Why you might ask? After an enjoyable weekend at the Unreason Beer and Cider Festival (a pleasing memory comes to mind when I made the acquaintance of Cotswold Blow Horn in 2014) my sense of direction is often temporarily disrupted. Indeed I was so tired and emotional this year that the question, 'What museum?' slipped from my fevered lips. Staff and volunteers insisted that it did exist, but that it wasn't located under a hedge round the back of the International Ciders marquee. At this point I shall digress to recommend Jeremiah Weed's cider from Kentucky - which I believe to be the reason I found myself examining the hedge from below in the first place. Readers will be comforted to know I regained my eyesight in a few hours and was able to walk again unaided within the week. But it inspired me to ask the question, can a museum be a hedge?
I know many of us begin to philosophise uncontrollably under the influence of alcohol. Indeed it is hard to disagree that wine is bottled poetry and Theakston's Old Peculier is the gateway to somewhere extraordinary. If the champagne glass reputedly represents the shape of Marie Antoinette's breasts and the Greeks drank wine from 'mastos' cups it is clear that even the ancients knew that new ideas and new thinking are suckled at the teat of mother booze.
This long preamble is by way of introduction to the larger question at issue today - what is a museum?
The basic dictionary definition is a place to start,
"a building in which objects of historical, scientific, artistic, or cultural interest are stored and exhibited."
The UK's Museums Association take it further,
'Museums enable people to explore collections for inspiration, learning and enjoyment. They are institutions that collect, safeguard and make accessible artefacts and specimens, which they hold in trust for society.'
International Council of Museums (ICOM) phrases it slightly differently, in particular,
I know many of us begin to philosophise uncontrollably under the influence of alcohol. Indeed it is hard to disagree that wine is bottled poetry and Theakston's Old Peculier is the gateway to somewhere extraordinary. If the champagne glass reputedly represents the shape of Marie Antoinette's breasts and the Greeks drank wine from 'mastos' cups it is clear that even the ancients knew that new ideas and new thinking are suckled at the teat of mother booze.
This long preamble is by way of introduction to the larger question at issue today - what is a museum?
The basic dictionary definition is a place to start,
"a building in which objects of historical, scientific, artistic, or cultural interest are stored and exhibited."
The UK's Museums Association take it further,
'Museums enable people to explore collections for inspiration, learning and enjoyment. They are institutions that collect, safeguard and make accessible artefacts and specimens, which they hold in trust for society.'
International Council of Museums (ICOM) phrases it slightly differently, in particular,
''..in the service of society.."
All are adequate, but limit us to buildings and objects. Quite rightly the ICOM and the Museums Association encourage us to do something fun and educational with the objects, but I begin to diverge from this thinking about the notion of holding collections 'for' society. We are part of society, we should be integral not separate. Collections should be held by society. Collections represent society. Collections are society, society is a collection of people and people are people (UKIP excepted). What you can safely say is that the concept of the museum wouldn't exist without people - but it can exist without collections or buildings - so the current definitions are wrong. The Royal Albert Memorial Museum in Exeter actually had a million visitors when it was shut for four years. In 2010 the Maison des Civilisation et de l’Unité Réunionnaise (MCUR) opened on Reunion Island. In the words of Francois Verges,
"The MCUR was not conceived around a collection, but rather around the desire and the will to offer a space of encounter, debate and interpretation."
So there are just two examples where either the 'collection' was irrelevant or the 'building' was. The common denominator is the 'people'.
Sorry I'm getting carried away, anyway its my round in the pub (a blood orange flavoured Hooch, a pint of bitter, a port and lemon and a sparkling mineral water for the miserable designated driver).
So we need to step back to the origin of the word museum. To 'muse' is to be absorbed in one's thoughts - you can, but do not have to, muse in a specific location or with a particular object. You can do it anywhere at any time (red traffic lights are my favourite; I found musing at green lights led to much higher car insurance premiums). A muse can also be defined as 'an inspiration' after the 9 Greek goddesses that symbolised the arts and sciences.
If we, who work in museums, accept that we have buildings and that we have collections, but not be tied by them, then our thinking is freed up immensely. Can we make it our mission to inspire society in thought? Extraordinary things might flow from that. The way we collect, the way we dispose, the way we present, the way we engage do not have to be tied to collections and buildings, they can become 'stuff' to help us not bind us.
A new dictionary definition of a museum?
"A concept to inspire a thoughtful society"
It makes you think; anyway a couple more Hooches and I'll set about asking whether we have free will and does that explain Keeping Up With The Kardashians?
All are adequate, but limit us to buildings and objects. Quite rightly the ICOM and the Museums Association encourage us to do something fun and educational with the objects, but I begin to diverge from this thinking about the notion of holding collections 'for' society. We are part of society, we should be integral not separate. Collections should be held by society. Collections represent society. Collections are society, society is a collection of people and people are people (UKIP excepted). What you can safely say is that the concept of the museum wouldn't exist without people - but it can exist without collections or buildings - so the current definitions are wrong. The Royal Albert Memorial Museum in Exeter actually had a million visitors when it was shut for four years. In 2010 the Maison des Civilisation et de l’Unité Réunionnaise (MCUR) opened on Reunion Island. In the words of Francois Verges,
"The MCUR was not conceived around a collection, but rather around the desire and the will to offer a space of encounter, debate and interpretation."
So there are just two examples where either the 'collection' was irrelevant or the 'building' was. The common denominator is the 'people'.
Sorry I'm getting carried away, anyway its my round in the pub (a blood orange flavoured Hooch, a pint of bitter, a port and lemon and a sparkling mineral water for the miserable designated driver).
So we need to step back to the origin of the word museum. To 'muse' is to be absorbed in one's thoughts - you can, but do not have to, muse in a specific location or with a particular object. You can do it anywhere at any time (red traffic lights are my favourite; I found musing at green lights led to much higher car insurance premiums). A muse can also be defined as 'an inspiration' after the 9 Greek goddesses that symbolised the arts and sciences.
If we, who work in museums, accept that we have buildings and that we have collections, but not be tied by them, then our thinking is freed up immensely. Can we make it our mission to inspire society in thought? Extraordinary things might flow from that. The way we collect, the way we dispose, the way we present, the way we engage do not have to be tied to collections and buildings, they can become 'stuff' to help us not bind us.
A new dictionary definition of a museum?
"A concept to inspire a thoughtful society"
It makes you think; anyway a couple more Hooches and I'll set about asking whether we have free will and does that explain Keeping Up With The Kardashians?
No comments:
Post a Comment