can also form a repertoire of material for loan to other institutions which may need the services of a specialised musical instrument collection, to fill out the coverage of a particular culture or period of history.
Professional curators will recognise all of this as a statement of the obvious; however, it may not be so obvious to members of the public who hold the museum's purse strings. There are two basic misunderstandings about reserve collections, and the fact that they are basically incompatible does not mean that the same person cannot hold them both simultaneously. The first misunderstanding sees the store as being full of Rubens, Stradivaris or Chippendale, any one of which would realise enough to fund the whole museum for a year if sent for sale, and which the curators are too mean-minded to show to the public. [It is worth noting at this point that the word 'curator' is derived from the Latin verb curare "to care for", and not from the French noun derived from a carib source curare "a deadly poison"!] The second misunderstanding is that the reserve collection contains a load of rubbish which has no conceivable interest, and does not justify the considerable amounts of money which must be expended in storing it in safety. The Independent of 30 March 1988 quotes the National Audit Office report on the Victoria and Albert Museum, the British Museum and the Tate Gallery as saying: "Review and possible disposal of objects lie at the heart of such issues".
My own collection has benefited from some 300 instruments which were transferred from the Victoria and Albert Museum, as well as transfers from other public collections, so perhaps I should not complain.
It is perhaps the image of the reserve collection which is at fault. Published catalogues must include material which is not on display, and should give details of the procedure by which stored items may be examined. The Museum of Mankind in London has a photographic catalogue of non-displayed material which may be consulted by members of the public. Perhaps we should organise an inter-museum loan service, circulating lists of material available for loan, and quoting the display conditions which must be provided. Above all, the management of the store must have a business-like and professional air. We must be seen to care about these items by providing good storage conditions and adequate supervision when material is made available to visitors.
Finally, we must beware of using museum objects as a toybox. Many educationalists seem to think that it is easy to make music with an unsophisticated instrument, or to participate without preparation in any musical tradition which relies heavily on improvisation. I feel that I have failed to communicate the fact that a great deal of skill and musicianship is required to play any instrument, but in particular those without mechanical aids, and that a performer working within an improvisatory tradition will have spent many years learning the rules which control the improvisation. "Playing" on unfamiliar instruments can only lead to frustration and disillusionment; it is far better to arrange for experts to participate in workshops and give basic tuition
in instrumental techniques while demonstrating the full musical capabilities of the instruments.
Read at the CIMCIM Meeting, Berlin, 11-17 April 1988.
Address for further information
© CIMCIM 1989.
This page updated: 31.12.98