“A building devoted to learning and the arts, regarded as a home of Muses” (Hoad, 327), that is called Museum, which has wontedly many constructive powers in life. “In its Greek form, Mouseion, it meant 'seat of the Muses' and designated a philosophical institution or a place of contemplation” (Lewis, p.1). Museums are as ancient as the civilization itself and its roots can be seen early in the 3rd Century BC at Alexandria (Lewis p.2). The idea of establishing a museum derived out of the curiosity of people in the 17th century in Europe. Museums have evolved according to the changes in the way of life of human race. Time is not a concrete thing, yet it leads to many ideas expanding the variety of museums. Today, there are many types of museums such as archaeology museums, art museums, history museums, nature museums, war museums, science museums and so on.
Although it is a fact that museums have an important place in every aspect of life related to culture, there are some debates on the role of a museum in the modern times. However, this paper is aimed to show the role of museums in cultural life and compare it to the changing roles of such medias in the modern times by giving some critical theories and aspects on it.
Theodore Low claims that museums are sort of propaganda instruments since they “have the powers which are of the utmost importance in any war of ideologies” (30), such as the power of making people see the truth, recognize the individual as a member of society and the power to keep minds open. As for that, museums cannot be clearly defined since they have acquired so many different connotations in these days (31). To him, the only description that can be put forward is “a dynamic force in the cultural life of the community” (32).
Low goes into deep and claims that: in order to define the role of museums, one needs to ask the question “What can museums become?” (35). The welding the museum into a specific unit creates two different aspects: First argument says there is the single goal toward which all of the museum's activities are striving, and the second says there is the discovery of the role that each activity must play in relation to one another (35). However, Low sees the both as dependent on the functions of “acquisition and preservation” (37), and therefore, rejects them with the idea of indefinableness of the role of museums.
On the other hand, there are some arguable theories signifying the challenge for museums to remain relevant in society and cultural life. Gail Anderson claims that the challenge “is an ongoing process of assessment that has occupied many museum leaders for years” (9). The challenge includes many other counterparts for museums, such as television, cinema, theatre and the other medias that are the mass productions of a global marketplace. In such a case, the question comes into being that “what role should the museum assume” (Anderson, 9) or what services can the museum's capabilities & available resources offer that will satisfy the needs in the competitive marketplace? (Anderson, 9). Over the past one hundred years, the evolution of the role of museums is apparently related to the challenge mentioned by Gail Anderson. To many critics, it is what the roles will be, rather than how museums carry out their roles.
As far as Michael M. Ames is concerned, this is a “age of deconstruction” and “the problem relating to ethnicity appear to be occupying an increasing part of public discourses” (80), which must be taken into consideration when a task for a museum is assigned. As it is known that culture is subject to museums, then it is highly necessary to examine the social context from a anthropological point of view considering the facts of public and global culture (Ames, 82).
One of the new models for museums is introduced with an idea that is out of the hands of global economy. “I have followed with fascination the emergence of a new and potential dominant model for museums” (75) said by Stephen E. Well, and he describes the model as “It is a model that seems strikingly different from most of the earlier ones that museums have followed: applicable across the entire spectrum of nonprofit organizations, it is called the Social Enterprise Model, named by J. Gregory Does” (77). Similarly, this kind of museum stands for the benefit of public, which is as intellectual as the nonprofit organizations needed and not much. Social Enterprise Model differs from the others by restricting itself to stay only for the benefits of public. For instance, one of the other models is “The Treasure House Model” (Well, 78), which has the goals of being “better and more” (Well, 78). The difference between these kinds is sharpened where the goals are come to light.
Gaby Porter puts an idea forward: “Feminist critics have focused on other media such as history, television, cinema and magazines and have overlooked or avoided museums” (104). On the face of this, she interferes to theorize museums from a feminist point of view which is seen as a deficiency by her. She says: “The theories I used for this feminist critique of museums are not themselves new: they are, broadly, structuralist and poststructuralist and developed most fully in literary criticism and cultural studies” (105-106). To combine the tools used by the literary critics with the concepts of a museum, she applies the relation of text, author and reader to the relation of exhibition, curator and visitor. The “real things” (106) museums deal with are “intrinsic, essential and universal truths which are material facts” (107) and therefore, the role of museums must be established according to the mission of all instruments having the power of creating discourses since such meanings are the essential obstacles in front of women (107).
To conclude, there are many theories on the role of museums in the modern times and all the functions they apply differ according to the purpose behind it. It seems that the differentiation of many things in the modern times starting in the late 18th Century has a provision in the role of museums in cultural life. It is an undeniable fact that museums have the power to conduct the masses and this power cannot be left neither in the hands of a distinguished social class nor the the politics of the governments. A museum's role is to be relevant to the core culture itself, rather than the culture created by ideologies and used to metamorphose the masses. As it is in its etymological description, museums stand for the art and the meanings created out of the logic that caused the two world wars and are the reason of today's world. Hence, the role of a museum must surely be related to art in any case. However, the ways that will lead museums stand as a distinguished form of cultural sanctuary are to be found to pick them from the box comprising the other medias such as television and cinema. The effects of popular culture and cheap productions must be avoided, too. The anthologies of a museum must be appeal to people by virtue of its unapproachable and artistic content.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder