A few months ago, as museums around the world ajar their doors waiting for the public to visit again, this phrase from Maira Kalman resonated even louder: “a museum visit is a search for beauty, truth and meaning in our lives. Go to the museum as often as you can.” The need to make a visit in response to the constant search for beauty, truth and meaning in our lives, as Kalman argues, would thus be one of the many reasons for this slow return, in some cases a little faster but by little, of the public to museums.
The need for museums to reopen continues to be a coveted goal, already promoted during the lockdown by many, including, for example, Andras Szanto on artnet.com. Immediate revitalization is being discussed, at least in part, in response to the need for comfort spaces. And reopening the revenue streams that the pandemic at least partly dried up could be one of many reasons.
There would perhaps be a greater need to rethink and reinvent much of what was thought, taking it for granted, to be the backbone of the traditional museum institution. Much of these methodologies have already been tested, and even published in books or presented inconferences. They could be branded as radical or utopian, but since the unthinkable became the new reality, change could become all the more rapid as it became a matter of “necessity sharpening the wits.” And this was precisely what my talk at this year’s edition of Ravello Lab was about.
The question to ask was the one suggested by Mami Kataoka, director of the Mori Art Museum in Tokyo and chair of CIMAM (International Committee of Museums and Collections of Modern Art), in the aftermath of Japan’s 2011 earthquake and tsunami: “what are the essential reasons why a museum, an art community or art itself should exist?”
Austin Camilleri, Prayer (detail) |
Change could take hold under these very tragic circumstances. Just as Forbes talks about how the coronavirus pandemic is accelerating the future of work, the same should happen for museums. We live in hope that Covid-19 has accelerated the shift toward a human-centered museum. Writing about the post-coronavirus museum, Dan Spock shared some valuable insights in this regard, stating that stereotypical museum ideas or ambitions had reached a tipping point even before the Covid-19 pandemic. His view is certainly influenced by what is happening in the U.S. museum landscape, but it is also true in part for Europe and elsewhere.
So what changes might the Covid-19 pandemic cause us to reflect on as we reopen doors that are still relatively closed, despite all the good use of technology? What should the ecology of museums, now more interconnected and in touch than ever before, consider in this situation?
The following three reflections were inspired by what we are experiencing day by day. I am sure there are more to consider, and others might add their own to these. I live in hope that museums around the world will not shy away from the constant questions that could pull them out of trouble and will seek, instead of a new normal, a rebirth.
Austin Camilleri, Prayer (detail) |
Sustainable Visits
In one of the past contributions, I took into account the inconstant and baffled reactions that museums have had while trying to remain relevant behind closed doors. And I think transmediality is more valid than ever in the case of the post-Covid-19 scenario. Indeed, transmediality can inspire a new kind of sustainable visitation in response to the restrictions and concerns (and I highlight some of them here) that museums will face.
We can take the Chinese experience as an example to better understand what the imminent future of museums will look like. Visiting Chinese museums in the post-Covid-19 era is characterized by extensive precautionary measures that include mask wearing, QR code systems by which visitors can pre-register online, and the presentation of a medical certificate. In addition, the number of visitors is kept under control by limiting it to 50 percent of the total capacity. Some of these measures for sure can be implemented in Europe and elsewhere, particularly physical spacing and restrictions on access. Others will be more difficult to introduce, not to mention their sustainability. It is fair to consider that each country will have its own rules and guidelines to follow. Beyond the Chinese experience, things will certainly look different when museums have to deal with services and spaces that were not designed and conceived with pandemic risks in mind.
Moreover, the museum experience itself, inside the museum, will come under even more minute scrutiny because of increased hygiene measures. I am referring to the problems with touchscreens and other touch experiences that are now unusable.
Austin Camilleri, Prayer (detail) |
Knowledge sharing and resource management
Museums around the world have more access to knowledge than ever before, thanks to webinars and chats. This is indeed a positive aspect that brings the global museum community much closer together. I can cite European museums as a good example of this generalized feeling, mentioning the remarks of NEMO Secretary General Julia Pagel reported in an interview. The need to feel and act as a community is becoming more and more important, Pagel noted, and it would be a great success if the sector could adopt a European approach, increasing collaborations and communication between institutions: “museum work, like any other form of work today, is in a global context...museums are not islands.”
This is certainly a positive development, and one that could benefit small and medium-sized museums, most of which are struggling to stay afloat: some of them may not even have the resources to manage a strong social media presence, or to consider measures that larger institutions can implement with little difficulty. Sharing resources could be the key to unlocking the necessary support that small museums need in this important time, and this could also happen regardless of time zones or territories, now more than ever.
There is a risk to consider regarding resource management. The NEMO survey reported one good measure, that of redeploying employees to work on the museums’ social presence, perhaps introducing additional services to be offered through the websites. This is commendable, but a more structured approach to redeployment should consider the skills and professionalism of a staff to work on technology and social as a necessary standard. Training could be the way, but as the NEMO survey also remarked, it could also be a matter of employing the right skills to provide quality content. It happened with some museums at the beginning of the lockdown. Hopefully this can be developed in a more structured and strategic way than the ways that current circumstances make possible.
Austin Camilleri, Prayer |
Funding models for spiritual experiences
I would not want to end this article without considering the dialectic (and perhaps paradox) that pits the idea of the museum as a place of comfort against the need to fund it adequately to enable it to continue to function. Much has been written about this point in recent weeks and months, and I would like to list here some of the contributions I have come across in recent days. Art museums are much more present in this debate. The ad of the Bozar Centre of Fine Arts in Brussels, Paul Dujardin, advocates an exit strategy inspired by the relevance and overwhelming importance of art: “today we need a world that saves art to ensure that tomorrow the roles will be reversed. Soon our artists will be in intense demand to shape the form, meaning and content of the post-coronavirus era.”
Interviewed by the British newspaper The Evening Standard, Victoria and Albert Museum director Tristram Hunt pushes for renewed goals through which museums could play a vital role during the recovery: “well-visited and well-managed museums could serve, as Henry Cole would have said, as energetic and meaningful institutions in this age of tension and isolation.”
Hunt’s comments may suggest that the new definition of “museum” under discussion at ICOM last year, and which made more sense as a statement of intent before the Covid-19 pandemic, may gain more acceptance in the months ahead than it did before.
What seems to me to be missing is the need to reconcile the new forms of museums, which are more present and relevant to their communities, with a funding model that has often measured success in terms of visitor numbers and with a business model based on exclusive services, such as room rentals, founded on prestige and status. Some observers, such as former International Monetary Fund director Carlo Cottarelli, have stressed the need for museums to obtain grants and subsidies at this crucial time. Cottarelli believes that businesses can generate revenue from the first day they return to work, as opposed to museums that will instead be run at a loss for months if not years, assuming they can survive.
Communities could be there to provide economic support. I came across a particular case involving a small museum. The Charleston House Museum in East Sussex (UK) has launched acrowdfunding campaign to offset a loss of about half a million pounds. And there is certainly much more waiting to be discovered.
The search for the right funding model, one that ensures social justice and enhances the democratization of the museum space may, still be in its infancy. But it is still time to make the need and ambition to be more connected to local communities felt more urgently.
Austin Camilleri, Kuruna |
The works in this article are by Maltese artist Austin Camilleri. Camilleri’s repertoire includes installations, paintings, drawings, videos and sculptures. He has also worked as a curator and exhibited his work in several European and international institutions.
Warning: the translation into English of the original Italian article was created using automatic tools. We undertake to review all articles, but we do not guarantee the total absence of inaccuracies in the translation due to the program. You can find the original by clicking on the ITA button. If you find any mistake,please contact us.