Sunday, October 5, 2014

The Museum-Public Relationship

Author John Donne once wrote how "No man is an island," and I believe Donne succinctly demonstrates how man is a social being in those few words. No man is such a radical individual that he can live entirely unaffected by his environment. Furthermore, man exists in relation to others. For instance, a man is a son in relation to a parent and a husband in relation to his spouse. In "No Man is an Island," Donne artfully shows how man is a social and relational being, and I believe this concept can tell us something about public museums and their purpose.


To review, a public museum is a museum that is run by a board of directors as is the case with public museums. However, public museums differ in that they rely on donations from major public sponsors and the generosity of society at large. For instance, the Smithsonian relies on funding from the US Government and depends on generosity from Congress to keep its doors open.

In a sense, a public museum enters into a relationship with the public, so a public museum is a social entity. Because of this, a museum must keep their public's interest and beliefs in mind. However, a museum still has an obligation to educate and challenge the public to discern their place in the world in light of the past. As in all relationships, there are times of tension, and sometimes, public museums do things that come into conflict with the public.

For instance, the National Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C. came into conflict with WWII veterans and members of the Republican party when they opened an exhibit exploring the US decision to drop nuclear bombs on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Many people raised concerns that the exhibit held too harsh a view of America at the time of the bombs' dropping. The dissenters to the exhibit believed that the museum lead people to see Japanese as innocent victims of American Imperialism. The controversy grew so large that even members of Congress became involved. They demanded that the museums change the exhibit In the end, the museum decided to remove the aspects of the exhibit that offended so many.

The National Air and Space Museum
However, some see this as an unjust censoring of the museum. They believed this censoring compromised the truth the museums sought to communicate with the public.

Regardless of how one feels about the aforementioned controversy, one thing is certain-- public museums must act with a mind towards the public they serve. Museums cannot and nor should they try to act independently of their public. This is not to say that museums must compromise the truth and depth of their exhibits, but it is to that museums must operate with a degree of finesse in respecting both the past and the public. Of course, as all relationships are, the museum-public relationship is a two-way street, so the public must also treat the past and museums with respect.

2 comments:

  1. Nice! I really like how you showed the relationship between museums and their funding, especially the example of the relationship between Congress and the Smithsonian. The pragmatic stance you take on the argument is very convincing!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very nice introduction to your evidence and argument. You do really well in recognizing that museum exhibits aren't the product and work of a single individual, but are rather a product that reflects and attempts to respect the past and the public's perception of it. Also good job in continuously incorporating interesting media in your posts :)

    ReplyDelete