Museums document social relationships represented in the languages, music and song, agriculture, architecture, contests of skill, visual art, religions, dramaturgy, educational systems, scientific disciplines, and the many other practices that symbolize those relationships. Consequently, discussions of social inclusion and exclusion unfold in the light or shadows of those coexistences and contentions. Many contemporary public museums, with missions and programs centered on mainstreaming the civic and educational values of the ruling strata, now sit within population centers in which many alternate socio-cultural affinities coexist and contend. However, these migrations also tend to increase the socio-economic polarity in those urban areas and the concomitant socio-cultural divisions, which we might describe as either exclusive or inclusive. More people than ever before reside in urban areas and, as a consequence, many contemporary polities are now more culturally diverse than at any earlier time. Nor can any museum effect broad accessibility if it does not intend to confront, at least episodically, the social forces that underlie or overlay its existence.Īt the beginning of the twenty-first century, global socio-economic conditions continue to induce specific intro- and inter-urban migrations. That challenge proposes that it is problematic to examine inclusion or exclusion without foregrounding those actions against loci of social power and hierarchy. This essay analyzes several intersections of social forces with the museum and challenges museums to reconsider their social practice accordingly. While specific collecting and programming practices are essential to promoting inclusion, no museum is an island. The argument for this avoidance turns on the premise that museums serve various and sometime conflicting audiences, so that while their role is to collect, preserve and educate, as complex organizations representing specific internal and external interests, they should not engage in specific advocacy (c.f. In the course of those considerations, museums may be challenged to avoid practices or policies that could be construed as socially engaged or advocative (Amari Citation2006 Chew Citation2004 Shore Citation2005). In recent years, this discourse has turned on the specific practices of the museum organization what objects it chooses to collect, the presence or absence of specific interpretations and how those interpretation are framed, how it reaches out to underserved communities or potential users, and the ergometrics used to determine effective design or architecture.Īs an important part of this discourse, various museum–audience interactions are considered, especially how the museum serves diverse audiences through the stories that are included in museum programming (Delin Citation2002 Sandell Citation2002 Young Citation2002). How museums include and exclude individuals and social groups – as audiences, staff, trustees, or as other stakeholders – is an ongoing discussion.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |