News
Registration is closed Number of participants 350

Abstracts



Luís Raposo
The Lisbon Declaration and the future of museums

Archaeologist. Expert in Ancient Prehistory (Palaeolithic).

Head of the Research Department (and Director between 1996 and 2012) of the National Archaeology Museum, Lisbon, Portugal, since 1980.

Invited professor of the University of Lisbon (Faculty of Letters, Department of History), since 2005.

Successively, President of the Board, President of the General-Assembly and President of the Fiscal Council the Portuguese Professional Association of Archaeologist (from 1998 to 2012). President of the Fiscal Council of the Portuguese Association of Archaeology since 2012. Member of the Advisory Committee of the Portuguese National Committee of UNESCO since 2008.

Chair of the Portuguese National Committee of ICOM since 2008. Member of the Board of the Regional Alliance ICOM Europe since 2010. Appointed member of the ICOM Strategic Plan Evaluation Committee (2011-2013) and of the ICOM Working Group on the Statutes, Internal Rules and Regulations and Governance (2014-2016).

Promoter of the ICOM International Conferences on "Museums of Portuguese Speaking Communities and Countries" (2011) and "Public Policies towards Museums in Times of Crisi" (2013) and, in this framework co-author of the Lisbon Declaration ("Support Culture and Museums to Face the Global Crisis and Build the Future", April 2013).

Responsible for projects of archaeological field work in the valleys of the Tagus and Guadiana rivers, in the Southwestern Coast and in the outskirts of Lisbon.

Guest professor in several undergraduate and postgraduate courses in various national and foreign universities. Member of master’s degree and doctorate examining boards in Portuguese and foreign universities. Postgraduate studies’ supervisor of students who hold scholarships from the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.

Representative of Portugal and/or of the Ministry for Culture in various committees appointed by the government. Member of postgraduate exams’ boards (master’s degree and doctorate) in Portugal and abroad. Responsible for research projects approved and/or financed by the Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Science and for several agreements on bilateral international cooperation. Member of the Gulbenkian Archaeology Award’s board (2000).

The Lisbon Declaration and the future of museums

Confronted with the consequences in the world of museums of the global crisis generated in 2008, following the partial collapse of the world financial banking system, ICOM Europe and ICOM Portugal co-promoted in Lisbon (April 2012), an international conference on "Public Policies towards Museums in Times of Crisis", attended by more than one hundred experts, coming from different continents, even if most of the debates were focused on the European particular situation. At the end, the chairs of six National ICOM European Committees (and five other latter adherents), together with the Chair of ICOM Europe and the President of ICOM, subscribed a document, known as Lisbon Declaration, which was conceived to be delivered to national and regional governments, as well as the European Union authorities (Parliament and Commission), and to circulate among museums professionals, visitors and citizens in general. Latter on, during the ICOM General Assembly held in Rio de Janeiro (August 2013), this document has been reframed in a broad context and taken as the basis for an ICOM Declaration on "Viability and sustainability of museums through the global financial crisis", adopted unanimously.

The potentiality of Museums as resources for development of economy and society, directly linked with recognised changes occurred among them, are in these documents contrasted with the effects of the crisis on Museums. In consequence, three priorities and ten objectives for public policies towards museums are putted forward. The first priority states that cultural infrastructures are as much needed as other infrastructures provided by authorities and proclaims three derived objectives: to consider investments in heritage and museums as preserving our legacy for the future; to increase percentage of Gross National Product assigned to culture; and to increase or maintain the resources for museums as permanent cultural infrastructures, supporting also their communities and local development. The second priority emphasizes the fact that museums need specialised staff on a continuous basis to play their role to the benefit of society and all citizens and considers four derived objectives: to support turnover in museum staff; to promote the training of museum personnel and ensure the achievement of high quality professional standards; to encourage employment of young professionals in museums (e.g. through fiscal benefits). Finally, the third priority urges all political boards and in particular governmental authorities to stimulate the participation of citizens in museums’ activities and proposes three derived objectives: to promote cooperation between museums and cultural activities among institutions; to sustain networks on a regional, national and European level; to encourage donations and activities in favour of museums, including policies of tax relief.

In the aftermath of the Lisbon Declaration is now time to ask if the framework model which it advocates for museums has been strengthened by public policies or if the crisis has forced (or is being instrumentally used) to change social commitment towards museums, weakening public entities and services, as part of a neo-liberal reconfiguration of the social functions of national states.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Wim De Vos
Museum and Politics: How ICOM’s general conference resolutions (1947 - 2013) constitute a reflection framework for today’s and tomorrow’s actions.

Born in Mechelen (Belgium) in 1965.

PhD in History of Literature, specialisation in Semiotics.

Formerly in charge of the outreach activities of the Royal Library of Belgium and Communication Manager of the Museum of Natural Sciences (Brussels). Currently Senior Advisor in Communication and Museums at the Federal Science Policy Office.

Formerly Chairman of ICOM Belgium and ICOM Belgium/Flanders. Currently Chair of the Judging Panel of the European Museum of the Year Award (EMYA) and Member of the Executive Council of ICOM.

In all his professional activities, Wim De Vos has paid a particular attention to bridge the gap between heritage and the (general) public, by undertaking initiatives and initiating cooperations that aim at a large public understanding and participation in heritage-based activities. He is involved in promoting initiatives that stress the role of heritage in the sustainable development of societies.

Museum and Politics: How ICOM’s general conference resolutions (1947 - 2013) constitute a reflection framework for today’s and tomorrow’s actions.

Since 1947, the triennial GeneraI Conferences of ICOM have issued resolutions that, on top of reflecting the spirit of time, contain a surprising homogeneity in the messages given to the professionals and the outer world.

In the first decades, ICOM has often linked its mission to the goals of UNESCO and has placed its actions in the framework of international conventions on protection of cultural and natural heritage, education....From the very beginning, the role of museums and heritage in mutual understanding has been stressed. This has been the source of inspiration for ICOMs work on developing standards and actions for conservation, professionalization and training of staff, but also on exchanges of specialists and specialised infrastructure, and on coordinated international actions. ICOM also appealed to UNESCO for developing certain specific actions in favour of heritage and heritage education on an international scale.

Museums have been seen as important factors of development, in regions and in countries. The role of certain categories of museums in economic development has been abundantly stressed, but also the concern of preservation of natural and cultural heritage. In considering the benefits of museums to societies, ICOM has been a pioneer in bringing together immaterial values (citizenship, culture, education, preservation of endangered cultural, intangible and natural heritage and traditions, social harmony, quality of life) and material profit (tourism, contribution to economic development, to creative industries).

Whilst issuing these sometimes pioneering reflections, ICOM has always stressed the importance of reaching a large public, even the public that doesn't visit museums. Over the decades, the resolutions switch from working for states or regions to working with communities.

Starting from ethics of acquisitions, the successive series of resolutions also illustrate the steadily growing importance of museum ethics and of the autonomy, even the independence of a museum and its professionals. ICOM has stressed with governments and international organisations the importance of public funds for the Museum Sector and asked its National Committees to do the same, meanwhile it has also created openings towards working with company museums.

This overview goes back to the origins but will merely dress a stimulating recapitulation of values ICOM has been and is standing and fighting for, in relationship to states, to the international community, to museums and to citizens, values that are and will be of current interest. The Resolutions of ICOM offer an ideal framework for reflecting today on Museums and Politics.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Linda Norris, Katrin Hieke, Irina Chuvilova, Kristiane Janeke
Museum, Politics & Power. An international conversation Experiences from the social media project for preparing and accompanying the ICOM conference

Kristiane Janeke, PhD, Germany

Study of history and Slavonic studies in Bonn, Berlin and Moscow

since 2008 freelance historian, curator, museum adviser, cultural manager

before projects at international exhibitions and museums in Berlin, Karlsruhe, Dresden, USA, Russia, 2006-2008 Director of the German-Russian museum Berlin-Karlshost

2010-2013 Minsk / Belarus

Research on intercultural communication and German Russian cultural exchange

Linda Norris, USA

Independent museum professional focusing on shaping compelling narratives, improving professional practice and listening to communities. With Rainey Tisdale, she is co-author of Creativity in Museum Practice (Left Coast Press, 2013). She has worked on interpretive projects and developed training opportunities for museums and cultural organizations in the United States, Canada, and Europe including the American Association for State and Local History, Connecticut Humanities, the Newfoundland Association of Heritage Industries, and Context Travel. She was a United States Fulbright Scholar in 2009 and 2010 to Ukraine and continues to work with museums there. Linda blogs at the widely-read The Uncataloged Museum and is the American member of the tri-national social media team for the Museums, Politics and Power project.

Katrin Hieke, ICOM Germany board member, Germany
Katrin Hieke studied archaeology, cultural anthropology and arts management. As an independent museum professional and consultant she works on projects including exhibitions, international museum networks and museum tourism marketing. Katrin Hieke is lecturer at international conferences and seminars and mentor for young professionals in the cultural sector.

Museum, Politics & Power. An international conversation Experiences from the social media project for preparing and accompanying the ICOM conference

With the social media project Museum, Politics and Power: An International Conversation we broke new ground by accompanying an international ICOM conference with a social media conversation across multiple channels. We’ve taken the tri-national conference as our starting place, but our interests in the topic are global. In this session we will discuss the project from its initial conception to the conference itself. We’ll discuss questions such as:

  • What topics generated the most vibrant conversations? The issues included very concrete problems out of colleagues’ daily museum lives, management issues and more general questions of transnational and intercultural aspects of our museum world, past present and future.
  • Can a safe place be established to share ideas when countries are in conflict?
  • What role can museums and heritage organizations play in that conversation?
  • Did the process add value to the overall conference?
  • What lessons learned might be useful for ICOM and national committees and how might that shape future efforts?
  • Our biggest failure, our biggest success, from all four team members and from you, the audience.
  • How can multinational teams effectively work and communicate together? (and what web tools best facilitate that?) Can a multi-lingual process attract readers willing to explore viewpoints in other languages?
  • How did we build interest through a wide selection of social media channels?

What were the successes and challenges of trying to recruit blog posts from international colleagues? The successes and challenges of trying to reach museum audiences around the world?

ikonka_pdf

Download


Vladimir Tolstoy

Graduated from the faculty of journalism of the Moscow State University.

In 1982 – 1992 – worked in a journal "Students’ meridian". Since 1988 he is a member of the Union of journalists of the USSR.

In 1993 – 1994 he worked as Main expert in the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation.

In 1994 he was appointed General director of the State memorial and natural reserve "Museum-estate of Leo Tolstoy "Yasnaya Polyana"".

Since 1997 he is a President of the Central council of the Association of museum workers of Russian regions. This organization unites more than 500 museums from 30 regions of Russia. Is a representative of Russian Federation in NEMO (Net of European museum organizations).

Since 2009 is a President of the Russian committee of the International council of museums (ICOM Russia).

During some years he was a Head of the Public chamber of the Tula region and member of the Public chamber of the Russian Federation. He is an organizer of the congresses of Leo Tolstoy descendants and founder of the "Leo Tolstoy heritage" foundation. Founder of the annual International writers meetings in Yasnaya Polyana.

On 23 of May 2012 he was appointed Adviser to the President of the Russian Federation. Honored cultural worker of the Russian Federation, Rewarded with the order of friendship.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Hermann Schaefer

PhD, extraordinary Prof. of Economic and Social History University of Freiburg, Honorary Prof. Technical University Karlsruhe;

Founding President of the Museum and Foundation „Haus der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland" in Bonn/Leipzig/Berlin, Council of Europe Museum Award 1995;

Former Director General for Culture and Media, Chancellors Office Berlin, Deputy Minister;

Co-Founder/Advisor/Judge European Museum Academy, former Member/Judge European Museum Forum/European Museum of the Year Award/ICOM Germany.


The intention of the program is to focus “all aspects of museums and politics, from state policies to exhibitions to internal museum work” – a challenge, which I want to meet by concentrating on contradictions and inconsequences in the relations between Museums and politics:

Ø The topic of this conference in mind it is surprising to look to the ICOM-definition of museums: ‘Politics’ is not mentioned in it. Do museums pretend to work in a politics-free frame? Of course not, but they have the tendency to ignore politics though they depend from its decisions. Museums in Germany pretend to work like under an umbrella of freedom of science. Museums would better face proactively the problems of political influence. In Germany may be this is even more complicated than in other countries as there are three levels of politics (Federal State, States, Municipalities).

Ø Our type of state is a parliamentarian Democracy, participation in elections is self-evident. Why is the participation of people of all levels of education not (yet) self-evident? If Museums successfully managed to face the needs of the wider public – this would sensitize politics for their needs.

Ø Politics expect high quality from museums, but the definition of criteria for the quality of efficient museums is not their competence. Museums would better actively confront themselves with exact and independently evaluated criteria for their efficiency. Networking, consulting and suvervising boards help to achieve better results.

Ø Politics tend to found new museums – museums see new foundings as their competitors and not seldom with jealousy. Museums will have to offer more and new means for cooperation between the institutions.

Ø Interest of politics and museums are different if it is about financial supply. Lack of financial means is no excuse but a challenge for creativity – and courage. More courage is needed to contradict politicians.

Ø Foreign interests of museums and politics may in critical international constellations contradict each other. Museums should be courageous enough to cultivate their foreign relations even in these periods.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Sally Yerkovich
Is there a future for museum ethics?

With a M.A. and Ph.D. in cultural anthropology (ethnography and folklore) from the University of Pennsylvania, Sally Yerkovich has over twenty-five years of leadership experience in high profile American institutions including the National Endowment for the Humanities, National Endowment for the Arts, New Jersey Historical Society, South Street Seaport Museum, and Museum for African Art. Since 1996, she has also worked internationally with leaders of cultural organizations in Southeastern, Central, and Eastern Europe sharing best practices, encouraging learning in informal settings, and promoting social justice.

Dr. Yerkovich is currently the Director of the Institute of Museum Ethics and Adjunct Faculty member at Seton Hall University and is writing a book on ethics in museums. She is also a faculty member of the Bank Street College Museum Leadership Graduate Program and a consultant to non-profit and educational institutions. She is the only U.S. member of the Ethics Committee for the International Council of Museums. She was President of the Fund for Arts and Culture, an all-volunteer organization that helps promote the development of civil society by sharing best practices with cultural organizations in former Soviet-bloc countries. She has been invited to speak to cultural leaders in Russia, the Czech Republic, Korea, Finland, and Ireland.

Dr. Yerkovich was the first President for the Tribute Center (2005-2006), a visitor and learning center of the September 11th Families Association that opened at the World Trade Center site in September 2006. There she initiated a path-breaking volunteer walking tour program, developed the core staff, and raised the funds necessary to open and operate the Center.

From 1997 until 2005, Dr. Yerkovich was the President and CEO of The New Jersey Historical Society.

Dr. Yerkovich has published numerous articles and reviews in national and international publications related to anthropology, history, and museums. She was on the United States National Committee for ICOM for six years and also was President of the Council for Museum Anthropology; she served on the Board of the American Association of Museums, the Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association, the Council of Affiliates of the American Association of Museums, and the Board of Trustees of the Newark Arts Council. She currently serves on the Board of the Merchant’s House Museum.

Is there a future for museum ethics?

In the spring of 2011, Seton Hall University’s Institute of Museum Ethics engaged the Center for the Future of Museum at the American Alliance of Museums in a conversation about ethics in museums in the United States. We agreed that ethics, like other cultural values, change over time and wondered how the shifting global economy as well as existing and projected demographic changes, the impact of technology, and an increasing awareness of the need to live in a manner that lessens our impact upon the environment, have affected and will affect museum practice. We speculated that it would not be a surprise to find that the ethical principles that guided professional practice even just ten years ago might be changing and might continue to change dramatically over the next ten to twenty-five years.

Knowing that museum professionals make decisions with ethical implications regularly, we also realized that we tend to think together about these issues only when a crisis arises. We asked if there might be something that we could do to start a constructive and future-oriented dialogue about ethics in our field and decided to embark upon a forecasting exercise to see if we could identify some of the critical issues that may need to be addressed. Forecasting is a tool that estimates or creates a picture of what our future might look like.

We approached close to two hundred museum professionals -- from emerging professionals to senior experts, from educators to registrars, public relations staff and fundraisers to directors -- as well as professionals from related fields like librarians and archivists, attorneys, futurists, journalists, and ethicists. Of these, seventy-nine agreed to participate in a forecasting exercise that would take place on the Internet. In addition to these Oracles, we invited public participation and had over one hundred members of the general public weigh in on various aspects of the project.

The forecast identified five major issues likely to be of profound importance to museums in the United States over the next ten to twenty-five years. They include: accessibility and diversity; conflict of interest; control of; collecting and deaccessioning; and transparency and accountability in governance, operations, and finance.

This paper will briefly discuss the results of this nationwide study, focusing upon control of (including censorship and curatorial/museum authority) and will reflect upon the international relevance of the findings.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Ms Taja Vovk van Gaal
House of European History – a new museum project in the heart of Brussels

Leader of the Academic Project Team, House of European History, DG Communication, European Parliament. Historian and Sociologist, Museum Adviser.

Graduated in 1979 from the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. Training and work as a curator in Contemporary History and in Cultural and Project management.

Director of the City Museum of Ljubljana, Slovenia, leading the largest investment in cultural projects in the city with the renovation of a museumpalace as well as the preparation of its permanent exhibition. Author/curator of many exhibitions and articles, a member of the board of different professional national and international organisations, inter alia

President of the Museum Council at the Ministry of Culture of Slovenia. From 2006 until 2010, Head of Support, European Cultural Foundation. From 1999 till 2011 Judge the European Museum of the Year Award and Member of the Board of Trustees of the European Museum Forum and currently of Europeana. Since 2011, Leader of the Project Team of the House of European History.

House of European History –

a new museum project in the heart of Brussels

Since the proposal of Professor Hans-Gert Pöttering expressed in his inaugural speech to create "a locus for history and for the future where the concept of the European idea can continue to grow", the subsequent establishment by the European Parliament of the House of European History has been a topic of on-going discussion and academic research.

The stance of the socialist President, Martin Shultz, which backs the initiative of his conservative predecessor saying that "the project constitutes a significant innovation in the way in which an advanced democratic system approaches its relationship with the past", demonstrates the broad political consensus the new museum project has enjoyed since its beginnings.

A consensus on the principal decision to establish the place where the memory of European history and the process of European unification would be jointly cultivated however does not necessarily mean unanimity of opinion when it comes to historic interpretation.

Two consultative bodies; a Board of Trustees and an Academic Committee were established in order to guarantee a founding principle of the House. This principle was that the politicians in this project play a role as facilitators in the democratic debate while the historians and curators freely carry out their function to convey their knowledge and reading of European history.

In order to make this democratic vision of the new European museum complete, one should add to the picture three other crucial stakeholders: the citizens of all walks of life and backgrounds from Europe and further afield for whom this project has been called into life, the professional museum community which has helped enormously by offering objects from their collections as well as the academic world which has been carefully monitoring the development of the project.

After a good three years of work on the and exhibition design both with the input of internal and external experts, the project is at an advanced stage of development, meaning that the mounting of the exhibition in the newly reconstructed Eastman building in the Leopold park will start in a short time.

This paper will look at the recent history of setting-up the House of European History in the light of the overall conference theme Museum and Politics and examine it along the lines of the suggested sub-theme Museums and the Making of Memoryin the above indicated institutional and memory politics setting.

ikonka_pdf

Download



Manfred Nawroth
European support for Institutional Museum Development

Curator, Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz. Dr. Manfred Nawroth was working as archaeologist at the German National Museum Nuremberg from 1993 to 2001. From 2001 to 2010 and 2012 until today he works as curator at the Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz. He is mainly in charge for exhibitions, events and scientific programs with partners in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia.

From 2010 to 2012 Nawroth was working as Resident Twinning Advisor of the EU funded Twinning project "Support to the Institutional Development of the Georgian National Museum" at the Georgian National Museum Tbilisi. He coordinated and managed the program with the Georgian partner and the visits of more than 30 Short Time Experts of the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation coming to Georgia to support the National Museum in the fields of building and construction planning, preventive conservation, collection removal, human resources, financial and budget planning, legal aspects, educational programs, PR and more.

Since 2012 Manfred Nawroth is also executive manager of the German Association for Archaeology (DVA).

European support for Institutional Museum Development

The European Union offers since years programs for Eastern Partnership. TWINNING is another instrument which usual used for establishing partnerships between public administrations in EU member states, and administrations in countries that are either current or potential candidates for EU accession, or European Neighborhood countries. The EU promotes twinning and uses this instrument to strengthen, reform and further develop public structures in partner countries. In frame of these projects a Resident Twinning Advisor ( RTA) is seconded from a Member State to work full time in the corresponding organization of the country to implement the project. The Project Leader is responsible for the overall thrust and coordination of the project. They are supplemented by missions of Short Time Experts (STE). From June 2010 until September 2012 the first Twinning project in the field of culture "Support to the Institutional development of the Georgian National Museum" was implemented by the Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz (SPK) and the Georgian National Museum (GNM )in Tbilisi, Georgia.

The Georgian National Museum was just founded in 2004 and unites 10 major museums in Tbilisi as well as in the regions and 2 research institutes under his umbrella. The Twinning project was focused on the institutional development of this institution. Nearly 40 STE from Berlin were coming several times to Georgia, consulted their Georgian colleagues and conducted workshops. The Twinning project was focused on the support to the creation of a Restoration-Conservation Centre, the improvement of preventive conservation practice, a collection removal pilot case and the introduction of a set of standards in the areas of financial and project planning, Human resources management, PR strategies and more.

The project aimed on knowledge transfer of European standards in the selected areas to Georgia in a collaboration between two cultural facilities of national importance. It is important to mention that a real partnership was created and that the Georgian partners adapted and implemented many practices and standards. In Brussels this project was regarded as a successful example for Twinning projects and shows that this instrument offers new opportunities in the cooperation between cultural institutions in the membership countries and those of the European neighborhood which goes deep into the problems and needs of the institutions and helps to show the way in a modernized future.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Da Kong
China’s cultural diplomacy through loan exhibitions The Search for immortality: Tomb Treasures of Han China

I am currently a third-year PhD student at the School of Museum Studies, University of Leicester in the UK. My PhD research is about China’s cultural diplomacy and its loan exhibitions to British museums, particularly in the 21st century. The aim of my research is to obtain a detailed sense of how Chinese loan exhibitions contribute to China’s cultural diplomacy, mainly through shaping the international image of China and how Chinese museums benefit from Chinese government’s recent ambition for soft power and cultural projection at home and abroad. Before starting the doctoral research, I have achieved a Master Degree from the School by conducting a similar but more preliminary research on the same subject. My Bachelor’s Degree on Museology and a Diploma on Diplomacy has been achieved at Fudan University in Shanghai, China, where my interest in the relationship between museums and cultural diplomacy has started. I also spent two years on ceramics restoration and conservation when I was there. I have taken some internship and voluntary placements at museums both in China and the UK, which are absolutely important for my understanding of the differences and similarities as well as communications between museums in the two countries.

China’s cultural diplomacy through loan exhibitions The Search for immortality: Tomb Treasures of Han China

China’s soft power has attracted considerable attention in the past decade due, in part, to the high visibility of art exhibitions sent by Chinese government to Western museums. The Chinese government’s uses of such exhibitions for political and diplomatic purposes has, however, rarely been explored.

An art exhibition borrowed from Chinese public museums requires official approval from an agency of the Chinese government. Cultural objects are categorized into three grades and a restriction is placed on the percentage of first grade objects in each loan exhibition. If the percentage is above that normally permitted, then special permission is required from the State Council. These mechanisms permit China to maintain a degree of control over the messages delivered by exhibitions abroad, regardless of whether they are curated by the host museum or the Chinese lender. The Chinese government’s preference for certain messages can be identified in these exhibitions but it would be untrue to suggest that the government acts directly as author of the exhibition script.

The Search for Immortality: Tomb Treasures of Han China, an exhibition held at the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge in 2012 coincided with the 40th anniversary of the establishment of full diplomatic relations between the People’s Republic of China and the UK. It also coincided with the 2012 London Olympic Games. The alignment of these landmark events encouraged the Chinese side to believe that this was an excellent opportunity to promote Chinese culture, while the proposal for an innovative curatorial approach to the exhibition, by the Fitzwilliam, encouraged the Chinese State Council to authorize an exceptional loan. Implicit within this cultural collaboration were largely unseen political and diplomatic implications. This paper examines these implications for China’s cultural diplomacy through an analysis of the organisation, negotiation, curation and media reception of this exhibition. It concludes that the Chinese government is consciously aware of the diplomatic value of loans abroad, but yet still allows the museums involved considerable freedom in the shaping of the exhibitions. The Chinese government is thus more facilitatory than directive, instrumentalising or propagandistic in its use of art exhibitions for cultural diplomacy.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Mikhail A.Bryzgalov
Soft Power of the Musical Culture of Russia

Director General, The Glinka National Museum Consortium of Musical Culture, Moscow
Born in 1964 in Saratov. Graduate of Saratov State L.V. Sobinov Conservatory (1990).
In 2001 completed professional retraining program at the Volga Academy of Public Service majoring in State and Municipal Management.

He commenced his career as a teacher at the Central Children’s Music School in Saratov, later taught at the Saratov Music College. In 1994 was appointed Director of the Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra. All these years Mikhail Bryzgalov successfully combined creative activities with administrative work. Founded under his leadership in 1990, the wind instruments ensemble Saratov Brass is a permanent participant in the city’s and the region’s celebrations and events.

In 1998 Mikhail Bryzgalov was appointed Adviser on international programs in the field of arts and culture at the Department of Culture of the Saratov government. In December 2001 he was appointed Director of the A. Shnitke Regional Philharmonic. In May 2002 elected Chairman of the Volga Region Association of Concert Organizations. On April 2, 2003 became Minister of Culture of Saratov region.
Since 2008 - Director of the Federal State Institution of Culture – M. I. Glinka State Central Museum of Musical Culture.

Soft Power of the Musical Culture of Russia

The concept "soft power" that was developed by the American political expert Joseph Nye of Harvard University in the 80s of the previous century just recently has become one of the dominant theories in the foreign policy and diplomacy of the Russian Federation, surpassing the methods of military and economic powers, that is described by the concept "hard power": "We continue our active and targeted efforts to improve and develop the foreign policy tools for more efficient use of modern means of implementing foreign policy priorities, including economic diplomacy, fully use the resources of "soft power", an international activities information support," said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov during his speech within Government Hour in The Council of Federation of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, Moscow, 18, December 2013.

As is obvious more and more Russian politics and diplomacy use "soft power" to achieve the desired results. According to the theory of J. Nye, this concept is characterized by three main components: culture, political ideology and foreign policy. And not without reason such a notion as "culture" comes first.

This report on the subject of museums and foreign policy convergence aims to identify tangible and intangible cultural heritage of the country as a new resource of leadership in today's globalized world, strengthening the authority of the state at the expense of cultural potential, discovering new possibilities for achieving international interests through international exhibitions, concert and educational activities.

The material is based on practical international experience of The Glinka National Museum Consortium of Musical Culture (Moscow, Russia) and describes the most important projects in cooperation with international organizations, institutions and museums. Most of the focus is on cooperation with the subordinate organizations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation - The Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States, Compatriots Living Abroad and International Humanitarian Cooperation, commonly known as Rossotrudnichestvo, and Commission of the Russian Federation for UNESCO.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Elizabeth Varner
Modification of the US' Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act for Cultural Heritage Lent by Foreign Museums

Executive Director of the National Art Museum of Sport. She also serves as Adjunct Professor at Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, Co-Editor-in-Chief of the Cultural Heritage & Arts Review, and Vice President of the Lawyer's Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation.

Varner has a Bachelor’s degree in Art History from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a Master’s degree from the Smithsonian Institute-Corcoran College of Art + Design, and a Juris Doctor degree from Tulane University Law School. She completed the Art and Business Program at Sotheby's Institute of Art in London, American Decorative Arts Program at Winterthur Winter Institute, and Victorian Society Newport Summer School. She is a former Colonial Williamsburg Antiques Forum Scholar, Editor-in-Chief of the Tulane Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property and Director of the Stanly County Museum & Historic Preservation Commission.

She has presented and published articles on cultural heritage law, international law, military law, arbitration, and museum administration.

Modification of the US' Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act for Cultural Heritage Lent by Foreign Museums

Eviscerating the protections afforded by the 1965 Immunity from Seizure Act (IFSA), Magness v. Russian Federation in 2000 and Malewicz v. City of Amsterdam in 2005 proved an overt threat to cultural exchange as foreign policy, pitting the US against foreign interests. In both Magness and Malewicz, the court permitted the claimants to distinguish immunity from seizure of the cultural work under IFSA from immunity from suit. In addition to finding that IFSA did not immunize lenders from suit, the courts found

that lending a work to the US constituted a commercial, not sovereign, activity fitting within exceptions to foreign sovereignty under the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (FSIA) thereby abrogating foreign museum state agencies' immunity from suit. Recognizing that the protection afforded to foreign sovereign lenders of cultural heritage was being undermined, the Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act was fast-tracked through the House of Representatives to immunize foreign sovereign lenders from suit.

It stalled in the Senate under a hail of protests from the cultural community. There was a narrow exception that would not have permitted jurisdictional immunity for actions that were based on a claim that the work was taken in Europe by Nazi Germany during World War II, which some considered discriminatory of other cultures that were not included in the exception. Moreover, as work taken in violation of international law by Nazi Germany was excluded from jurisdictional immunity, it suggested that other work, not included in this exception, which was taken in violation of international law, could be shown in US museums.

While there has been much interest in lawsuits involving cultural heritage from foreign lenders, a neutral analysis of the issues and options to resolve this problem while maintaining the values of the US' cultural heritage regime have been largely ignored. Rejecting the desirability of either foreign cultural heritage serving as a jurisdictional hook or the US issuing blanket immunity from seizure and suit, this paper traces the history of immunity from seizure for cultural heritage in the US and the purpose for its implementation – to foster cultural exchange and dialogue. Then this paper will track how the protections afforded cultural heritage loans have eroded, obviating the purpose of the law. Finally, this paper will review the Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act that has just been reintroduced and tender modest suggestions that would foster cultural exchange between countries.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Karen Exell
National museums and international politics: the new global museums in the Gulf

Lecturer in Museum Studies at UCL Qatar, where she coordinates the MA in Museum and Gallery Practice. She has worked for over 15 years in museums, heritage organisations and universities in the UK and Egypt before moving to Doha, Qatar, in 2011. She has a BA in Egyptology from Oxford University, a Postgraduate Diploma in Museum Studies from the University of St Andrews and a PhD from Durham University. Karen's research interests include museums and the creation of knowledge in relation to heritage and identity, and the impact of museums on cultural identity. She is currently researching for a monograph on museums and the cultural landscape in the GCC states of the Arabian Peninsula. Her recent publications include the co-edited volume Heritage Debates in the Arabian Peninsula (Ashgate 2014) and the co-authored paper ‘There is no heritage in Qatar’: Orientalism, Colonialism and other Problematic Histories’.

National museums and international politics:

the new global museums in the Gulf

The new Gulf museums are all intimately linked to international politics and global economic

networks on many levels. These museums include the Saadiyet Island museums in Abu Dhabi (the

Louvre, Guggenheim and the Zayed National Museum, all under construction) and the Museum of

Islamic Art, Mathaf: ArabMuseum of Modern Art, and the new National Museum in Qatar.

Conceived as global institutions from the first, the new museums in Qatar and Abu Dhabi represent

the ideological engagement of these Gulf states with the West for political reasons, whilst offering in

exchange enormous economic benefits for the countries that facilitate their development. This

results in museums that take aWestern form that may not speak to the local cultures, and require

skills that do not (yet) exist in the host countries. The economic benefits for the facilitating nations

are accrued at the macro and micro level – from the government contract between France and Abu

Dhabi for the construction of the Louvre Abu Dhabi, to the employment opportunities offered to

skilled foreigners in these institutions.

This paper argues that while there are many social and cultural reasons that can be inferred for the current rapid construction of museums in the region, it is the multi-scalar political nature of the new Gulf museums, from what they represent to how they are run, that defines them. After outlining the contemporary regional framework of foreign policy and international relations, this paper will present a discourse analysis of the development and decision-making behind certain aspects of the for the new national museums under construction in Qatar and Abu Dhabi (both due to open in 2016), to reveal how national narratives are being constructed. The paper will demonstrate that these national museums are engaged in a discourse that has less to do with the construction or representation of national identities as with a dialectical engagement with international geo-politics; their form and represents an essential element of their small states’ foreign policy. What might at first seem a contradiction – the utilisation of imported models of heritage preservation including the utilisation of Eurocentric or ‘universal’ value-systems (i.e. the dominant heritage systems created and disseminated by entities such as UNESCO and ICOM) to represent a non-

Western culture – is in fact entirely consistent with the role of these museums in diplomacy and foreign relations. Ultimately, through this small-scale analysis, the paper attempts to throw light on how global politics penetrates all aspects of these new national museums in the Gulf, and, in turn, to reveal the role these museums play in global politics.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Natalia Grincheva
Democracy for Export / Cultural Diplomacy outreach through the Museum Connect Program of the American Alliance of Museums

PhD researcher in the Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Society and Culture (CISSC) at Concordia University. Her doctoral research encompasses new museology, cultural diplomacy, and social media. Her project focuses on the use of social media in museums' international outreach and diplomatic activities and aims to evaluate the impact of cultural diplomacy programs implemented online within a museum context.

Natalia is a holder of several prestigious international academic awards including the Fulbright Scholarship (2007-2010), Quebec Fund Fellowship for Research on Society and Culture (2011-2013), Australian Endeavour Research Fellowship (2012-2013), and others. Her most recent publication, "Psychopower of Cultural Diplomacy in the Information Age," published by the USC Center on Public Diplomacy, received Digital Humanities Award in the nomination "The best 2013 short publication."

Democracy for Export / Cultural Diplomacy outreach through the Museum Connect Program of the American Alliance of Museums

My research looks at the phenomenon of the U.S. museum as a political agency which has remained sensitive to the cultural and political issues of the nation and retained its status of the authoritative cultural institution projecting the idea of democracy to domestic and international audiences. Through historical overview and rhetorical analysis of the cultural diplomacy and international politics of the USA, the paper traces philosophical idea of democracy as the main driving principle of the nature of international engagement of the U.S. museums with the outside world. The paper argues that democratic values have been communicated by the American museums at home and abroad not only through programming and art collections, but also through the very nature of the museum agency. American museums, in contrast with the European traditions of highly-aristocratic elite culture, emerged from the very beginning as democratic and inclusive institutions emphasizing educational opportunities for all. This paper explores different political forces in place when the American museum served as an agent for spreading the democratic principles of the U.S. culture.

The idea of democracy and freedom of artistic expression in this paper is explored through the analysis of the Museum Connect Program, which has been implemented by the American Alliance of Museums (AAM) for many years. The AAM is "the largest museum service organization in the world" (U.S. Department of State 2012). Though the AAM is national organization that unites American museums and museum professionals, it is involved in a number of international cultural activities, which makes the alliance an important player in international cultural politics. Drawing on some examples of the Museum Connect Program, the paper intends to demonstrate that the great influence that American museums exert overseas functions across different cultural, economic, and political forces. The museum diplomacy in this way is operationalized not only through artistic or cultural programming, promoting American democracy and freedom of artistic expression abroad, but also through more subtle forces of international professional leadership of American museums, which influences the cultural fields around the world and imposes the values of the American liberal economy through reshaping the ways museums work in other countries.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Gregor H. Lersch
Borders and Museums

Cultural Scientist and Project Manager of several international major exhibitions, last at Martin-Gropius-Bau Berlin „Side by Side. Poland-Germany. A 1000 years of Art and History" (2009-2012). Before working for the HILTI Foundation in Liechtenstein as coordinator of exhibitions in Europe and Asia (2006-2009). Currently researching on socialist and post-socialist art at European University Viadrina Frankfurt/O.

Borders and Museums

A Case Study: German-Polish museum cooperations from "cold war" until today

The importance of borders for museum cooperations and exhibition exchange should not be neglected. My paper analyzes how political borders influence cultural exchange and if there exists a specific mapping of arts and culture beyond? The history of Germany and its neighbouring countries in the field of museum and art exchange after World War II constitutes an interesting example how museum cooperations do not self-evident mirror political boundaries. Several examples of big international museum projects from the time of the Cold War indicate that the Socialist Republic of Poland did intensively cooperate with Western Germany even before official diplomatic relations had been established. Meanwhile Poland had very few relations to the neighbouring socialist state, the GDR. The examples show that borders, even the "Iron curtain" during the "cold war", can become permeable for museum and exhibition exchange.

Most interesting is the period after 1989 as German-Polish relations are still very much influenced by the history of the 20th century and the switch of borders in central Europe after World War II. German-Polish reconciliation became more and more an important topic of German foreign policy, but was build however on already existing connections beyond politics. Examples of recent museum cooperations (f. ex. " Side by Side.Poland-Germany. A thousand years of art and history", Berlin-Warschau 2011, "Europa Jagiellonica", Potsdam-Warschau 2013) reflect the current status. The "Side by Side" f. ex. project displayed a common history of 1000 years through more than 800 objects from about 200 international lenders. Additionally the recent German-Polish history shows that switches in governments can quickly harm existing cultural relations.

The german-polish case shows how museums can support mutual international understanding even at a moment when political borders theoretically do not allow and support these cooperations. The paper presents concrete exhibition projects and includes examples from the German exchange with other countries (f. ex. Russia) and examines how museums could play an active part in reconciliation and exchange processes.

The existence of both, political borders, but also the invisible borders - parts of the mental maps of every society, should be considered while talking about future museum networks. Art historians recently developed a "critical geography of art" that will in this case study applied to the current mapping of international museums in central Europe.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Markus Moehring
The Transnational Making of Memory

1958: born in Lörrach (located in the spot, where Germany, France and Switzerland touch each other)
1985: Master’s degree in History and European Ethnology (university of Hamburg and Freiburg/ Germany)
1985: student/intern at Henry Ford Museum Dearborn/ Michigan (USA)
1987: director of ‘Oberrheinisches Bädermuseum’ (bath history)
since 1991: director of the Three-Countries Museum
since 2009: spokesperson for the history museums within the German Museum Association (DMB)
since 1995: project leader of several tri-national special exhibition networks
since 2002: initiator and leader of two transnational networks: the trinational Network of Museums (with 35 French, German and Swiss exhibitions about the First World War in 2014) and the trinational Network of Historical Societies (with 400 societies in the 3 countries)

The Transnational Making of Memory

Aims and projects of the tri-national Network of Museums in the Upper Rhine Valley

Generally-speaking, most history museums present their history from a national perspective. This is not only true for national institutes, but also for regional museums. Very often they are not aware of how much their work is influenced by this national perspective. To reflect on and to overcome this national perspective, a network of German, French and Swiss museums was founded.

This network is based in the Upper Rhine Valley, which belongs to Germany, France and Switzerland. With its six million inhabitants, this region is a great example of how enormous the influences of different national politics were and still are on the life of the people. Especially the 19th and 20 th century are still remembered in highly diverse ways – with corresponding enormous differences in the museums.

A common annual museum ticket for over 280 museums helps very successfully to motivate people to cross the border. Particularly the "Network of Museums" creates an intensive cooperation. The partners meet regularly to reflect on the different ways of "making the memory" in the three countries and to produce, present and promote special exhibition-series on a common topic. Between June and November 2014, the Network will present 25 exhibitions on the 1 st World War, which are conceptionally connected with each other (Strasbourg, Mulhouse, Karlsruhe, Basel, Freiburg, Speyer, Lörrach etc.). They focus on the German, French and Swiss perspective as well as on regional points of view. Over three years of common preparation have shown how different, even one hundred years after the beginning of the war, the three nations look upon the events and also which different consequences this approach had for the museum´s role in the memorial culture.

This network of museums is initiated and organized by the Three-Countries Museum, situated in the one spot where the three countries of Germany, France and Switzerland touch each other. The permanent exhibition of this museum, its collections, its educational programs and special exhibitions are dedicated to the differences and similarities between the "Making of memory" in Germany, France and Switzerland.

The Three-Countries Museum also founded a second network: the „Network of Historical Societies" connecting around 10.000 German, French and Swiss people with special interest in history in numerous associations.

Although the Three-Countries Museum might be considered a regional museum, it can not be denied, that its political meaning in the context of crossing borders is of exceptional importance and unique in Europe. For this reason, its projects are supported by the EU with 1,2 Million Euros 2012-2014.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Anna Aponasenko
History of the “Trophy” Funds of the State Hermitage Museum in the Context of Soviet Foreign Relations Policy

Deputy Head, Register Department, State Hermitage Museum

Anna Nikolayevna Aponasenko graduated from St. Petersburg State University, History Faculty, where she specialized in Source Studies of Russian History. In 2005 defended a dissertation of the Candidate of Historical Sciences. Deputy Head of the Register Department of the State Hermitage Museum.

History of the “Trophy” Funds of the State Hermitage Museum in the Context of Soviet Foreign Relations Policy

All issues related to the fate of the so-called “trophy” artworks taken out of postwar Germany have always remained very complicated and controversial. Since 1945 the “trophy” funds of the State Hermitage Museum have seen an evolution from open public display to total secrecy and back to open storage.

Since 1943 the Soviet Government was developing a scheme that later received the name of “compensatory restitution”. This scheme suggested that the Soviet Union would be taking artworks out of German museums as a compensation for the war losses. This principle was initially approved by the allies in the Anti-Hitler Coalition.

In accordance with the developed principles of compensatory restitution in March 1945 Soviet troops began to take museum objects out of Germany. However, the Crimea and Potsdam Conferences revealed a growing disagreement between the countries – allies of the Anti-Hitler Coalition. Similarly, the Inter-Allied Reparation Agency showed no unity of opinions as the allies began to accuse each other of breaking the rules of art export from Germany. Deteriorating situaion in foreign relations suggested that public display of artworks being taken out of Germany into the USSR would seriously fuel tension between ex-allies which would be too risky for the country devastated by the war.

Due to these circumstances already in October 1945 a special government telegram forbade the State Hermitage Museum to exhibit objects brought from postwar Germany. This prohibition can be understood as the first step towards secrecy for trophy funds.

The storage conditions of “trophy” valuables became even more rigorous due to the First Berlin Crisis (1948-1949) when the world found itself under threat of a new war. As a result, in 1948 all information about trophy museum funds was classified as equal to state secrets. Since then to see the special fund of the State Hermitage Museum, one needed a written permission of the Chairman of the Committee on Fine Arts.

On May 14, 1955, in response to remilitarisation of Western Germany and its admission to NATO the USSR and countries of Eastern Europe signed the Warsaw Pact. Formation of the pact was followed by a number of acts of goodwill intended to cement the new alliance. In the beginning of 1956 the Soviet Government decided to return to the Polish People’s Republic the museum objects that had belonged to it and were taken by Soviet troops to the USSR from the territory of postwar Germany.

In September-October 1956 the State Hermitage Museum handed over to Warsaw 12 220 artworks that had been kept in the museum’s Special Fund. Soon, in 1958, museum collections were returned to the German Democratic Republic. Total number of museum objects returned by the Hermitage Museum to Germany is 640 515.

In summary, artworks from postwar Germany can be seen as hostage to high politics. Their fate in the museums of the USSR was in many aspects closely connected to changes in the country’s foreign relations policy.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Wesley A. Fisher and Ruth Weinberger
Holocaust-Era Looted Art: a Current World-Wide Overview

Director of Research for the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany. In addition to assisting the various compensation and restitution programs of the Claims Conference, he is responsible for the Claims Conference/World Jewish Restitution Organization Looted Art and Cultural Property Initiative (see http://art.claimscon.org). He has produced a worldwide Descriptive Catalogue of Looted Judaica; created projects to make the records of the Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Rosenberg (ERR), the largest of the Nazi agencies confiscating Jewish cultural property, accessible and searchable; run discussions and negotiations with relevant governmental and non-governmental agencies; and assisted the Czech Republic with the organization of the Holocaust-Era Assets Conference held in Prague in 2009 and the establishment of the European Shoah Legacy Institute. He is also Executive Director of the Victim List Project of the Swiss Banks Settlement (Hon. Edward R. Korman, United States District Judge), which assists the worldwide compilation of the names of the victims of the Nazis and their allies, and he represents the Claims Conference to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, the European Holocaust Research Infrastructure, and the International Portal for Records Regarding Nazi-Era Cultural Property.

Dr. Fisher was a senior member of the founding staff of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. and helped establish the Museum as a major force in Holocaust and genocide studies and related fields. He was Deputy Director of the Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets in 1998 and, at the request of then Deputy Treasury Secretary Stuart Eizenstat, assisted the Government of Lithuania and the Council of Europe with the organization of the Vilnius International Forum on Holocaust-Era Looted Cultural Assets in 2000. He helped create the Task Force for International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research (now the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) begun at the initiative of then Prime Minister Persson of Sweden.

From the 1970’s to the early 1990’s he was the administrator of virtually all scholarly exchanges, joint research and conferences between the United States and the former Soviet Union in the humanities and social sciences, including relations between the archives and libraries of the two countries and in art history. For many years a professor at Columbia University, Dr. Fisher holds a B.A. degree from Harvard University and a Ph.D. in Sociology and a Certificate of the Russian Institute (now Harriman Institute) from Columbia University.

Ruth Jolanda Weinberger, Germany

Researcher for the Looted Art and Cultural Property Initiative at the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (see: http://art.claimscon.org). She co-produces the worldwide Descriptive Catalogue of Looted Judaica. She created a report entitled The Looting of Jewish and Cultural Objects in Former Yugoslavia: The HAG Südosten & the Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Rosenberg in Belgrade, Agram (Zagreb) and Ragusa (Dubrovnik) , the largest Nazi agencies confiscating Jewish cultural property. In addition she has prepared a number of internal papers focusing on provenance research and restitution procedures in various countries worldwide.

From 2000 until today, Dr. Weinberger has worked on a number of restitution and compensation programs. Prior to working for the Looted Art and Cultural Property Initiative, she has worked for the Fund for Victims of Medical Experiments and Other Injuries administered by the Claims Conference, which was under the auspices of the German Foundation. While administering and researching applications to this compensation program, which was part of the much larger Slave- and Forced Labor Program, she was able to reveal more medical experiments in additional locations than previously known thus resulting in more successful payments.

Dr. Weinberger has also worked for the Swiss Refugee Program of the Swiss Bank Settlement, and at the Vienna based Committee for Jewish Claims on Austria. She holds a doctorate degree in history from the University of Vienna, Austria, and is the author of "Fertility Experiments in Auschwitz-Birkenau. The Perpetrators and Their Victims" (2009), in addition to a number of articles on the topic of medical experiments as well as political and historical developments.

Holocaust-Era Looted Art: a Current World-Wide Overview

Major intergovernmental conferences and resolutions have established international principles regarding the restitution of art and other cultural property, most notably the Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art (1998) endorsed by 44 countries, Resolution 1205 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (1999), the Declaration of the Vilnius International Forum on Holocaust-Era Looted Cultural Assets (2000), and the Terezin Declaration (2009) endorsed by 47 countries. As a result, there have been some positive steps towards the restitution of movable artwork and cultural and religious property plundered from Jews, but progress has been slow, and there remains a very considerable amount of looted movable artwork and cultural and religious property that has not been recovered and that is still in private and public hands. Most recently this has come once again to public attention as a result of the recent discovery of a collection of over 1400 artworks in Munich, Germany and subsequent reforms by the Federal and State Governments of Germany.

No mechanism was established to monitor progress by the 44 countries that endorsed the 1998 Washington Conference Principles. The main organizations of the world Jewish community active in the restitution of property looted from victims of the Holocaust, namely the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (Claims Conference) and the World Jewish Restitution Organization (WJRO), which have conducted extensive research over the years on the status of provenance research and of claims processes for the restitution of artworks in most, if not all, relevant countries, presented a report on such progress at the Holocaust-Era Assets Conference in Prague in 2009. Five years have passed since then, and we believe it would be appropriate to present an updated worldwide report at the Museum & Politics Conference in St. Petersburg in September 2014.

The variations among countries’ historical experiences and legal systems, as well as the complexities of provenance research and the establishment of claims processes, are such that it is not easy to make generalizations. It is clear, however, that some sort of independent examination of progress is necessary, both within individual countries and among them. In the management of their collections, museums both are impacted by outside political forces and assert their own political values. Museum exchanges may function as cultural foreign policy, but conflicts of values may also be reflected in the absence of museum exchanges.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Brittany Lauren Wheeler
All that Remains: Repatriation and the Foreign Policy of the Museum

Ms. Wheeler presently works as the Repatriation Specialist at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago and co-coordinates the New Scholars Network, a group of young persons involved in the study and work surrounding forced migration. She holds M.A. degrees in both International Museum Studies (University of Gothenburg, 2006) and Forced Migration Studies (University of the Witwatersrand, ACMS, 2011).

All that Remains: Repatriation and the Foreign Policy of the Museum

Though NAGPRA legislation was passed more than twenty years ago in the United States, it is still common for those that work with museum repatriation requests to field questions from the public and other museum professionals as to how much material is being requested for repatriation, and whether this means much more will be returned. To make the assumption that these questions should be answered in a similarly quantifiable manner (for instance, that repatriation is tied only to certain legal/cultural categories and is therefore statistically insignificant) limits the conversation around the questions these queries in fact raise about the relationship between material returned to descendant groups and the majority remaining collection.

This paper aims to provide a theoretical treatment of whether, and in what way, the ‘foreign policy’ of the museum institution toward North American collections and affiliated communities has changed by affirmatively linking these collections, rather than dissociating them via categorization or relegating repatriation to an anthropological niche; the longue durée over a singular act of deaccession. This paper asks, Are relatively unchanged museum collections, composed of material often collected at the same time as that being repatriated, liberalized or fundamentally altered by the process of repatriation or the human rights discourse surrounding return? Has the foreign policy of the repatriating museum changed over time, in terms of overall interpretation, relationship-building or contemporary collecting?

This paper will utilize academic literature, institutional policies and public material (such as National NAGPRA Program proceedings) from the museum sector in its analysis, but will also look to disciplines such as migration studies, wherein the rights of and obligations toward individuals and possessions considered ‘out of place’ have arguably more direct political implications for the displaced, returned, and those that remained behind. The paper will also consider the role and limitations of non-binding international and regional declarations over time, inclusive of those such as the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Persons and the Declaration on the Importance and Value of Universal Museums. These articles, documents and declarations will be laid over a conversation that critiques a simple narrative for repatriation and its long-term results for museum institutions as ever-political entities.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Kristiane Janeke
Museums as ambassadors and political players?
Impulses for German-Russian relations

Study of history and Slavonic studies in Bonn, Berlin and Moscow

Since 2008 freelance historian, curator, museum adviser, cultural manager

Before projects at international exhibitions and museums in Berlin, Karlsruhe, Dresden, USA, Russia, 2006-2008 Director of the German-Russian museum Berlin-Karlshost

2010-2013 Minsk / Belarus

Research on intercultural communication and German Russian cultural exchange

Museums as ambassadors and political players?

Impulses for German-Russian relations

German-Russian relations are not at their best. Recently, the Snowden affair, tightened controls of the political foundations, and continuous discussions about the development of the civil society and the human rights situation in Russia have been straining the [mutual] relationship. Even the otherwise always prospering business community complains about decreasing turnovers and in the cultural sector rifts are clearly visible despite claims to the opposite by the German state-minister for cultural affairs.

History shows that such periods of estrangement have repeatedly occurred in the past in spite of a generally good relationship. The low point of course was the catastrophe of German policy of extermination in East Europe during the Second World War. This tragic period is documented by the German-Russian museum in Berlin-Karlshorst. It is, besides the Allied Museum, a unique institution of international museum cooperation in Germany. The importance attributed to the German-Russian relationship by the German Federal Government is shown by the fact that it is one of the very few museums fully financed by the Federal Government.

Using this as a starting point I shall explore the role museums can play in international relations. Can museums actually influence, possibly even improve them and contribute to their stabilization? And if so, how? My assumption is that a strengthening of museums in culture- as well as in foreign policies can contribute to the taking up of controversial issues and to offer innovative platforms for discussions. This may result from the specific function of museums as informal places of learning and education as well as media of democratization. Perceiving museums more strongly as political locations they can give important impulses for politics and society.

This talk will examine this thesis in three steps using the German-Russian relations as an example with a sidelong glance at the US. An inventory of the museum field (1) will show how the museum reflects the achievements as well as the problems of the specific fields of cooperation even beyond culture (2). In a last step (3) will be developed tools and methods out of the unique institutional context of museums that can contribute to the improvement and steadying of the relations. This would require a re-evaluation of the German-Russian museum, the activation of the "German-Russian museum dialogue" and the realization of common projects concerning current political and social issues as for instance migration, participation, inclusion, conflict of generations, development of the urban space, cultural education and national heritage. Instructive stimuli on that matter are offered by American museums.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Dr. Wolfgang Eichwede, Dr. Britta Kaiser-Schuster, Corinna Kuhr-Korolev, Ulrike Schmiegelt-Rietig
Research Project: Russian Museums during World War II

Dr. Wolfgang Eichwede, Germany

Wolfgang Eichwede, born 1942, is a prominent historian and until 2007 he was the tenured professor of the Department of Politics and contemporary East European History at the University of Bremen, Germany. Founding rector of the Research Centre for East European Studies (Forschungsstelle Osteuropa – FSO) at the University of Bremen in 1982 and acting director until 2008, the Institute has amassed during this period one of the world's richest and largest archives of the Eastern European (and Russian) alternative cultures in the second half of the 20th century. (Wolfgang Eichwede (ed.): Das Archiv der Forschungsstelle Osteuropa. Bestände im Überblick: UdSSR/Russland, Polen, Tschechoslowakei, Ungarn und DDR. Stuttgart 2009) His research focuses on the Soviet and Russian social and cultural history to the present day, along with numerous publications. After the unification of Germany in 1990, Eichwede also delved into the issues and questions of so-called "looted art", particularly to investigate the losses of the USSR (Union of Socialist Soviet Republics) during World War II. He is the vice president of the German Society for Eastern European Studies (DGO) as well as winner of national and international awards. Eichwede currently writes a history of “Samizdat-Cultures in the Soviet Union after Stalin” (cultures outside of censorship) for the Yale University Press, USA. Furthermore he supervises a research project regarding the fate of Russian museums and their collections during the war (1941-1945).

Dr. Britta Kaiser-Schuster , Germany

Study of European and East-Asian History of Arts, Philosophies and Psychology in Heidelberg and in Berlin (FU). After the awarding doctoral degree worked from 1993-1995 as a scientific research assistant and scientific curator in different Berlin Museums, from 1995 till 1999 as an exhibition curator and author, 1996 Scholarship of the Getty Foundation for the History of Arts and Humanities. From 1999 working in the Cultural Foundation of the German States as a Director for Fine Arts of XX – XXI centuries.

Development and managing of many projects, like German Information Centre for Cultural Support (2000 – 2007), Restoration Studies (with J.P.Getty Foundation, 2001 – 2005), F.-Möller Scholarship Program for Russian art historians (together with Foundation of Dm. Likhachev, 2000 – 2007), series of conferences „Cultural Cooperation in Europe - Creating an International Network for Cultural Cooperation“ (2002-1005), “ Arsprototo” – Journal of the Cultural Foundation, KUR-Program for Conservation and Restoration Objects of Arts (together with Cultural Foundation of the German Government). From 2007 German-Russian Museums Dialogue (with Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz), from 2009 Adviser of German-Russian Library Dialogue (with the State Russian Library for foreign literature named after M.-I.-Rudomino, Moscow, and State Library of Berlin).

A member of different committees, like: 2004-2012 Advisory Board of Broehan-Museum Berlin, from 2006 National Committee „Conservation of Cultural Property, from 2007 „European Network on Research Program applied to the Protection of Tangible Cultural Heritage (HERITAGE-NET)“.

Corinna Kuhr-Korolev, Germany

PhD in history, is a senior researcher in the project “Russian Museums in World War II”. Research interests include the social and cultural history of the Soviet Union. She wrote her dissertation on the history of Soviet Youth in the 1920s (published as “Gezähmte Helden – Die Formierung der Sowjetjugend”). Results of a project at Bochum University on “Justice and Power - From Brezhnev-Years to New Russia” will soon be published.

Ulrike Schmiegelt-Rietig

Born 1966, art historian/historian, focusing in European commemorative culture, history construction, history of photography, cultural goods in World War II; curator, long-term experiences in museum and exhibiting, cooperation in various large scale exhibition projects.

Research Project: Russian Museums during World War II

The spoils of war, the consequences of looting, and destruction of cultural goods are crucial to the museums in Russia and Germany and their history until today. On both sides museums have thus become platforms of national politics, which is more often than not stuck in particular legal opinions. Focusing on the well-being of cultural goods, museums repeatedly have been the victims of this status quo. One primary goal of the moment is, to elucidate the fate of what was lost. This makes a bilateral cooperation of Russian and German museums more important than ever, a cooperation that has to consist in an exchange of knowledge and joint research.

Today our knowledge of whereabouts of cultural goods originating from German museums in Russia is quite improved, compared to the state two decades ago. The situation is different in the other direction: Despite impressive efforts of documenting losses of Russian institutions, many questions remain open and preconceived notions of the whereabouts of Russian cultural goods dominate over objective analysis.

This must change, and to give a new positive signal the Kulturstiftung der Lдnder has thus initiated a research project about the history of Russian museums during World War II. Its focus is on a series of six “case studies” which examine museums in Northwest-Russia, namely the imperial palaces of Peterhof, Pavlovsk, Tsarskoe Selo and Gatchina and the museums of Novgorod and Pskov. In-depth research in German and Russian state-, regional- and local archives, private collections and untapped resources such as photography and film footage promised a deeper understanding of what exactly happened in these areas.

One goal is to distinguish singular incidents from a more general, underlying structure, the analysis of which aims to foster a more specific investigation of the fate of individual cultural goods. For example, insights into the extent of plundering by German soldiers open new ways to research particular objects, especially in an era when such goods have increasingly begun to circulate on an European scale. Tracking individual objects thus demands a broad observation of the art market and careful provenance research.

Manpower and research is generously funded by the VolkswagenStiftung. However, to succeed the project relies on the support of the local museums, and a permanent exchange of information. It thus understands itself as a contribution to broader attempts at bilateral cooperations, and, hopefully, to a normalized cultural exchange in the future.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Dr. Britta Kaiser-Schuster
German-Russian Museums’ Dialogue (DRMD): Research on Cultural Objects removed from Germany to the Soviet Union between 1945 and 1947

Study of European and East-Asian History of Arts, Philosophies and Psychology in Heidelberg and in Berlin (FU). After the awarding doctoral degree worked from 1993-1995 as a scientific research assistant and scientific curator in different Berlin Museums, from 1995 till 1999 as an exhibition curator and author, 1996 Scholarship of the Getty Foundation for the History of Arts and Humanities. From 1999 working in the Cultural Foundation of the German States as a Director for Fine Arts of XX – XXI centuries.

Development and managing of many projects, like German Information Centre for Cultural Support (2000 – 2007), Restoration Studies (with J.P.Getty Foundation, 2001 – 2005), F.-Möller Scholarship Program for Russian art historians (together with Foundation of Dm. Likhachev, 2000 – 2007), series of conferences „Cultural Cooperation in Europe - Creating an International Network for Cultural Cooperation“ (2002-1005), “ Arsprototo” – Journal of the Cultural Foundation, KUR-Program for Conservation and Restoration Objects of Arts (together with Cultural Foundation of the German Government). From 2007 German-Russian Museums Dialogue (with Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz), from 2009 Adviser of German-Russian Library Dialogue (with the State Russian Library for foreign literature named after M.-I.-Rudomino, Moscow, and State Library of Berlin).

A member of different committees, like: 2004-2012 Advisory Board of Broehan-Museum Berlin, from 2006 National Committee „Conservation of Cultural Property, from 2007 „European Network on Research Program applied to the Protection of Tangible Cultural Heritage (HERITAGE-NET)“.

German-Russian Museums’ Dialogue (DRMD): Research on Cultural Objects removed from Germany to the Soviet Union between 1945 and 1947

Knowing history and provenance of its own collection is gaining raising importance in the museum activity as well as in the field of publicity. German museums are focusing their attention on the period after Hitler came to power. This leads to conducting studies of the art objects formally belonging to Jewish, Eastern and Western European collections currently located in German public collections. At the same time, German museums, especially the museums of East Germany, are still feeling responsible for their works of art lost in 1945-1947.

Since 2008, German–Russian Museums’ Dialogue (DRMD) supports the museums in tracking the fate of their losses through research studies. The project is designed as an independent investigation effort aiming to reconstruct the history of German museums and art collections. History of displaced works of art is understood as a part of European and Russian–German history, without intent of the restitution of cultural objects but seeking their availability for public and science.

The project is based on developing a database containing information about the activities of Soviet trophy brigades. They were formed in February, 1943 by the decree of USSR State Defence Committee. Their initial purpose was identification, storage and removal of captured trophies and abandoned weapons as well as other relevant property from the liberated territories. After the Yalta Conference, from April, 1945 the powers of trophy brigades were expanded: they were authorised to collect any kind of assets, including cultural property. In art trophy brigades, officers responsible for finding, recovery, detection and removal of the art objects had been fine art historians, archeologists, museum employees, librarians and professors in their civil life.

DRMD Database documents the activity of trophy brigades in Germany, as well as the work of the Soviet museums and institutions from April, 1945, which had received the displaced cultural objects into their possession. Information about the specific objects of art is listed in the database together with the description of the working conditions of the trophy brigades in the post-war Germany and the operations of allies.

A comparison of the records of the database with the information about contemporary museum funds and with actual information about the losses gives a possibility to identify the cultural property deemed as lost. DRMD considers this knowledge a basic foundation for developing a dialogue about these objects of art, for carrying out multiple projects on inventory, restoration, exhibitions and scientific publications; an opportunity to write a common German-Russian history of the trophy brigades from a shared platform. It’s the mutual study of German and Russian sources based on a joint scientific research that opens us an opportunity for thinking about the history of displaced art in a new way: not as a national loss but as a common intellectual benefit.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Corine Wegener
So Far as War Allows: The Role of Museums in Protecting Cultural Heritage during Armed Conflict


Corine Wegener is Cultural Heritage Preservation Officer in the Office of the Under Secretary for History, Art, and Culture at the Smithsonian Institution, where she coordinates emergency response for cultural heritage threatened by armed conflicts and natural disasters. She has worked on projects to help protect heritage in Syria, Mali, Egypt, Iraq, Haiti and other locations. Before coming to the Smithsonian, Wegener was associate curator of Decorative Arts, Textiles, and Sculpture at the Minneapolis Institute of Arts. During a concurrent twenty-one year Army Reserve career, Wegener mobilized several times, including her last deployment as Arts, Monuments and Archives officer for the U.S. military in Iraq.

So Far as War Allows: The Role of Museums in Protecting Cultural Heritage during Armed Conflict

The recent movie “The Monuments Men” recounts the true story of the Allied Forces’ Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives (MFAA) teams. Many of these men and women were museum professionals who saved cultural property from bombing, provided salvage operations, and restituted looted cultural property to the countries of origin during and after World War II. Most were already serving in the military, but were identified by a special commission of museum professionals for this military duty. How did museum directors manage to use their political influence to convince President Roosevelt to create a special commission to protect cultural heritage in the middle of a war? How did they convince General Eisenhower to order his officers to protect cultural property “so far as war allows”? And finally, how can museums relearn some of those lessons to influence events today? This paper will address these questions and talk about role of museums and museum professionals in the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict.

More than 120 nations are States Parties to the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, a treaty meant to protect cultural property from the type of damage and looting that occurred during World War II. States Parties to the treaty are to plan to protect cultural property against the possibility of war, including the documentation of collections and sites, disaster planning, training of military personnel, and the creation of specialist military teams (like the Monuments Men!) to ensure protection of cultural heritage. Clearly museums have a vital role to play both in times of peace and during conflict. Disaster planning and documentation are part of our normal duties as caretakers and should be taken seriously whether we expect to experience armed conflict or not. Museums can also play a role in training military personnel in their responsibilities under the 1954 Hague Convention and training future Monuments Men. There is also a vital role to play as a venue to support social cohesion, peacebuilding, and conflict prevention. After a conflict, museums can provide a place for preserving memory as well as for dialoguing and reconciliation.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Carolyn Rapkievian
Taking a Stand in a National Museum to Provoke Change in Society

Assistant Director for Education and Museum Programs at the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of the American Indian where she has worked for 20 years developing and overseeing the museum's interpretive projects and departments. Prior to her current position, she held leadership positions in science museums, nature centers, children's museums, as well as history and art museums around the country.

Taking a Stand in a National Museum to Provoke Change in Society

The National Museum of the American Indian has begun to take a proactive role in stimulating inquiry to provoke a change in society. This paper will demonstrate three examples in our efforts to eliminate racial stereotypes, advance awareness of environmental sustainability issues, and introduce the concept of Native sovereignty.

The museum’s recent symposium examining the use of the term "Redskins" by Washington’s football team amplified an issue within the American Indian community. As public attention was focused on the controversy regarding stereotypes and cultural appropriation in sports, national commentary subsequently followed in the popular press. As a result, public awareness was advanced and the country’s conversation about the detrimental effects of cultural and racial stereotyping has been elevated. While the Washington team has not yet changed its name, other sports teams have, due to a heightened understanding of harm perpetuated by derogatory racial insults.

The museum held, in conjunction with former Vice President Al Gore’s Live Earth initiative, the first of an annual program focusing on climate change, global sustainability, and human responsibility. Attended by over 8000 on site, the program reached millions more around the globe via satellite broadcast. The program highlighted observational knowledge (indeed science) conveyed to us by Native peoples who had long worked and lived upon their homelands across the Arctic and elsewhere. This complex ecological knowledge is benefiting science today and the programs at the museum have heightened public awareness of the human-induced origins of climate change. It is hoped that this awareness instigates public political action to change individual and state behavior.

In the museum’s activity center for children, we lay the foundation for understanding political issues facing Native peoples. The center’s matching game positions Native tribal council buildings and tribal flags in parallel with the United States capitol building and the American flag, thus messaging the status of Native nations in the U.S. as sovereign nations. This designation is important in the protection of treaty rights. Native peoples must consistently educate the public, our law-makers, and remind our courts of the historic agreements between Native nations and the United States.

At the National Museum of the American Indian these programs and interactive exhibition exemplify the effectiveness of the museum’s civic engagement efforts. While these examples are focused in scope, in the context of a national museum, they are major steps towards demonstrating an active posture to all the museum's constituents.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Christian Tchuisseu Nana
Museum as powerful connection Institution, and hope for African society

Director of the Blackitude Museum and Art of God Gallery to Yaoundé, Cameroon. He was born in Douala (Cameroun) in 1978 and studied Communication and Arts management. Also he is the General Secretary of ICOM Cameroon, ICOM member since 2008 and regularly takes part in the work and activities of ICOM, whether in Cameroon where I occupy long time ago various positions and roles within the national bureau of the Cameroonian Committee of ICOM, I’m also work today with AFRICOM Representative in Central Africa area and work also with many ICOM International Committee; International Cultural and Art Organization where I have participated at my expense in several meetings and workshops.

I have attended several meetings and workshops with national and international museum and cultural heritage professionals. I participated in contests and share my experience of young professional and Museum Manager in conferences, seminars and professional trainings. This allowed me to bring my modest contribution to the dissemination and promotion of Cameroons Cultural Heritage and even that of the central African region and even international through journals and scientific publications.

Museum as powerful connection Institution, and hope for African society

African collection and object are popular; they are exhibited over the world in the museums, this important artistic, architectural work and activities of the pioneers of African Art was recognize everywhere today, this to show the universal thinking and voice in Art Domain.

African museum have to hold this occasion and opportunities to thinking and review their position. Actually many African country and government associate today Professional of Museums and Heritage to thinking and brings their experiences and expertise to make well know and develop Heritage and Museum Sector.

African Museums Professionals in many case held this occasion and opportunities gave by their government to renew and develop legislation, Museum and Heritage law, to make it dynamic and attractive, this to bring many people in the Museum or makes many people being interested by their heritage. That’s the Case of Cameroun and much country in Central Africa area.

Recent studies made there show us a dynamic and reel engagement of the population and visitors of those place, even in Urban than in regional Museum, Private or state Museum. This to argue that; the development of African countries will depend also to the place gave to development, promotion and diffusion of this memories and history. To makes peoples comes to those place and land learn more about those collection, objects and history they know.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Sean Kelley
The Role of Museums in Stimulating Dialogue On Pressing Social Issues and Promoting Civic Action

Senior Vice President, Director of Public Programming. Eastern State Penitentiary Historic Site, Philadelphia.

Sean Kelley has run all public programming at Eastern State Penitentiary since 1995. He is currently focused on developing programming to address the enormous growth in the US prison population since 1970, and the causes for racial disparities within that population. 
He visits active prisons, writes critically about prison museums and sites of detention, and speaks widely on the responsibility of museums to address complex and painful subjects.

Mr. Kelley has developed an extensive training program for new tour guides at Eastern State, and remains heavily involved in training and evaluating all tour staff. He is currently overseeing a shift away from a traditional guide-led model of public tours to a dialogue-based approach.

Mr. Kelley developed an award-winning audio tour that incorporates twenty-seven former inmates and officers, heard by more than half a million Eastern State visitors to date. He has curated history exhibits such as “ALONE: Solitary Confinement in American Prisons, 1829 to Present” and “The William Portner Memorial Exhibit on Jewish Life at Eastern State.” He has overseen the selection of, and curated, 74 site-specific artist installations at Eastern State to date.

Mr. Kelley also oversees the historic site’s special events, including its haunted house fundraiser. That event generates in excess of $1 million net revenue annually.

Mr. Kelley has served as adjunct faculty at Rutgers University, teaching Museum Studies in the graduate program in Public History.

The Role of Museums in Stimulating Dialogue оn Pressing Social Issues and Promoting Civic Action

Over 185 institutions worldwide form the International Coalition of Sites of Conscience. Our members are diverse: they range from long-standing historic sites to emerging memory initiatives, commemorate a variety of histories, and address a wide range of issues. They are united by their conscious commitment to connect past to present, memory to action. They assist the public in drawing connections between the history of the sites and contemporary implications by stimulating dialogue on social issues and promoting humanitarian values. This paper discusses the programs of the Ellis Island Immigration Museum and the Eastern State Penitentiary that are based on these principles.

The Ellis Island Immigration Museum’s dialogue program, Speaking of Immigration, allows participants to explore the immigration experience of Ellis Island and invites them to compare similarities and differences in immigration today. Conducted with New Jersey City University, it takes college students on interactive tours of Ellis Island, focusing on different aspects of immigration during the island’s heyday. Each tour’s historical narrative provides a starting point for facilitated dialogue in which students consider immigration experiences and views about current immigration policy. Students are encouraged to formulate their own ideas, listen respectfully to different viewpoints, challenge prejudices, and consider ways to take civic action in their communities.

Eastern State Penitentiary is the best place to address the current state of the U.S. prison system. The U.S. has the highest rate of incarceration in the world and has no national prison museum. For twenty years this site has hosted art installations addressing contemporary issues, political content and the role of race, justice and privilege. Starting in 2012, it challenged itself to engage every visitor as a central element of a visit. A three-dimensional bar graph has been constructed, illustrating the skyrocketing number of prisoners in U.S. prisons; ranking all nations by both rate of incarceration and by use of capital punishment; and illustrating the racial breakdown of the U.S. prison population over time. A new interactive exhibit will elicit visitors’ personal connections to these historic changes, encourage reflection, and support true dialogue. Key mistakes have been made and will be discussed freely.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Elsa Bailey and Wendy Meluch
Science Museums Partner to Bring Community Input into Exhibition Development about Current Research

Dr. Elsa Bailey’s career path of more than 25 years has encompassed a rich and varied set of experiences, including positions as an educator in schools, in science and history museums, work in the fine arts, and evaluating educational projects and programs across these settings. She holds a BA in Psychology, from the City University of New York; an MS in Education, from Bank Street College of Education in New York; and a PhD in Educational Studies (domain of Museum-School Partnerships), from Lesley University in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

She has specialized in the learning of young children, professional development for teachers in schools, professional development for museum educators, science education, art education, museum-school partnerships, and working with underserved and diverse audiences. After working as an educator for a number of years, Dr. Bailey turned to evaluation and research working with Lesley University’s Program Evaluation and Research Group. After completing her PhD at Lesley University, she established her own consulting practice, Elsa Bailey Consulting. Dr. Bailey is now based in San Francisco, but her evaluation projects and educational consulting work are carried out across the United States and in international locations.

Dr. Bailey has been an invited author, speaker, and workshop presenter both in the United States and internationally. Topics for these invitational presentations include methodologies for museum exhibition and program evaluation; learning in informal education environments; professional development of museum educators; and museum-school collaboration. She had served on a number of advisory boards, and is a frequent contributor to the literature in informal education.

Wendy Meluch, USA

Wendy Meluch began her deep association with museums as a student, volunteer and staff member during the 1970’s. Focusing on the visitor experience though evaluation and visitor studies weaves together Ms. Meluch’s professional background in educational travel, performing arts, non-profit development, and museum management. For the past 17 years, she has consulted with a wide variety of institutions to help them bring the visitor voice into exhibition, program and facility development. Her clients include historic houses, parks, zoos, science centers and all manner of museums. Her special interests in the field include visitor motivation and satisfaction, serving populations with special needs, and bilingualism in the museum environment.

Ms. Meluch holds an MA in Museum Studies from San Francisco State University, and BA's in Anthropology and Tourism Management, and a Certificate of Latin American Studies from Michigan State University. She is a contributing author to several online and print publications, and has spoken and presented workshops on visitor studies internationally.

Science Museums Partner to Bring Community Input into Exhibition Development about Current Research

Current dialogue in the museum field revolves around finding effective ways to show evidence of museums’ impact on their communities and audiences. An opportunity to conduct research around this impact has presented itself in connection to an evaluation project we are undertaking in the state of New Mexico, a state located in the Southwest of the United States. The University of New Mexico has received a grant from the United States National Science Foundation to build capacity in scientific research in their state. The focus of this initiative centers on research relating to "Sustainable Energy Development." The University has partnered with three science museums in Albuquerque New Mexico to help support public outreach for this initiative. These museums will be developing and presenting one or more exhibitions relating to this research, and then travel these exhibitions to other museums in the newly formed New Mexico science museums network. New Mexico is a state with a very diverse population and cultures including Hispanic, Native American Indian, and other groups. This population presents a very wide range of differences among its citizens in both economic circumstances and educational attainment. A significant segment of this population is spread across many regions remote from the main cities. As we are deeply interested in using this exhibition development as a focus for investigating museums’ influence in the educational, cultural, and economic development in their communities, we have decided to approach this research through the lens of community impact. We foresee three front-end studies to investigate these areas of inquiry with the following stakeholders: public, teachers, and scientists. In the public study, we will survey a sample of the public to assess their attitudes and knowledge base around the topic of Energy, and also assess their awareness and use of informal science museums in their regions. We will do a similar investigation with the teacher study, but it will be framed to elicit the formal school perspective. For the scientist study, we will gather information on what scientists believe the public should know and understand about their energy research, and also what drives their interest to do this research. Issues around career development in the sciences and opportunities to generate dialogue around sensitive issues relating to energy research and development will be included in the front-end evaluation. Findings from the front-end evaluation will inform exhibition development to assure its relevance to multiple perspectives surrounding this project.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Nina A. Borisova
Politics Influence on the Technical Museum Exhibits

She worked in different telecommunication companies as an engineer, researcher, developer, manager. She is science director of the A.S.Popov Central.

Museum of Communications from 2003 till present, and doctor at the Bonch-Bruevich Saint-Petersburg University of Telecommunications.

Politics Influence on the Technical Museum Exhibits

According to the common definition, the museum exhibit is a cultural value having qualities or special characteristics making it necessary for society to preserve, study and represent it to the public. Within "Museum and Memory Preservation" subject it is offered to discuss, whether politicians have any influence on a museum exhibit. There is no definite answer to this question in regards of museum exhibits from the technical museum’s collections. On one hand, no politician and no politics can affect "historical memory" parameters of a technical object: design, material, principle of the operation, etc. On the other hand, museum exhibits and collections have to be studied and publicly presented in the most different ways (in the form of scientific publications, exhibitions, expositions, etc.). Here the probability of subjective representation of museum exhibits/collections is high, including a factor of political influence.

The report features politics influence on only one of the directions - permanent exhibiting of museum exhibits. Based on the analysis of permanent expositions of a number of domestic and foreign technical museums (mainly telecommunication museums) two indisputable aspects of political influence are highlighted: politics affects, first, the way the exposition is structured, secondly, the "political coloring" of the way some exhibits are presented (as a rule, it is far not the most valuable exhibits).

The third aspect of influence is disputable. It is related to the international tendency to use the museum exhibits relating to inventions as means of developing pride for your country. For example, the words "We are the first in the World" are the keynote of many technical museum’s expositions devoted to the radio invention in different parts of the world. In many countries of the world there are their own "Popovs", "Gagarins" etc. In reality, many technical devices and pioneer projects appeared due to the efforts of a great number of scientists. Step by step each of the scientists made a contribution to the common cause of their creation and development. The most interesting part is that expositions of the country having no domestic scientist in the "pioneer team of the world" having invented any technical device, demonstrate only the inventions of the scientists from the allies (countries close in political views, national roots, etc.).

The conclusion is made that politics influence on the technical museum exhibits is widespread in Russia, as well as in other countries.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Erin Bailey
Revealing Queer, an analysis of politics, narratives and community roles when exhibiting LGBTQ histories in US museums

Guest Curator, Museum of History & Industry, Seattle, WA USA

Revealing Queer, an analysis of politics, narratives and community roles when exhibiting LGBTQ histories in US museums

In the United States museum professionals have been discussing queer representation in museums for decades. However, over the last decade the US has undergone a major shift in national politics in

support of the Gay Rights Movement. As a result there has been a steady increase in queer themed

exhibitions in US museums. When thinking about queer representation in museums, professionals

continue to develop best practices for exhibiting political. This paper will explore changes in US politics, making connections between the political shift in support of the Gay Rights Movement and the increase of queer themed exhibitions. Specifically examining how shifting political opinions empower museums to engage political topics, the power of the museum as a platform for writing political and contemporary histories while developing approaches to overcome the sparse and inconsistent records of these histories.

Moreover, this paper will use the partnership between Queering the Museum Project (QTM) and the

Museum of History & Industry (MOHAI) as a case study to rethink the politics of museum exhibitions and discuss the transformation of the museum into a forum for civic engagement. This partnership was forged to produce Revealing Queer, an exhibition that charts how regional queers have changed national history, how Seattle supported the national Gay Rights Movement, and how Seattle built its reputation as a liberal and "gay friendly" region. One of the goals of this exhibition is to connect queer experiences and non-queer experiences to deepen our understanding of queer identities and the role of the museum in displaying the impact of activism and political change on society.

Revealing Queer seeks to change the way museums represent queer topics, develop, and

explore political community driven exhibition narratives. When engaging with political histories that have been sparsely collected museums release their expert authority and rely on the lived experiences of community members to write their histories into the archive. As a practice based project QTM utilized a Community Advisory Committee model comprised of 15 queer organizations who directed and informed the in the Revealing Queer exhibition. Using the Community Advisory Committee model this partnership transformed MOHAI into an instrument for social change while providing an opportunity to explore and reflect on contemporary issues. This methodology and partnership validates the importance of trust when working with new audiences and exposes the need to maintain transparency, authenticity, and equity when engaging political topics.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Donna J Keren and Karin Grafstrom
Culture is a Persistent Traveller

Donna J. Keren, PhD, USA

Senior Vice President, Research & Analytics, NYC & Company

Donna J. Keren joined NYC & Company, New York City’s official tourism, marketing and partnership organization in 2002. She directs one of the travel industry’s most comprehensive and forward-looking research programs. Research & Analysis at NYC & Company is the office of record for vital statistics on the

city’s tourism industry. At NYC & Company Dr. Keren has developed the annual cultural audience survey.

Designed to identify key drivers and challenges across all cultural and arts activities, the study has supported member organization marketing initiatives and programming insights since 2009. In 2011, she led the NYC effort to provide the country’s first representative survey of the economic impact of same-sex marriage on the city’s economy. Other innovative projects include a focus on borough and neighborhood tourism insights and developing proprietary econometric models for visitor volume and tracking Dr. Keren has over 30 years experience in strategic and market research. Previously, she was VP, Social Trends & New Markets for Strategic Surveys International, a provider of custom research and market intelligence to clients in financial services, communications, the arts and culture, and major not-for-profit organizations. In the aftermath of 9/11, she helped the American Red Cross of Greater New York identify service needs and worked with Lower Manhattan organizations on community recovery. During the 1990s she ran a consultancy dedicated to research and technical assistance for non-profit and public sector agencies. A former Professor of Anthropology/Latin American Studies at Temple University (Philadelphia), she is Adjunct Associate Professor at the School of International & Public Affairs at Columbia University and is an adjunct member of the graduate faculty at the Tisch Center for Hospitality, Tourism and Sports Management at

New York University and regularly joins the faculty at the University of Barcelona program in Tourism Studies. She also shares her experience with organizations such as ARF (Advertising Research Foundation), The Brand USA, TTRA (Travel & Tourism Research Foundation), the Manhattan Chamber of Commerce, and Grantmakers in the Arts as well as speaking at international conferences. Most recently she was in

Montevideo, Uruguay for the 3rd Annual International LGBT Tourism Conference as the country celebrated the passage of a national marriage equality act. A native New Yorker and Lower Manhattan resident, she received her Ph.D. from the City University of New York Graduate School.

Karin Grafström, USA

Market Research Manager of The Metropolitan Museum of Art since 2005. At the Museum she oversees visitor research, market research, and audience projections. Her work encompasses research for exhibitions and the curatorial and operating departments of the museum.

Previously, Ms. Grafström worked for the New York City Mayor’s Office of Media and Entertainment, where she structured ground-breaking tax legislation to support NYC’s film and television industry. She has also held major business development positions for the National Broadcasting Corporation, including two years based in Hong Kong.

Ms. Grafström holds a Bachelor of Music and a Masters of Business Administration with an emphasis in international strategy. She continues to study piano and ballet, and serves on the board of Poets & Writers. In 2001, she received a writing prize from The Economist for an essay on travel in the 21st century. Ms. Grafström lives in New York City with her husband.

Culture is a Persistent Traveller

The critical relevance of museums and culture to our increasingly mobile and connected world may be looked at relative to people’s desire to understand their own and others’ cultures. Artistic achievements are tangible evidence of the thinking and history different cultures. The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s collections represent many cultures of the world, thus our mission embraces the heritage of all our visitors, both New York City’s diverse local communities as well as international visitors from 190 countries.

This report pulls together a picture of the inter-relationship between cultural assets and tourism. The Met’s 6 million annual visitors come half from the local area and half from much further away – including one-third international. Tourism sustains us, and the corollary is true—the museum is an important factor in tourism. As the most visited cultural attraction in the City, the Met is an anchor of its $55.3 billion tourism industry. A series of annual studies quantify the museum’s value by measuring visitor spending and the direct tax impact of its visitors from out of town, and their crossover attendance at other cultural venues in NYC.

The value of the museum’s cultural contribution to NYC is seen in a deeper look at research done for the reopening of the Met’s Islamic galleries, which identified people’s desire (and need) to give context to their own lives by learning more about their own culture. This was highly relevant for the local-area Muslim communities, with many visitors drawn to the Museum for the first time to understand more about their identify and cultural history through the artworks on view. Likewise this exposure to new aspects of their heritage was important for visitors from abroad, both for travelers from regions represented by the galleries, and for others in our tourism base whose origins trace back to Islamic regions. Three years later, visitation to these galleries continues to be high.

We further explore how the array of cultural institutions in New York City contributes to the social and economic life of the city, particularly as it relates to its place in the local and national tourism economy, and the combined economic value of tourism and cultural assets.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Pino Monaco
Our American Journey: study on how to engage youth throughout the United States in creating a new narrative of America

Associate Director of Program Evaluation, Smithsonian Center for Learning and Digital Access. As the Associate Director of Program Evaluation at SCLDA, Dr. Pino Monaco oversees the Smithsonian’s professional development on program evaluation and audience research. His group works on the integration of informal and formal learning, cyber-learning and inclusion of under-represented audiences.

Magdalena Mieri, USA

Director of the Program in Latino History and Culture at the National Museum of American History

Jennifer Brundage, USA

National Outreach Manager, Smithsonian Affiliations, Smithsonian Institution

Christopher A. Glavas, USA

National Outreach Manager, Smithsonian Affiliations, Smithsonian Institution

Our American Journey: study on how to engage youth throughout the United States in creating a new narrative of America

Do people consider museums as representatives of their cultural and social identities? Is the use of new media sufficient to create participatory experiences? This study addressed how youth (grades 8-12) perceived participation in "Our American Journey" (OAJ), a multi-year signature program for the Smithsonian Institution (SI), which will result in a new narrative of America and its emergence out of many diverse cultures. One of the OAJ major undertakings is to engage youth in participating in creating this new narrative; supported by the network of institutions affiliated with the SI throughout the country, youth in diverse communities will produce digital narratives of their own migration experiences. These will inform a future exhibition, programs, online presence and other offerings of OAJ. Furthermore, the project will serve as a vehicle for strengthening youths' skills in research and critical thinking.

After surveying more than 170 Smithsonian Affiliates for interest in and capacity to engage youth, five communities were selected for a deeper analysis - four of them through interviews and focus groups with different members and youth and one by piloting the production of students’ self-documentary projects, through a collaboration between an Affiliate museum and a high school. The study revealed that youth’s level of interest in the topic of migration varies -when moving away from very recent personal experiences with migration, interest tends to decrease. The issue of sensitivity emerged – youth and adults do not feel necessarily comfortable in sharing their experiences. To help overcoming these concerns, an active participation of communities, and especially youth, in creating the learning experiences was strongly advised. Affiliates stressed that engagement with communities and their co-creation of required a significant investment in resources, particularly time, to build ongoing trust between their organizations and migrant communities. Other resources emerged as important to the project, including expertise in recruiting target audiences and helping youth tell difficult stories, providing incentives to encourage audiences to participate despite challenges, technology specific to the project, and staff time. While through the pilot, students successfully connected to their families, to the Affiliate museum, and to a broader understanding of what it means to live in this nation, questions about the balance between quality of the works and students’ participation remain open. Matrixes, which can be used to screen readiness of museums to engage youth in similar projects, will be shared.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Alexander Drikker
Museum and a demographic-democratic revolution

1960-1966 – student, Department of quantum electronics, Leningrad Institute of precise mechanics and optics, 1966-1970 – engineer-researcher, Leningrad Institute of Radioelectronics, 1970-1973 –postgraduate student, Institute for problems of information transmission, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Moscow, 1974-1986 assistant professor of the course of General physics, Leningrasky Institute of textile industry and design.

1987-2014 head of sector Databases, senior researcher, State Russian Museum, St. Petersburg

2005-2014 Full Professor of the Department of Museology and protection of monuments, Institute philosophy, St. Petersburg State University.

PhD (Candidate of philosophical Sciences), Dr. Hb (Doctor of culturology).

Area of scientific interests: Evolution of culture, Information technologies in a Museum, Information Aesthetics, Museology, Visual culture, Social Psychology of Art, Futurology of culture.

Museum and a demographic-democratic revolution

The today’s Museum has proved very popular in today's culture.The today’s Museum is ever more strongly distanced itself from its predecessor – the Museum of the totalitarian period. The contemporary Museum proclaims an openness, tolerance as the main values. These statements raise the fundamental question of the appointment, the role of the Museum in culture and society.

The Museum boom and subsequent radical reorganization of the Institute Museum are began after the Second world war. The main feature of the actual cultural context can be integrally represented as a global democratization. Powerful stream pulls a Museum in modern mass culture. A global culture directs today the development the Museum in the first place to the increasing influx of visitors. Socio-cultural advantages of the "Museum for all" are obvious.

Museum, of course, created for all. Its original and a basic function is a social function. It is the organization in public space the conditions to conducive the overcoming of biological isolation, to join to the treasures of culture, to eternal values. At the same time, the obvious bias towards mass undermines the ontological base of the Museum, which is supported on the balance, the opposition of individual and social components, of cultural memory and its actual reflection. However the sociality in the Museum is rather general meaning.

The dominant trend of democratic culture removes the selection criteria of the cultural values. Such a clear orientation of the Museum to request of democratic spectator inevitably leads to simplification of language for dialogue of viewer and Museum. On this route a Museum meets the threat to lose the historical place and role, prestige of the Institute, to dissolve in a multitude of cultural and entertainment neoplasms of the global competitive environment.

It is necessary to find the right balance between by openness, by accessibility of a Museum for democratic viewer and by the authority consolidation of the Museum, of cultural values, of their absolute priority. This balance can be maintained in the framework of a separate «classical» Museum, or in the framework of the diversity of museums (in their today's unlimited multitude) of various types.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Alfred Roch Kiki
The museum: a social transformer

Born on August 9th 1984 in Adjarra (Benin). It has multidisciplinary training which concerns several areas. He holds a Master's degree in Community Development at the University of Abomey Calavi in Benin and a University Degree in "Funding for Cultural Projects" at the Senghor University of Alexandria (Egypt).

Manager of several projects on the Heritage, actually, he is working at: "Museum of Adjarra" in Benin as

Cultural Mediator since August 2nd, 2013 to present. Author of several papers, he participated in major scientific meetings around the world and also written in the international media such as www.haiti-observateur.net ; www.reseauhem.ca ; www.divainternational.ch and www.togoportail.net

The museum: a social transformer

Museums were born in the late 18th century, the Enlightenment, the great archaeological discoveries of the first gatherings of art whose purpose was to prevent their dispersion. While fulfilling its regulatory obligations are: the preservation and safeguarding of tangible and intangible heritage, museums have undergone radical changes in recent years. Thus, contemporary museums have become more creative and a public place. Some even want more and more specialized as children's museums or botanical museums performing various functions in the process of building the company.

Currently, in the world, museums are opened to a wider audience and offer in exchange a variety of services and also in different languages. Training center par excellence, museums are structures of knowledge dissemination. Scientific area whose understanding causes mobilization disciplines such as sociology, anthropology, archeology, history and economics. They thereby contribute to the social formation of individuals and communities, essential vehicle for the beginnings of a sustainable development. As an illustration, we quote the program "Museum for Development" implemented by the EPA. Also, new ways of management and operation of museums contribute to anchoring the concept of heritage in community level particular youth. This is a social transformer whose policies could also be used to achieve their goals.

In addition, the museum activity reinforces a mindset of belonging to local community level and therefore raises their participation because the heritage that abounds museum evokes facts that challenge them. The transforming of the museum also notes through income-generating activities that develop the territories housing museums and therefore strengthen the local economy and allow families to easily meet their needs. The example of the city of Porto- Novo is a museum city is evidence of development of tourism.

Museums transform not only men but also everything that surrounds them. The image of the city, its management or its structure is sometimes based on its potential museum. As examples we discuss the "Adjarra Museum" (Benin), the music museum of Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso), the "Fouta Djalon museum of Labe" (Guinea) or the heritage box of "Bandjoun" (Cameroon).

Our study would be to first understand the perception that people have of the concept of museum collecting the popular and scientific evidence. Then we will explore the root causes of the renaissance of the museums. Finally, we show how the museum is more social transformer.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Mr. Li Yuhua
Preliminary Discussion on the Functional Role of Geosciences
Museum in the Construction of Ecological Civilization

Graduate degree, was born in April, 1955. He is now deputy director of the Geological Museum of China, executive director of the Chinese Museums Association, member of the International Council of Museums. He is experienced in the field of museum management and researching. His major thesis includes "the achievements exhibition in the resources and environment fields for celebrating the sixtieth anniversary for the founding of the People's Republic of China", "Introduction of the Geological Museum of China", "Proposals for protecting the environment during the development and utilization of mineral resources", and "Preliminary discussion on the functional role of geosciences museum in the construction of ecological civilization".

Preliminary Discussion on the Functional Role of Geosciences Museum in the Construction of Ecological Civilization

With the rapid development of industrial civilization, environmental issues have become a global issue. People calls for ecological civilization. Geosciences museum should put their resources and professional advantages into full play to support ecological civilization education for the sustainable harmonious development of mankind and nature.

First, the implementation of ecological civilization education in geosciences museum is an inevitable requirement of social development. The development of industrial civilization brought human society the brilliant material achievements, meanwhile led to very serious ecological consequences, hindering the healthy development of human civilization. The ecological civilization education, whose core is the sustainable development of human civilization, promotes the stroke of the whole society ecological civilization. As a social educational organization, geosciences museum should undertake the responsibility for ecological civilization education.

Second, geosciences museum has unique advantages and conditions to implement ecological civilization education. The function of geosciences museum has determined it as a fabulous education basis. The direction of social education development in geosciences museum provides favorable conditions to education. With its continuous improved professional standards and its growing social function, geosciences museum provides the public with a lifelong learning classroom.

Third, geosciences museum should all-round and multi-level play educational function of ecological civilization. Display manner ecologicalization of exhibits is the basis of ecological civilization education; explanation adhering to the ecological idea is the important form of ecological civilization education; science popularization activity is the necessary means of ecological civilization education; green Eco environmental facilities and services is the effective support and ensure of ecological civilization education.

ikonka_pdf

Download


Despina Catapoti, Nikolas Papadimitriou
Museums, Social Memory and Public Discourse: a European Perspective

Lecturer in Cultural Theory and Digital Culture, Department of Cultural Technology and Communication, University of the Aegean. Mytilini, Greece.

Despina Catapoti read History and Archaeology at the University of Athens, Greece (1995). She was awarded an MA in Archaeology and Prehistory (1997) and a PhD in Archaeology (2005) from University of Sheffield. Since 2008, she teaches at the Department of Cultural Technology and Communication, University of the Aegean, Greece. Her research and teaching interests centre on cultural theory, history of science and epistemology, with particular focus on the history and philosophy of archaeology. Currently, she works at the intersection of digital technologies and the broader cultural heritage field, with the aim of assessing the impact and contribution of New Media on archaeological/historical heritage outreach and engagement.

Nikolas Papadimitriou, Greece

Curator of Antiquities,Museum of Cycladic Art, Athens, Greece.

Nikolas Papadimitriou graduated from the University of Athens in 1993 and did his MA and PhD in Ancient History and Archaeology at the University of Birmingham, UK. In 1999 he taught courses on Greek Archaeology at the University of Birmingham, and in 2002-2003, he worked a consultant on cultural affairs at the Hellenic Ministry of the Aegean as. Since 2003, he has been working as a Curator of Antiquities at the Museum of Cycladic Art, Athens, Greece, where he has curated the museum’s permanent exhibition of Ancient Greek Art (2009), several temporary exhibitions, the on-line presentation of collections at the museum’ website www.cycladic.gr, and presentations in international cultural portals (Europeana, Google Art Project, Claros). In 2011-2012, he worked at the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, as museology curator of the exhibition «Ancient Cyprus-Cultures in Dialogue», (presented at Brussels, October 2012 - March 2013). He has received scholarships and grants by the Greek State Scholarship Foundation, the University of Birmingham, and the Maison des Cultures du Monde in France. In 2000, he won the Michael Ventris Award for Mycenaean Studies by the Institute of Classical Studies, London, and in 2011 he was a Stanley J. Seeger Fellow at the Centre for Hellenic Studies, Princeton University.

Museums, Social Memory and Public Discourse: a European Perspective

Currently, a growing body of literature acknowledges that museums constitute institutional mechanisms that have been shaped with direct reference to the nationalist and colonialist regimes of the period of modernity. An equally large number of studies stresses that in today’s postmodern world, we have reached a stage where museums can finally break free from long established, albeit highly exclusive modes of categorization and move towards the realm of "open text", where different themes, memories, scales of analysis, materialities, social groups, and identities may be allowed space for interplay. In Europe, the foregoing developments have led to the formation of two distinct museological strands: (a) a post-nationalist strand, aiming at promoting a revised version of the ‘small-scale’ (e.g. community and/or site-specific museums) and (b) a post-colonialist strand, which strives for a new ontology of the "large-scale", based on the concepts of trans-nationalism and cultural hybridity (e.g. Museum of Europe-Brussels, Museum of European and Mediterranean Civilizations-Marseilles.).

The present paper recognizes the major impact of contemporary theoretical discourse on our (museological) understanding of representation, but also forewarns against the prevailing curatorial policy of European museums to produce, display and promote a highly spatialized image of the past. The tendency to associate knowledge of the past with specific geo-political territories constitutes a mode of thinking that remains deeply embedded within the paradigmatic tradition of the 19th century. And although it was precisely under the influence of the modernist paradigm that 19th century museums revolut

ionized the way societies viewed history, for 21st century museums to trigger a new revolutionary perspective, what they ought to achieve first is their paradigmatic reconfiguration. A step towards this direction (and thus worth investigating as a possibility) would be to shift analytical attention from the ‘spatial backbone’ of the past to the political anatomy of ‘memory games’. To exemplify the above point further, this paper will exemplify how and why contemporary museums have to revise their public role by increasing accessibility to the interpretive process as opposed to the interpretive outcome and by committing themselves to the transformation of data records into an object of, and available to, public discourse.

ikonka_pdf

Download


PRUDNIKOVA ALISA YURIEVNA
When opportunities become challenge: new NCCA

In my paper I will analyze a case of the latest changes with the National Centre for Contemporary Arts (NCCA) in Moscow. NCCA is the first Russian government-based institution for contemporary art was established in Moscow in 1994. In 2012 it was proposed to move the construction of a new building for the NCCA to Khodynkskoe Pole with the architectural project submitted during an open international architectural competition.

The NCCA’s ambition is to become a global museum and exhibition center which will not only obtain a new building in Moscow shortly but will also form a national cultural policy via its network. Even today the NCCA is a unique intellectual production resource with a powerful network of agents in the Russian regions. The resources of this network must be evident at the new Museum. On the other hand, today’s Russian museums are not integrated into the global cultural space. Thus the NCCA should build horizontal national and international links to integrate Russia into a global context.

Museums of contemporary art are generators and game-changers. In the 1990s, the opening of regional NCCA branches was a historic event and saved many local art communities. Active, enterprising people in those regions needed institutional support. Being independent centers for contemporary art with their own programs, priorities and specific natures yet at the same time a part of the national network, the branches enjoyed a dual status, with all the attending opportunities. Buildings and levels of art communities differ, but these institutions have been art environment drivers for some time. For instance, in Yekaterinburg the NCCA no longer has a monopoly on the field of contemporary culture due to new private foundations, artist-run spaces and big festival projects inspired by the NCCA. Everywhere the NCCA is a unique platform for interdisciplinary projects realized jointly between Russian and foreign partners.

Museum attendance depends mostly on location but beyond the Arbat and Red Square, art policy is the main thing. The NCCA’s program has to become less generous and, with concentrated resources, make any particular event bold, audience-oriented and producing new knowledge and meaning. Everything that takes place at the NCCA needs to be a must-see event. Therefore it is important for the future building to be flexible so that it doesn’t limit a potential art program on account of its form.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Laura Demeter
Picking up the Pieces: Traces of the Communist Past in Bucharest and Berlin

Сurrently enrolled at the Institute for Advanced Studies in Lucca as PhD Student in the Field of Management and Development of Cultural Heritage. Here she is conducting her research on mechanisms of heritigisation of the communist past, a comparative study between Romania and Germany.

In 2001 she graduated in the field of History in Romania at the Bucharest University. A second degree was completed in 2007 the field of Art History and Italian language at the Ruhr- University in Bochum, Germany. Additionally she received her Masters at the Technical University in Cottbus, Germany in the area of World Heritage Studies (UNESCO).

Her area of interests encompass from mechanism of heritigisation, value creation, museum studies, preservation, conservation, to memory and identity building discourses, Communism, Eastern Europe.

Picking up the Pieces: Traces of the Communist Past in Bucharest and Berlin

Starting from the statement within the discourse on heritage formation that not everything is heritage nor will end up acquiring the status of heritage, but anything has the potential to become heritage, in my presentation I try to identify the mechanisms involved in the process of constructing heritage by focusing on a particular aspect of it, namely on the process of value creation and value assessment.

As identified by Peter Howard heritage is not ‘a static phenomenon’ nor a ‘product’ and assets do not hold automatically the intrinsic status of heritage, until they are identified and recognised as such. People and their motivation define what heritage is. Therefore constructing heritage is merely the result of an evolving process of value adding, selective and subjective of anything that someone whishes to preserve or to collect. ‘The heritage process depends on the values that people invest in the heritage phenomena on the different kind of ways in which things are viewed.’(Howard,Heritage Management, Interpretation, Identity, 2003, p.12)

Within the discourse of value creation I am interested in looking at how particular assets evolve in time and space from the position of being devoid of positive characteristics and recognition and even being considered ‘rubbish’, to acquiring or even reacquiring the heritage status.

Therefore I will higlight how discourses on the relation with the past are transformed into actions and how Eastern European societies are currently dealing/engaging with the physical/material presence of their communist past. More precisely, I am interested in identifying the mechanisms involved in the process of creation of ‘heritage’ when particularly dealing with the material assets of the communist past.

One central problem to be presented is how historical assets are negotiated and constructed as culturally valuable and how are they being incorporated, perceived and preserved as components of the national cultural heritage.

Since the amount of material presence from the communist past is enormous, I will focus my presentation on two particular sites of historic interest, namely I will look at the destiny of the collections housed previously by the Museum of Communist Party in Bucharest and Museum für Deutsche Geschichte (MfDG) in Berlin.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Julia Kantor
The Paradigm “Historical truth - historical memory - historical policy” in Russia. Museum aspect.

Doctor of Historical Sciences, Councilor of the Director of The State Hermitage Museum, Professor of the Department of General History (Russian State Pedagogical University of A. Herzen). Author of more than 100 scientific papers on different topics: the history of Stalin's repressions, the Soviet-German and Polish-Soviet relations in the first half of the Twentieth century, the fate of art treasures during the World War II.

Dr. Kantor is the author of the books: "War and Peace of Mikhail Tukhachevsky "(M.:"Vremya", 2005), "Baltics: War without Rules. 1939-1945 " (SPbII RAS, "Zvezda Magazine Publishing House", 2011), "The triangle Moscow - Warsaw - Berlin" (St. Petersburg: Evropeysky Dom, 2011, co-author), "Sworn Friendship. The secret cooperation between the USSR and Germany. 1921-1939"(M.: "ROSSPEN", 2014).

Also she is an author of the special courses focused on the history of international relations in the interwar period, the militarization of the totalitarian regimes in the first half of the Twentieth century, the fate of art treasures during the Second World War, the relations between the individuals and the totalitarian state in the Twentieth century), These courses were successfully tested and adopted in the universities of Russia and abroad.

Since 2008 Dr. Kantor is an expert of international research projects under the Russian Union of Museums and the Foundation of PrussianCultural Heritage (Germany), devoted to the fate of art treasures during the Second World War II.

Since 2013 Dr. Kantor is the expert of interdepartmental working group to perpetuate the memory of victims of political repression under the Council of Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation.

Dr. Kantor combines her scientific activity with journalism.

The Paradigm “Historical truth - historical memory - historical policy” in Russia. Museum aspect.

The historical policy forming public opinion is based on the facts and mythologies. Often they use a manipulation of the facts, for the sake of current political issues to create a public perception of the past favorable for the political elites. "Those who own the past have the future as well." The mythologems are often the derivatives of propaganda and historical memory. Nevertheless, this memory is not identical to the sum of individual "memories." The shift from the facts towards the ideological clichés is the characteristic sign of the Soviet approach to the representation of history, including the museum sphere. The museum exhibitions became the victims of an ideological approach to history and arts quite often. In modern Russia the relapses of “Soviet" are occurred from time to time. The abundance of historical facts that have become available in last years, often able to disorient the viewer accustomed to the one-dimensional approach to the museum narrative. Today the museums are the mediators of the both objective and ambivalent vision. Therefore, the museums are becoming professionally "at risk": on the one hand, being mostly government agencies they depend on the vector of historical politics, on the other hand the unprepared audience may misunderstand them. In modern Russia museum is a "buffer" between the government and society. The multitude of “painful points" in the history of XX century is the cause of multifaceted activities and conflicting interests. The museums has a chance to become a platform for full disclosure of these issues and to perform an educational function. The modern museum is capable of using the whole range of available documentary- historical, arts and crafts, and other visual means. The paradigm of "historical truth - historical memory - historical policy" itself can be the subject of reflection and displaying in museum.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Gulchachak Nazipova
Museums and Memory Preservation

General manager of the National Museum of the Republic of Tatarstan, Doctor of Historical Science, vice-president of ICOM Russia, initiator and head of association of the museums of Tatarstan .

Dr.Gulchachak Nazipova was born in February 1961. She graduated the historical faculty of the Kazan State University. She is a museum employee with 20 years of experience and works in National Museum of the Republic of Tatarstan since 1984.

Dr.Gulchachak Nazipova is the supervisor and organizer of many exhibition projects, including intermuseum exhibitions, organizer of scientific and practical conferences and museum forums.

She is the author of more than 100 scientific publications, dedicated to the history of cultural life of Kazan and Volga-Ural region, museology of Tatarstan and problems of current museum activity.

Museums and Memory Preservation

Re-exposition of V.I. Lenin and A.M. Gorky museums in Kazan: is it old idols returning!?

Museums of two idols of the twentieth century are being recreated in Kazan: the V.I. Ulyanov-Lenin House Museum and the Maxim Gorky Literary Museum.

Lenin and Gorky are the different historical figures, but they lived in Kazan almost at the same time - in the 1880's. They were united also by the epoch, which gave them, for various reasons, the definition of "proletarian", and canonization of their images in the Soviet period was resulted by opening of their museums. In Kazan, Lenin and Gorky museums were established in the 1930s, they became popular and were frequently visited, the government supported them. During perestroika period the museums’ buildings became dilapidated and their expositions were outdated. Museums attendance decreased gradually.

These are two very different museums, but taking into consideration whose names are being returned to the cultural space of the city, the creators of new expositions face the same problems.

First of all, a number of scientists, public figures, journalists and politicians question the necessity and validity of memorialization of these and other former Soviet idols. The difficulty lies also in the fact that the modern attitude to V.I. Lenin and A.M. Gorky personalities and work and to all associated historical period is ambiguous and includes both enthusiastic and unconditional reverence and total rejection, often sharply negative assessment or complete ignorance and unwillingness to know.

Secondly, a specific problem arises in recreation of a series of exposition, as material source content is very important. In Soviet times, the main identified authentic memorabilia and manuscripts of V.I. Lenin and A.M. Gorky were concentrated in the central archives and museums of the country, and mainly copies dominated in the expositions of regional museums. Therefore, the necessity to include originals in such expositions remains to be a pressing problem, which can be solved on the basis of new research about these personalities.

In such situation it is very difficult, but still necessary to develop methodologically and practically to build the thematic structure of expositions, so that they become attractive for modern visitors. But now there is a tendency to actualize Maxim Gorky’s creative works and to give positive assessment to his image. New facts, being disclosed during historians’ researches of V.I. Lenin’s activities, exacerbate negative attitude towards him in society. Therefore, it is obvious that the creation of new exhibits in these two museums cannot have the same solutions.

But it is museums, which can and must show not only an example of humanistic, positive approach to reflection and interpretation of life and activities of Lenin as well as Gorky, but also to identify new sources of expositions and submit relevant topics, interesting and useful for the modern society.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Pauline van der Zee
The sorrow of Belgium. Ethnographic museum collections and their colonial past

General manager of the National Museum of the Republic of Tatarstan, Doctor of Historical Science, vice-president of ICOM Russia, initiator and head of association of the museums of Tatarstan .

Dr. Gulchachak Nazipova was born in February 1961. She graduated the historical faculty of the Kazan State University. She is a museum employee with 20 years of experience and works in National Museum of the Republic of Tatarstan since 1984.

Dr. Gulchachak Nazipova is the supervisor and organizer of many exhibition projects, including intermuseum exhibitions, organizer of scientific and practical conferences and museum forums.

She is the author of more than 100 scientific publications, dedicated to the history of cultural life of Kazan and Volga-Ural region, museology of Tatarstan and problems of current museum activity.

Museums and Memory Preservation

Re-exposition of V.I. Lenin and A.M. Gorky museums in Kazan: is it old idols returning!?

Museums of two idols of the twentieth century are being recreated in Kazan: the V.I. Ulyanov-Lenin House Museum and the Maxim Gorky Literary Museum.

Lenin and Gorky are the different historical figures, but they lived in Kazan almost at the same time - in the 1880's. They were united also by the epoch, which gave them, for various reasons, the definition of "proletarian", and canonization of their images in the Soviet period was resulted by opening of their museums. In Kazan, Lenin and Gorky museums were established in the 1930s, they became popular and were frequently visited, the government supported them. During perestroika period the museums’ buildings became dilapidated and their expositions were outdated. Museums attendance decreased gradually.

These are two very different museums, but taking into consideration whose names are being returned to the cultural space of the city, the creators of new expositions face the same problems.

First of all, a number of scientists, public figures, journalists and politicians question the necessity and validity of memorialization of these and other former Soviet idols. The difficulty lies also in the fact that the modern attitude to V.I. Lenin and A.M. Gorky personalities and work and to all associated historical period is ambiguous and includes both enthusiastic and unconditional reverence and total rejection, often sharply negative assessment or complete ignorance and unwillingness to know.

Secondly, a specific problem arises in recreation of a series of exposition, as material source content is very important. In Soviet times, the main identified authentic memorabilia and manuscripts of V.I. Lenin and A.M. Gorky were concentrated in the central archives and museums of the country, and mainly copies dominated in the expositions of regional museums. Therefore, the necessity to include originals in such expositions remains to be a pressing problem, which can be solved on the basis of new research about these personalities.

In such situation it is very difficult, but still necessary to develop methodologically and practically to build the thematic structure of expositions, so that they become attractive for modern visitors. But now there is a tendency to actualize Maxim Gorky’s creative works and to give positive assessment to his image. New facts, being disclosed during historians’ researches of V.I. Lenin’s activities, exacerbate negative attitude towards him in society. Therefore, it is obvious that the creation of new exhibits in these two museums cannot have the same solutions.

But it is museums, which can and must show not only an example of humanistic, positive approach to reflection and interpretation of life and activities of Lenin as well as Gorky, but also to identify new sources of expositions and submit relevant topics, interesting and useful for the modern society.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Ardjuna Candotti
The Hidden History of the Indonesian and the Dutch: Government Politics within Museums?

PhD candidate at the University of Amsterdam and independent museum professional working in the field of museum education and exhibition making for several museums in Amsterdam. Candotti holds a MA in Museum Studies and BA in Cultural Sciences, both from the University of Amsterdam. At present, her affinity with the traditions of (re) presentation in museums within the context of 'mutual' heritage, (trans) nationalism, cross-cultural transfers and urban symbolism has led to a comparative PhD study on the narrative and classification of Hindu Buddhist antiquities in museums in Europe and Asia. Candotti also worked as a lecturer museology and teaching assistant in cultural history of Rome for the Department of Art, Religion and Cultural Sciences at the University of Amsterdam.

Ajeng Ayu Arainikasih, Indonesia

S.Hum., M. Arts, lecturer of Museum Studies at the Department of Archaeology Universitas Indonesia. She had her bachelor degree in Archaeology from the Universitas Indonesia, and her master degree on Art History Curatorial and Museum Studies from the University of Adelaide, Australia. Ajeng Ayu Arainikasih is also the founder and director of Museum Ceria, an Independent Museum Educator in Jakarta, Indonesia, which specialized in designing fun educational programs for kids and adults within museums. She is also a museum consultant for many museums in Indonesia.

The Hidden History of the Indonesian and the Dutch: Government Politics within Museums?

The cultural legacy of a shared past between Indonesia and the Netherlands contains a complex history with a diversity of stories, perspectives and memories. Both countries have their own versions of a shared past to tell, but these (hi)stories will always be challenged by each other and other discourses on the past. So, how are these (hi)stories perceived in contemporary politics and represented in museums in both countries? Which (hi)stories are told or not told and why? And what is the role of personal stories within this?

This paper therefore explores the hidden (hi)stories of colonial relations between Indonesia and the Netherlands within the realm of making memory in Indonesian and Dutch museums and the different perspectives on the representation of this shared past, in particular the period of the Indonesian war for independence (c. 1942 – 1950s). It analyzes the political conditions of these hidden (hi)stories in the historical narratives that are to be seen in Indonesian and Dutch museums.

The paper argues that the absence of different perspectives and (hi)stories can be explained with reference to tendencies in the politics of historiography. And that interests in a political power field influences whether there’s recognition for personal experiences and stories within a countries’ history and are to become part of the museum narrative or not. It examines the different historical and current perspectives from both countries towards their common past, the complex agency role of museums and the (in)visibility of political, military histories and civic personal histories in museums like PETA Museum in Bogor Indonesia and Museum Bronbeek/Indies Center of Remembrance in Arnhem the Netherlands.

It concludes that history presented in museums are not only determined by the questions and interests in the present, but that these hidden (hi)stories also show the politics of the governments of particular country on which (hi)stories to tell and remember and which (hi)stories to forget.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Dr Leila Koivunen
The Establishment of the National Museum of Finland and the Silencing of "Exotic" Cultures

Historian, holds a PhD in the School of History, Culture and Art Studies, University of Turku, Finland. She has specialized broadly in the history of European interaction with and perceptions and representations of the non-Western world during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Her doctoral dissertation dealt with the British imperial imagination and the mechanisms of visualizing Africa (published by Routledge 2009). Her recent research project focuses on the history of collecting and exhibiting "exotic", non-Western material cultures in Finland between the 1870s and 1910s. The study assesses the role and impact of various kinds of exhibitions in the production and distribution of knowledge concerning non-Western cultures.

The Establishment of the National Museum of Finland and the Silencing of "Exotic" Cultures

In 2013, two major museums of foreign ethnography in Finland – the Museum of Cultures and the Kumbukumbu Mission Museum – closed their doors from the public. The decision to end all exhibition activities was in both cases a result of a poor economic situation which had aroused questions such as What should be done with the non-Western artefacts in Finnish collections? What is their function and relation to the national collections? Who has the responsibility to put them on display and how should this be done?

Such questions were not new. In this paper, I will show how similar issues were dealt with when the National Museum of Finland was being established and opened to public in January 1916. At that time, Finland was still part of the Russian Empire, but gained independence a year later in December 1917. Obviously, the museum project was of a major importance for a young nation in defining and presenting its new identity. The collection which formed the basis of the new museum was, however, problematic as a considerable part of it consisted of non-Western artefacts. They had been collected and donated by sailors, sea captains and other travelers during the previous decades and centuries. This part of the collection reflected an older idea of a museum which the new nation builders wanted to omit from the new museum. Thus, the establishment of the Finnish National Museum represented a significant break from an older tradition of collecting, turning the focus solely on the history of the Finnish nation. This paper discusses the policy and the practices of silencing the voices of non-Western, "exotic" cultures. It also sheds light on a simultaneous development of the idea of the Finno-Ugric past which moved the boundaries between the Finns and the people from other cultures.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Anjuli Grantham
Exhibiting Russian America: Alaska Museums Responding to the Russian Past

Curator of Collections and Exhibits at the Baranov Museum in Kodiak, Alaska. She is a public historian who specializes in the history of maritime Alaska. She received her Master's degree from the University of South Carolina. She serves on the Alaska Historical Society Board of Directors.

Exhibiting Russian America: Alaska Museums Responding to the Russian Past

From the mid- 18th century until 1867, the state of Alaska was a Russian colony. The legacies of Alaska's Russian past are indisputable, yet also the cause for continued conflicts, both in terms of how Alaskan's view themselves and how historians and museum professionals interpret the Russian era. Russian fur traders violently altered the Native communities which they encountered, and thousands died due to illness, starvation, and warfare. Yet, at the same time, Orthodox missionaries and Creoles (those of mixed Russian/ Native heritage) served as cultural intermediaries who brought Christianity and literacy to regions of Alaska. Both the Orthodox church and Creoles were systematically denied rights once the US purchased Alaska. Many Alaskan Creoles denied their Native heritage and identified as Russian to survive in the new American Alaska, including the founder of the Alaska State Museum and others who established early museums in Alaska. This not only had political implications, but it impacted the historiography and interpretation of the Russian past in Alaska, as well.

In this paper, I will examine the ways in which Alaska museums have engaged in, shaped, or been altered by the shifting interpretation of Alaska's Russian past. For much of the 20th century, there was the tendency to glorify the Russian past, as brutal and disruptive as it was to Alaskan Natives. Yet, since the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971, the tides have changed. The Russian period was no longer interpreted in a positive manner, but rather as the ''Russian Dark Ages,'' as Native groups started resusitating traditional practices, reclaiming Native heritage, and eschewing Russian roots. Yet, there is the sense that public sentiment about the Russian past is shifting again. How have Alaskan museums responded to these changing views regarding our Russian past? This paper responds to the subtheme, ''Museums and the Making of Memory.''

ikonka_pdf

Download

Ekaterina Teryukova
Museum, Politics and Religion: the State Museum of the History of Religion’s Case

Graduated from the department of history of arts of the Saint-Petersburg State University, studied in the post-grade course of the State museum of the history of religion with the theme “Dogma and social activity of English speaking Protestants of Saint-Petersburg in the beginning of XX century”. Since 2001 lecturer in the department of the philosophy of religion and religious studies of the Saint-Petersburg State University. Since 2007 – Deputy Director on science work of the State museum of history of religion.

Museum, Politics and Religion: the State Museum of the History of Religion’s Case

Religion is one of the most powerful tools of ideological influence used by authorities and one of the universal elements of human culture as well. Past and present give a number of examples of it. It’s not surprising that at one of the most tragic period of the Russian history (in 1930-s) such unique museum as the State Museum of the History of Religion was founded. This period was characterized both by religious persecution and dynamic cultural policy. These activities were reflected in related processes: closure of churches accompanied by sacred objects’ withdrawal and opening of new museums. Around 250 new museums were organized in the Soviet Russia in 1919 - 1927. In 1925 The League of Militant Atheist started the campaign for anti-religious museums. In 1928 there were about 600 museums of this type. They were difficult to classify according the modern museum classification. As the complexity of the religious phenomena specificated the multiplicity of a religious research so the religious objects displaying had to find its specific forms and complex character.

The organization of the Museum of the History of Religion in Leningrad was part of this process. Unlike of antireligious museums, it intended to make a comparative typological exposure of ritual and sacred objects of various peoples. Its goal was to present religious phenomenon as it was. Museum as a part of Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Union became a centre of the soviet study of religion. This probably was a reason of its good fortune. It wasn’t closed during WWII as it happened to other antireligious museums.

The paper features the history of the Museum of the History of Religion and its permanent exhibition as a reflection of changing political history of Russia. Replacements of the national and international policies, ideologies, concepts of economic development, value systems influenced concept and content of the museum permanent exhibition.

Following the principles of scientific objectivity and comparative historical analysis of religion allowed to the Museum to perform its mission for all the period of its existence. Originally it was important to eliminate mass illiteracy, to keep historical and art heritage, to spread scientific knowledge as the powerful ideological tool for the construction of new socialist society. Modern stage influenced by globalization and migration process is specified by the need to form the culture of conscience tolerance based on exploration of the history and cultural traditions of various people.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Karla Vanraepenbusch
History museums and the politics of commemorating: the Great War centenary in Flanders

Has a master degree in history (Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium) and a master degree in museum studies (Université de Neuchâtel, Switzerland). Previously, she did an internship at the Musée d'histoire de la Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland, and worked at the Musée international d'horlogerie, Switzerland.

Since 1 March 2014, she is a PhD student associated to the Center for Historical Research and Documentation on War and Contemporary Society (Cegesom, Belgium), in the framework of the research project "Recognition and Resentment: Experiences and Memories of the Great War in Belgium". Her research, under the supervision of Chantal Kesteloot (Cegesoma) and Laurence van Ypersele (UCLouvain), concerns material memory traces of the First World War in Antwerp and Liège.

History museums and the politics of commemorating: the Great War centenary in Flanders

In August 2014, hundred years will have passed since the beginning of the Great War. Invaded despite its neutrality, Belgium has been hit severely by the German atrocities against the civilian population as well as by the horror of the trenches. It is no wonder then, that these next four years commemorations have been planned fitting of this milestone in Belgian history and in its collective memory.

Already in 2011, the Flemish government, that represents the Dutch-speaking northern region of Belgium, has launched an action plan to commemorate the Great War Centenary in Flanders. At the heart of this plan are five strategic investment projects, meant to be ‘gateways’ into the battlefield region. Four existing museums telling the story of the First World War will be refurbished, and a wholly new fifth visitor centre will be created. The subsidies allocated by the Flemish government result thus in a new dynamic for museums that represent the history of the Great War in Flanders.

Often applauded abroad for being ahead of other countries and regions in time and in ambitions, the Flemish action plan to commemorate the Great War centenary has been largely criticised by Belgian historians. These consider the Flemish action plan to be promoting a region that did not yet exist at the time. They also stress that the war hit the entire Belgian society, even tough the main battlefields were situated In Flanders Fields. According to these historians, the Flemish government is (ab)using the commemorations of the Great War centenary to fuel its identity and to promote that identity internationally.

The five museums that form the heart of the Flemish action plan are free to develop the content of their new permanent display as they wish. However, the political context of commemoration in which they are being developed is disquieting, especially since the past transmitted by the Flemish government seems to differ from the past transmitted by academic historians. Which past do these museums transmit to their visitors, and how do they represent history? To what extent are they politically exploited by the Flemish government? These are the main questions that I wish to tackle in my paper.

In order to answer these questions, I will analyze the Flemish action plan in detail, as well as the critical response of several Belgian historians to this plan. I will also examine the representation of the First World War in the permanent display of the five museums chosen to be the strategic investment projects of the Flemish government: In Flanders Fields Museum, Memorial Museum Passchendaele 1918, Talbot House, Museum on the Yser, and the Ganzenpoort visitor center.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Orit Engelberg-Baram
“Constructing Glocal memory” - Collective Memory of the Holocaust in Global and National Perspective in “Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance Authority - Yad Vashem” and the “United States Holocaust Memorial Museum”

Independent curator whose work centers on historical and social subjects. As a researcher, she is specializing in Jewish and Israeli history, and various aspects of collective memory.

“Constructing Glocal memory” - Collective Memory of the Holocaust in Global and National Perspective in “Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance Authority - Yad Vashem” and the “United States Holocaust Memorial Museum”

The social need to remember the past and to pass it on to future generations is universal, and museums take an important role in it. My research revealed the ways in which two national museums mediate the past, transform meaning, construct collective memory and shape contemporary identities. It compared two museums that were initiated by the largest Jewish communities in the world: The Israeli “Yad Vashem” and the “United States Holocaust Memorial Museum” (USHMM). It showed how the narrative that is represented in one museum is different from the other, even though both deal with the same historical events.

Unlike preserved European commemoration sites, which are located in the spaces where the Holocaust happened, Yad Vashem and USHMM are not geographically connected to the Holocaust. They are not anchored in history or geography so much as in the ideals and political interests that generated them. Both museums outline a dichotomy of “there” (Europe) and “here” (Israel or the United States). In Yad Vashem “there=exile” and “here=redemption” and in the USHMM “there =dictatorship” and “here= Democracy”. Both museums shape a narrative in which “there” was the disaster and “here” is a solution to it. In this sense, they are much alike: both nationalize the memory of the Holocaust, and present it as the ultimate “other” to their country.

The research discusses the political messages through an analysis of the components of the exhibitions; the museums’ locations and their meanings; their architectures and circulations of audiences; their approach to “universal lessons” of the Holocaust versus “particularism”. For example, it examines those subjects: who is included in the “victims group”? [Jews, Sinti and Roma, Jehovah witnesses, Homosexuals etc.] and how are they portrayed?; how is Anti-Semitism represented; the perspective that the visitors are expected to adopt [the victims’? perpetrators’? Bystanders’? Liberators of the camps?] And most significant, what is “the solution” offered by each of the narratives [national revival in Israel? anti-fascist politics? Humanist activism? pursuing democratic values? tolerance to different ethnic groups? etc.] In addition, the research reveals documents and protocols from the planning processes.

The importance of the research lies in the fact that it deals with subjects that are at the heart of the identity discussions of two Jewish societies: the American and the Israeli. The research looks at the broader context, of constructing national ethos and of global cultural changes and shift in values in western society.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Karen S.Franklin
Looted Jewish Cultural Property-Issues of Ownership and Return

Director of the Family Research Project of the Leo Baeck Institute in New York City, currently serves as Chair of the Memorial Museums Committee of ICOM. Mrs. Franklin is a past chair of the Council of American Jewish Museums and served on the boards of the American American Association of Museums and ICOM-US. She is a member of the Advisory Board of the European Shoah Legacy Institute as a member of the Judaica and Jewish Cultural Property Working Group.

Looted Jewish Cultural Property-Issues of Ownership and Return

In recent months a number of news stories related to Nazi-era looted art have focused public attention on these issues. They include the discovery of hundreds of artworks hidden in Munich and Salzburg by Cornelius Gurlitt, son of the Nazi art trader Hildebrandt Gurlitt, and the release of The Monuments Men, a Hollywood film starring George Clooney.

This attention has resulted in wider scrutiny into the provenance of artifacts held by museums today. However, the public, press, and even museum professionals, are often at a loss to negotiate the complex legal and moral issues with regard to ownership and return. This is especially true for Judaica and Jewish cultural property, an area where individual ownership and communal property issues have never been fully addressed. This topic should be of interest as part of the larger conversation about ownership and restitution of communal property.

In 2009, the Holocaust-Era Assets Conference held in Prague, resulted in the Terezin Declaration, endorsed by 47 countries. The European Shoah Legacy Institute, with five working groups, was founded to carry out the recommendations set out by the Declaration. The Judaica and Jewish Cultural Property Working Group was tasked with developing best practices in this area. This paper will focus on the critical and unique issues related to looted Judaica, and the efforts of the working group to create guidelines and best practices.

The working group, chaired by Dr. Felicitas Heimann-Jelinek, is today comprised of museum and archival professionals from Austria, Greece, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, Germany, Israel, Belgium, and the United States. The group has initiated an ambitious project to create an online, virtual exhibition on the topic of what is to be done with objects of Jewish material culture plundered, expropriated, or displaced from individual families and communities, where ownership is in question. Though the project is not scheduled for completion until 2016, a sample of the types of cases it covers demonstrates the complexity of the issues, and illustrates the value of clarification for all involved.

  • Questions of legal ownership of Jewish ceremonial objects prior to WW II;
  • Judaica that were looted from communities that no longer exist;
  • Judaica that once belonged to known individuals;
  • Judaica which belonged to unknown prewar individuals
  • Judaica which belonged to unknown prewar communities;
  • Judaica looted from Jewish Museums, archives, libraries (both Jewish and non-Jewish)

Selected cases will be explored in this session.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Jörg Skriebeleit, Ulrich Fritz
Exhibiting Memory Former concentration camps as modern museums of recent history
From mementoes to museums - Concentration camp memorial sites in custody of the Bavarian Memorial Foundation

Jörg Skriebeleit, Germany

Studies: Cultural Science/European Ethnology at Eberhard-Karls Universitiy Tübingen and Humboldt University Berlin. Focus on Contemporary History, Holocaust, Praxis and Theory of Museums and Exhibitions.

Promotion/PhD at the Center for Research on Anti-Semitism at the Technical University Berlin (Prof. Wolfgang Benz)

Profession: Since 1999 Director of the CC Flossenbürg Memorial Site.

Various publications about the history of Flossenbürg CC, culture of memories and topics of museology (such as: Das Außenlager Bayreuth des KZ Flossenbürg. Wieland Wagner und Bodo Lafferentz im „Institut für physikalische Forschung“, Bayreuth 2003; Erinnerungsort Flossenbürg, Akteure, Zäsuren, Geschichtsbilder, Göttingen 2009; Erinnerung ausstellen, Berlin 2011)

Scholarships at Universities in Berlin (Humboldt), Marburg, Munich (LMU) and Vienna.

Responsible for the new conception of the Flossenbürg memorial site.

Main-Curator of various historical exhibitions, newest: „what remains – The aftermath of the Flossenbürg Concentration Camp“, recently honoured with the price such as “Best Museum in Bavaria 2011/2012”, “Special Commendations of the European Museum of the Year Award 2014”

Scientific Advisor at various memorial projects (such as: Memorial fort he murdered jews of Europe, Berlin; Memorial Mauthausen, Memorial Submarine-Bunker Valentin, Bremen), “Memorial to the victims of the Munich Massacre in 1972”

Ulrich Fritz, Germany

M.A., literary scientist, historian, curator of exhibitions, work for Siemens Humanitarian Relief Fund (1999-2001), Flossenbürg Concentration Camp Memorial (2001-2010), since 2011 research assistant for the Bavarian Memorial Foundation (project “Subcamps in Bavaria”). Still working on a dissertation project concerning the subcamps of Flossenbürg concentration camp (TU Berlin, Prof. Wolfgang Benz). Numerous articles on the Flossenbürg camp complex, death marches, memorial culture, exhibitions.

Exhibiting Memory Former concentration camps as modern museums of recent history

The exhibition of crimes at their original sites in itself represents a fundamental break with the presentation, auratization and authentication aims that have accompanied the developmental history of European museums since their beginnings. Ever since the piles of corpses were reconstructed in Buchenwald, all attempts to find forms for a multifaceted expression of realities in the camp have operated within a tension between fact and fiction, moralization and musealization.

Concentration camp memorial sites are multiple sites. They are modern Golgothas, cemeteries, sites of family histories, open-air museums, places of learning, and historical sources – both for the period of the concentration camps themselves and for the following decades of dealing with their historical existence. However, concentration camps have a further and increasingly important function: they are also museums.

Defining them in this way presents the conceptualization of exhibitions with particular challenges. The issue today is not so much one of providing authentic proof of the horrors that occurred there as of generating a reflexive and discursive presentation of as well as commentary on these horrors. The great task facing exhibitions at concentration camp memorial sites consists in making history and historical processes decipherable in all their complexity, in naming actors, providing changes in perspective, and facilitating empathy with the victims without superficial moralization.

The history of exhibitions at concentration camp memorial sites in Germany is a history of a decades-long struggle to establish them, and their ideology-critical and self-reflexive reconception following reunification. They have a potential to enlighten that which needs to be conserved and repeatedly renewed, particularly in relation to the history of the reception of the camps. If they succeed in this endeavor, concentration camp memorial sites and their exhibitions will become more than merely special forms of museums whose capacity to function at a museological level is still occasionally questioned by classic historical museums. In terms of their presentation of the historical process they could in fact acquire an avant-garde character.

From mementoes to museums - Concentration camp memorial sites in custody of the Bavarian Memorial Foundation

After the end of World War II, former concentration camps were converted to various uses – commemoration of the victims was but one objective. In Germany, the Cold War defined the attitude towards these symbolically charged places. The German Democratic Republic turned former camp sites like Buchenwald into National Memorials. In the Federal Republic of Germany, however, state attention to former camps for a long time was limited to their legal protection. The first exhibition at Dachau was opened in 1965, under pressure from former inmates and few German activists.

After the German re-unification, the Federal government reshaped and funded National Memorials in the former GDR. The Federal Government´s national program for Memorial sites includes memorials of both the National Socialist dictatorship and the Socialist regime in the GDR – a constant stimulus of controversy.

In 2002, the state of Bavaria devolved the concentration camp memorial sites at Dachau and Flossenbürg to the newly founded Bavarian Memorial foundation. The Bavarian minister of culture and education heads its board of trustees. Institutional funding is provided by the state of Bavaria and, since 2009, by the Federal Government. The Foundation´s main aim is the preservation and development of the memorial sites as “witnesses of the crimes of National Socialism, as sites of remembrance of the victims and as sites of learning for future generations” (art. 2). The statutory list of tasks comprises all classical functions of museums, like the presentation of exhibitions, and collection and documentation of artefacts.

Thus, the law depicts a paradigm shift: Concentration camp memorial sites in Germany, once confined to their role as mementoes, are increasingly perceived as contemporary museums and as institutions of political education. Public interest and professional recognition keep growing: An estimated 700.000 visitors, largely from abroad, attend the Dachau memorial each year. Flossenbürg memorial was nominated for the 2014 European Museum of the Year award. Besides, memorial sites have become key places of political representation, as was recently shown by the visit of German Chancellor Merkel at Dachau (2013).

In the last years, the Bavarian Memorial Foundation has focused on projects outside of the former main camps, namely new exhibitions at the sites of former subcamps, and the servicing of 75 concentration camp cemeteries all over Bavaria. The Foundation´s growing network covers memorial sites all over Europe, communal and national political representatives, museum experts, committed citizens and, of crucial importance, the survivors and their families.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Dr. Franziska Nentwig
Museums and Politics – Post War History in Museums in Berlin. A snapshot from the Perspective of the Stadtmuseum Berlin

General Director and Management Stiftung Stadtmuseum Berlin. Dr. Nentwig Education and Professional Experience: Academic studies at Carl Maria von Weber University for Music, Dresden1984-1988 and dissertation at Dresden Technical in 1993.Long-time Assistant to the CEO at The Hygiene Museum Dresden. From 2002 Director Manager of The Johann Sebastian Bach Birthplace Eisenach. 2006 Director General Berlin City Museums Stiftung Stadt-museum Berlin). Memberships Offices amongst others):Board member of Landesverb and der Museen zu e.V. LMB); Vice Presidentof ICOM Germany; Advisory Member of Haus Brandenburgisch-Preussischen Geschichte; Member cultural advisory panel tothe Brandenburg Cathedral Foundation Domstift Brandenburg), UNESCO Committee(Berliner Komitee fur UNESCO-Arbeit V.), UNESCOCommittee(Berliner Komitee fur UNESCO-Arbeit V.)

Museums and Politics – Post War History in Museums in Berlin. A snapshot from the Perspective of the Stadtmuseum Berlin

After 1945 the city of Berlin underwent an unique post war history which found its ending in the reunification of Germany, particularly in the merging of East and West Berlin.

The regain of urban “normality” in Berlin did not start until 1990 and it is still on going in present days. Various processes and changes continue in Berlin and are mirrored in today’s vivid museum’s scene with over 180 museums.

The Stiftung Stadtmuseum Berlin, founded in 1995, with its five houses has the responsibility to serve as the Landesmuseum (state museum) of history and culture for the public. It is an active part of that lively cultural scene and is renewing its position by constructing a ten years “masterplanproject”. Part of this is taking a closer look at various museums that discuss historical mediation.

Due to the first international joint conference, where three ICOM countries, Russia, USA and Germany, participate, we will present “snapshots” of chosen museums in Berlin and their current ways of presenting post war history. It will be intriguing to see so, because all three countries played a big role in the forming of Berlin in past and future.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Dr. Masum Momaya
Who is American?

Currently a Curator at the Smithsonian Institution, Dr. Masum Momaya has 20 years of experience working for women’s rights, gender, race and class equality and social justice. Her curatorial portfolio includes two online multimedia, multilingual exhibitions; a community-based exhibition at a local museum; a solo artist exhibition; and a commissioned multiple artist, themed exhibition.

“Beyond Bollywood: Indian Americans Shape the Nation,” Dr. Momaya’s current Smithsonian exhibition, displays more than 200 historical and contemporary photographs, three dozen works of art and two historical artifacts to explore the contributions of Indian immigrants and Indian Americans in shaping American history. Formerly, Dr. Momaya has done curatorial work at the International Museum of Women in San Francisco and the Indo-American Heritage Museum in Chicago. She has also served as lead researcher and writer of the Association for Women’s Rights in Development and on the board of Amnesty International’s Women’s Human Rights Program.

Dr. Momaya’s 100+ articles, podcasts and exhibitions have been translated into more a dozen languages including a review of Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn’s “Half the Sky” for the Women’s Policy Journal of Harvard. Dr. Momaya is an avid public speaker having given talks at the White House, several international conferences and numerous universities. Her work has been featured by NPR, the Associated Press, BBC News, Agence-France Presse, Reuters, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the Huffington Post, The Times of India, The Hindu, Vogue India and feministing.com

Dr. Momaya earned an honors BA in Public Policy and Feminist Studies from Stanford University and a masters degree in Education and a doctorate (EdD) in Human Development from Harvard University. She is a graduate of the Coro Fellowship in Public Affairs in San Francisco and has conducted research at the Centre for Development Studies at Oxford University.

Who is American?

This paper explores how an exhibition I’ve curated at the Smithsonian Institution, Beyond Bollywood: Indian Americans Shape the Nation questions “who is American?” for museum personnel, the museum field, research collaborators and visitors, including tourists.

Funded through taxpayer dollars and private philanthropy and free in admission for 364 days a year to 30 million visitors annually, the Smithsonian is charged with the increase and diffusion of knowledge. Although 168 years old, most history, art and culture exhibitions – past and current – render a very narrow picture of who is American for the United States’ and global public. Namely, similar to most textbooks of American history, history at the Smithsonian is almost exclusively told through white, male, upper class, Christian and heterosexual lenses, including the curators and other staff working on exhibitions, research collaborators and characters in exhibition scripts. All others are still primarily ‘othered.’

Beyond Bollywood seeks to change this in practice and product. This paper will detail this. First, I will describe the process of conceptualizing the exhibition and building necessary relationships with Indian immigrants and Indian Americans around the country to collect stories, photographs and artifacts for the exhibition. When the exhibition process began in 2008, there was not a single item in the national collection of 137 million objects that represented the history of Indian Americans.

Second, I will discuss the process of framing and writing the exhibition script as an American story and communicating it to colleagues within the Smithsonian and in the larger museum field. Many museums, including the Smithsonian, have long been accustomed to showing exhibitions on ‘exotic’ India with statues, tapestries, textiles and works for fine art from India. Thus, I was constantly clarifying that this was not one of those exhibitions, only to be met with confusion.

Third, I will explore audience responses from the Indian American community and the broader public to the framing of Indian American stories as stories of American history and Indian Americans as Americans. Finally, I will discuss some implications of this questioning for (1) establishing relationships between museum and ‘othered’ communities; (2) reshaping and broadening the mandate and content of exhibitions in national, public museums and influencing the ongoing immigration debate and notions of who is American in the United States.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Varsik Sargsyan
Making History in Museums

Born in 1987 in Dilijan, Armenia. PhD student at the Mashtots Institute of Ancient Manuscripts “Matenadaran”, Yerevan. Sphere of interests The History in Museum Space. Since 2008 is working in the same institute as a guide. In 2008 graduated from the Armenian State Pedagogical University, Faculty of Culture: my specialization is Museum Management and Preservation of Monuments, Bachelor. Took the Master Degree at the Yerevan State University, at the Faculty of History in 2010, specialization was World History.

Making History in Museums

Museums and history are tightly connected. There are a great number of history museums all over the world which represent the history of their country, city, nation, etc. Representing the history museums take into consideration the questions such as: for whom, why, and how they should represent the history? Indeed, the museum exhibition structure greatly depends on the questions mentioned above. That is why the interpretation of history and its representation in museums is never neutral.

When we present the museum objects, we are not just presenting them: we are selecting ones while neglecting others. We select also historical memory related to these objects by ''forgetting'' others. We must recall that re-creation of history in museums is always incomplete. Our choice depends greatly on our purposes and what kind of historical text we want to create.

The main issue of the paper is to examine the following questions:

How can museums support to solve historical sophisticated questions?

Is the museum a place of political tolerance or the stage of debates?

Do the museums generally maintain the national identity or they also contribute to solving the problems existing within the nation?

Selecting and placing an object next to the other objects in a space opens up interpretive possibilities for the audience, most of them fail to understand the subject matter or material culture on display. Objects never really speak but the impression the visitors gain in their minds forms real objects, after which the objects appear to be as unmediated evidences. Therefore, museum visitors can see another aspect in museum object which have not been foreseen by museum curators. Museum visitor experience is also included in the framework of our research to find out how the visitors perceive the history represented in museums.

My research is carried out on the basis of museums of Armenia, in particular The Matenadaran-Scientific Research Institute of Ancient Manuscripts after Mesrop Mashtots and History Museum of Armenia, as well as the experience acquired in international museums.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Magnus Olofsson
The Vasa Museum - a Display Window for the Power

Paste your document hereDeputy Director of the Vasa Museum in Stockholm, Sweden. Have worked since 1987 in different positions in museums covering maritime history, with such diverse things as education, collections management and IT. Is also member of the board of ICOM Sweden.

The Vasa Museum - a Display Window for the Power

The Vasa Museum is a museum with one big object – a more or less complete warship from the 17th century, named Vasa. The ship was built for the war against Poland in the 1620´s. It was a big, strong and very modern warship for its time, which set out for the maiden voyage August 10th 1628 but sank after only about 1000 meters of sailing. It remained under water for 333 years and was salvaged in 1961. It has been restored and conserved and resides in a permanent museum since 1990. With over 1.2 million visitors per year the Vasa Museum is one of the main tourist attractions in Stockholm. The mighty warship was a fiasco in its own time, but has become a success in the present.

In addition to the large numbers of visitors, the museum is also used by today’s authorities to show something of the best Stockholm can offer, every state visit includes a visit to the Vasa Museum. When the King, the government or the big companies want to show their guests something spectacular, they bring them to the museum. We can see how a historic failure is used by the modern rulers to promote the country. To understand this paradox it is necessary to have an idea of Swedish history. All countries highlight certain historic periods in the construction of their history, in the case of Sweden these are the Viking age, the 17th century (known as the “Big power-age” in Swedish) and the 1950’s and 1960’s when the country took a big economical, technological, social and political step forward, and once again played a role on the international scene. The Vasa Museum represents two of these three eras – the 17th century and mid-20th century Swedish wonder of engineering and technology, through the salvage of the ship. This is what the political and economical rulers of today want to be associated with.

On the other hand is it interesting to see how the interpretation of this archaeological find sometimes has been used as a way of criticizing the modern power in general, and the royals in particular.

How do the authorities to use a historic fiasco to promote Sweden as a successful country? Is it a problem or an advantage for the museum? These and other issues connected to the relationship between the power and the museum, I would like to discuss.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Anatoliy Budko
Political power and museums’ missions

Director of Military Medical museum since 1998. Member of the Presidium of the Russian Committee of the International Council of Museums. MD, professor. Medical colonel retired. Honoured Doctor of the Russian Federation. The Medal of Honor awarded.

Graduated from the Military Medical Academy named after S.M. Kirov, St. Petersburg State University and the Institute of International Humanitarian Law in San-Remo, Italy.

The author of more than 500 scientific papers, 16 books, including "The History of Russian military medicine", "The History of Medicine of St. Petersburg." The chairman of the St. Petersburg Scientific Society of Historians of Medicine and the St. Petersburg Military History Section of the Academy of Military Sciences of the Russian Federation.

Sphere of his interests is in the field of museology. He has substantiated a polycentric model of museums’ activity. He has also developed a definition and basic approaches to museums development, the concept of universality and uniqueness of museums. He is one of the initiators of the development of comparative museology in Russia.

Political power and museums’ missions

During different historical periods Russian political power delegated certain social responsibility to museums. Peter the Great used the creation of the first museum – Kunstkamera – for the development of science, as a base for the further appearance of Academy of science and as the most important element in the process of Russian army formation.

The same situation repeated during the period of World War II. Then political power of the country was to decide the most significant problem of human losses replacement. Military medical museum created in 1942 was a predecessor of the later founded Academy of medical sciences of the USSR. The result of their cooperative activity was the return of 72,3% wounded and 90,6% sick solders to the fighting formation. Both institutions also prepared the summary of military actions medical support during the period of World War II in the form of 35-volume edition “The experience of the Soviet medicine during the Great Patriotic War”.

In Russia nowadays the state still is deligating a part of its powers and authority to museums. The cooperation of museums and the government is tightly connected with the specific museums’ missions realisation. The ideas of humanity and mercy have been an essencial part of the medical profession from its appearance. As a result they have become the basic element for the humanitarian mission, that has been entrusted to Military medical museum together with its role to save historical heritage of Russian medicine.

This mission has recently been realised in different ways:

- The museum’s research work in the area of international humanitarian law, that has proved the Russian military leaders of the 18th century to have created the initial principles of the international humanitarian rules in case of war.

- Solving the problems of international humanitarian law the museum has revealed the information about foreign solders listed as unaccounted losses and appeared to be treated during the period of World War II in Soviet military hospitals.

- Exhibition projects of the museum devoted to the problems of medical backup of prisoners of war and returnees;

- Consideration of several gender problems.

The humanitarian mission of the museum has been highly praised by the state.

In recognition of the museum’s merits the president of the Russian Federation has expressed his appreciation to the museum’s team “for their great contribution into the process of development of Museum Affairs and saving historical traditions of native medicine”.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Tamara Ognjević
State as a Hostage of Its Own Cultural Policy


Art historian and writer, is general manager and a co-founder of Artis Center for history, theory and management of art (Belgrade, Serbia). She graduated and mastered Art history at The Faculty of Philosophy at Belgrade University where she is currently pursuing her doctoral studies. Tamara Ognjević is the author of numerous essays, studies, articles, literary criticism, theoretical papers and books in the field of history of arts, communications and gastronomy heritage. As a curator, lecturer and manager in the culture industries – the expert in PR and marketing of heritage, fine and applied arts, she is the author of the most diversified creative projects ranging from author's exhibitions and multimedia programs to an authentic art & study concept in the field of cultural tourism.

State as a Hostage of Its Own Cultural Policy

Strong crises that has been affecting Serbia in the process of its social changes initiated in the early 90's is reflected in the culture in the most explicit way, particularly in the operation of state museums. A decades long practice that the operation of museums be directed by political decisions resulted in a passive attitude of museum management itself and, consequently, two major state museums - the National Museum in Belgrade and the Museum of Contemporary Art in Belgrade have been practically out of operation for more than one decade. Under the pretext of a necessity to reconstruct the museums, although funds for reconstruction are lacking, the management of the above museums expects the state, as their founder, to resolve this issue that has long been raising a wide range of public controversies. Lack of initiative by museum managements to have this situation changed through various activities aimed at the improvement of museum operation, since the government is expected to take care, make decisions and act in that respect, as well as inability to implement appropriate reforms in cultural policy, make the state behave like a hostage.

What is in the root of "misunderstanding" between the state and museums? What are the consequences of decades long passivity and designation of politically competent instead of professionally competent museum managers and why should the management of a state owned museum have a high level of self-initiative and freedom in managing this kind of institutions? These are the key issues discussed in this paper. At the same time, this paper raises a delicate issue about the need to reduce the number of state owned museums while also pointing out some interesting positive examples in the operation of private museums in Serbia, emphasizing the importance of education of new generations of museum professionals who are aware of the significance of interconnecting different spheres of interest in order to ensure a successful and efficient operation of a modern museum.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Dr. Matthias Henkel
Museums as Worships of Modernity

As a current member of the management team of the Center for Audience Development, Matthias Henkel is active in the field of research, education, and consultancy at the Institute for Arts and Media Management, Freie Universität Berlin. He also currently works for the renowned agency MetaDesign as consultant for brand communication in the cultural sector. In addition, since December 2013 he has served as the director of communications for the governmental specialist task force for the much-publicized ‘Munich Art Trove’.

In his capacity as director of the Nuremberg Municipal Museums (2009–2013), he envisioned the association as the city’s polycentric memory and developed a string of projects of lasting value for it. The projects included: the opening of the Memorium Nuremberg Trials (Courtroom 600), the reconceptualization of the Albrecht Dürer House, the establishment of an FC Nürnberg club museum, devised in collaboration with the club, the development of a central storeroom for artefacts to ensure the preservation of the various collection holdings, and finally the creation of the new permanent exhibition ‘Kaiser – Reich – Stadt’ in the Imperial Castle, the Kaiserburg, in a major collaboration involving the Bavarian Palaces Department and the Germanisches Nationalmuseum. Parallel to all this, he launched the series of Nuremberg museological conferences which generated lively scholarly debate over the tasks and objectives of the modern museum in today’s urban society.

As head of Press, Communication, and Sponsoring for the whole of the Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (2001–2009), he not only oversaw all communications relating to the more than 700 temporary exhibitions that took place during his tenure, but also such high-publicity events as the reopening of the Alte Nationalgalerie, Bode-Museum, and Kunstgewerbemuseum Schloss Köpenick, the unveiling of the Friedrich Christian Flick Collection and Scharf-Gerstenberg Collection, the transfer of the Nefertiti Bust to the Altes Museum, and the topping-out ceremony for the Neues Museum. During this time, he played a key role in devising, in collaboration with the agency POLYFORM, the future visitor-flow system and entire PR strategy for construction work due to take place on the UNESCO World Heritage Site as part of the Museum Island Master Plan. It was also during this period that Matthias Henkel forged the now familiar SMB brand, in a collaboration with OTT + STEIN. Working closely with MetaDesign, sensational campaigns were devised for several, celebrated, major exhibitions at the SMB, including: Babylon – Mythos und Wahrheit (2008) and MoMA in Berlin (2004).

After his postgrad traineeship at Brake Castle and Museum in North Rhine-Westphalia (1992–1994) he was appointed to the post of curatorial assistant at the Institute of Cultural Anthropology at Göttingen University, where he gained his first teaching experience and headed his own research project on popular culture (1994–1996).

He has worked on the German national committee of the ICOM since 2010; has been cultural adviser to the German Association of Specialist Journalists since 2005; was a member of the jury in the 2009 ‘Year of Science’, launched by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research; served on the board of trustees of the Foundation of Modern Communications Museums from 2010 to 2013; and served on the committee of the Association of Museums in Bavaria from 2010 to 2013.

He has taken on teaching and lecturing responsibilities at the following institutions: Freie Universität (Berlin), Georg-August Universität (Göttingen), FHTW/FHVR in Berlin, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität (Erlangen/Nuremberg); Universität der Künste (Berlin), Bayerische Volontärsakademie (Munich).

Museums as Worships of Modernity

The great impact of architecture is – since Stonehenge, the Pyramids of Giza or the Great Wall of China – obviosly. During the last two dozen decades museums became more and more identificational sites – staged and executed to perfection as unique spaces of self-perception.

In former times the construction design of museums often borrowed their aestethic pattern from temples or churches (i.e. Altes Museum Berlin, Metropolitan Museum of Art New York). In present times it seems to be that new museum buildings are the cutting edge, the state-of-the-art architecture of their era (i.e. Guggenheim New York, Centre Pompidou Paris, Guggenheim Bilbao, Pyramide of the Louvre, Louvre Abu Dhabi).

Another concept to transfer the aura of importance and meaningfulness is to convert an existing historical building into a museum: the Winterpalast of the Eremitage is a wonderful example for that concept. In many historical towns in Western Europe this is a very common way to establish a city-museum. However: The construction costs grow exponentially, the technological requirements will continue to become more complex to run a steady air and temperature conditioning at recommended levels.

The costs of the building and start-up period are normally funded by the public building owner. But how about the operating costs, the funding for special exhibitions, the educational programs or scientific research and storages?

The ICOM Code of Ethics, our cornerstone of museology, stated clearly: Museums have to preserve, interpret and promote the natural and cultural inheritance of humanity“. For that reason an architectural shell is necessary and useful, but there is a great need of funding to run the programming, to pay the staff, to develope the collection – to create a living institution that takes its active part in socialpolitical live.

Museum architecture seems to be a global language of selve-reflection. At the moment there are many ambitious museumprojects worldwide at an early stage of development (i.e. Humboldtforum Berlin, MPlus Hong Kong). In my point of view it is the task of ICOM to ensure that museums not only look like (inter)cultural institutions, it is our task to transform museums into factories of identity that are helpful to create the society of the 21st century.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Anton Belov, Kate Fowle
Role of the museum in creation of the area and public capital. Place of the museum in the modern conceptions of the town-planning and development of the territories

Anton Belov, Russia

Alumnus of the National University of Science and Technology (MISIS, former Moscow Steel Institute) and the founder of ARTGUIDE magazine and Artmanagement, the first Russian art event company. Since October 2010, he has been the director of Garage Museum of Contemporary Art. Through an extensive program of exhibitions, events, education, research and publishing, the institution reflects on current developments in Russian and international culture, creating opportunities for public dialogue, as well as the production of new work and ideas in Moscow.

Kate Fowle, Russia

Chief curator at Garage Museum of Contemporary Art in Moscow and director-at-large at Independent Curators International (ICI) in New York. From 2009-13 she was the executive director of ICI. Previously she was the inaugural international curator at the Ullens Center for Contemporary Art in Beijing (2007-08) and chair of the Master’s Program in Curatorial Practice, which she co-founded in 2002 for California College of the Arts in San Francisco. Before moving to the United States Fowle was co-director of Smith + Fowle in London. From 1994-96 she was curator at the Towner Art Gallery and Museum in Eastbourne, East Sussex.

Fowle’s recent writing includes catalogue texts on Doug Aitken, John Baldessari, Harrell Fletcher, Ilya Kabakov, Robert Longo, Ari Marcopoulos, Sterling Ruby, Qiu Zhijie, and Althea Thauberger. She has written on curating and exhibition practices for numerous publications and magazines, including Parkett, Modern Painters, Mousse, Art in America, Manifesta Journal, the Exhibitionist, and Frieze.

Role of the museum in creation of the area and public capital. Place of the museum in the modern conceptions of the town-planning and development of the territories

Role of the museum in creation and development of the area and public capital. Place of the museum in the modern conceptions of the town-planning and development of territories.

Creation of the museum in a “non-musuem” site, development of the area, transfer of the venue/platform to another museum.

Creation of public demand for a contemporary museum that will not teach, but will be “the center of the ambience (vibe, atmosphere)” – a big public space with free access.

Museum as a discussion platform (in Russian – “the discussing museum”) and thus a unique tool for creating a civil society.

The important role of the museum as a key venue of the year-round activities of the central park .

Educational and public programs as the key moments/activities in development of a modern (a modern person) and increasing the number of the cultured people.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Anastasia Mityushina
The Reflexive Museum: educating the communities, changing the context

Trained as an art historian, Anastasia Mityushina is currently Curator of Education at Garage Museum of Contemporary Art in Moscow. Since 2010, she has built the department into a leading museum education facility in Russia, initiating a number of unique programs for creative engagement with families, as well as developing new opportunities for professional audiences, including a publishing program.

From 2003 Mityushina was a consultant for two private collections of international contemporary art; managed pr-campaigns for the Ural Biennale; and was associate curator at Perm Museum exhibition MoskvApolis. From 2005 – 2007 she worked as project manager for the state museums in Russia overseeing the Pavel Filonov exhibition at the State Russian Museum and the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, as well as Marc Chagall at the Tretyakov Gallery. From 2003 – 2009, Mityushina contributed to a number of Russian art press including ArtChronika magazine, KhZh magazine and ArtGuide.

Mityushina received her Master of Arts in History of Art at Moscow State University. She was born and brought up in Moscow.

The Reflexive Museum: educating the communities, changing the context

Derived from Ancient Greek, the term ‘museum' originally referred to a temple dedicated to the Muses. In more recent times, it has been used and construed differently in contemporary cultures to reflect a range of diverse practices. In Russian, however, the word ‘museum' remains most often associated with the sole function of historic conservation, and unlike current European and American traditions, the Museum is described as ‘influential' rather than ‘friendly' and ‘responsive'; ‘reserved' rather than ‘dynamic' and ‘reflexive'.

The presentation will reflect on what it means to build a responsive institution focusing on current debates around notions of the public and how the education activities evolve together with the audiences of contemporary art in Russia.

The presentation will explore historical precedents of museum as educational hub (in Russia and internationally; audience engagement initiatives within the Museum of Painterly Culture; Rodchenko's workers clubs etc.), as well as the rising phenomena of educational activities in Russian museum in recent 3 years (Multimedia Art Museum, Moscow; Moscow Museum of Modern Art; St Pete Manifesta Parallel Program).

The 5 years experience of Garage Education will be analysed in relation to parallel State and Moscow city museums bold reforms of 2013-2014.

ikonka_pdf

Download

H. Christian Carr
Heritage Matters: Museums as a Catalyst for Tourism in the American South

Ph.D.,is Professor of Art History in the School of Liberal Arts at the Savannah College of Art & Design where she also teaches museum studies classes. She received her doctorate in Art History from Virginia Commonwealth University and a certificate in Arts Administration from New York University. Dr. Carr served on the faculty of Sweet Briar College in Virginia for a decade, first as a duPont Scholar-in-Residence and later as Director of the Arts Management Program and the Sweet Briar Museum. She has worked at a variety of cultural institutions, including the National Gallery of Art in Washington, DC, and her publications include “Bringing Home the World: The Cultural, Artistic, and Architectural Patronage of Indiana Fletcher Williams” inA Seamless Web: Transatlantic Art in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge Scholars Press, 2014), “Young Audiences for Old Collections” inRethinking Learning: Museums and Young People (Heritage 365 Press, 2009; reprinted 2014), as well as entries on the decorative arts for Encyclopedia of American Material Culture (ABC-CLIO, 2008).

Heritage Matters: Museums as a Catalyst for Tourism in the American South

When visiting Savannah, Georgia, in the mid-twentieth century, the Southern-born aristocrat Lady Nancy Astor remarked that the city reminded her of a “beautiful woman with a dirty face.” Today, Savannah is a destination known for its beauty, history, and a thriving museum community. The story of the fifty-year transformation of the city, and the role of museums in its changing fortunes, will be the focus of this paper. As this success is due to significant and innovative cost-sharing measures between the city, a university, and their museums, it is intended to address the fourth subtheme of this conference: the responsibility for financing cultural heritage between the public and private sector.

In response to the widely reported criticism from Lady Astor, leading citizens formed the Historic Savannah Foundation with the mission of preservation and beautification. Despite its efforts, the nonprofit organization, run by volunteers, was unable to reverse the fortunes of this riverfront city. By the 1970s, the once-vibrant 2.2 square mile historic district was a rundown patchwork of single and multifamily townhouses and commercial and government structures organized around a series of 36 garden squares established by the original 18th-century city plan.

However, this shabby matrix was punctuated by cultural institutions such as the Telfair Academy, the first art museum in the southeast, the Davenport House, built by a 19th-century architect as a showplace for his skills, and the Juliette Gordon Low Birthplace, home of the founder of the Girl Scouts. These museums catered to the dedicated cultural tourist but struggled to attract significant visitation. Thirty years later, as the face of the city was wiped clean, a corresponding rise in the number of tourists commenced. Today, the local economy of Savannah is based on tourism, and the city’s museums are an acknowledged cornerstone of this success.

This paper will trace the revitalization efforts that led to Savannah becoming a tourist destination and examine the critical positioning of its museums as the public face of the city. The city’s marketing office, “Visit Savannah,” has a $6 million dollar annual budget, and a portion of those funds are directed to the support of local museums. The “tourist tax,” or occupancy tax, and a local tax of .01 on every dollar spent in the historic district are additional revenue streams that benefit local museums.

Cost-sharing programs to support both direct and indirect costs have been implemented with the city government and the Savannah College of Art and Design to support the missions and activities of these museums.

As a result, two new buildings devoted to contemporary art have been built in the past decade. These have received international acclaim, and provide a new dynamic to a now-thriving museum community that in turn attracts additional visitors to Savannah. This appeal is proven by the fact that in 2013-2014, both the Southeastern Museum Conference and the National Trust for Historic Preservation chose to hold their annual meetings in the city. This paper will trace the expansion of Savannah’s museums from institutions sought out by specialists to institutions which form a critical and public part of the city’s identity and are thereby supported fiscally through innovative initiatives from local government initiatives. It is possible that this success may be replicated elsewhere, and therefore this paper may be a useful addition to what will undoubtedly be an informative and engaging conference.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Dr. Markus Walz
More Cultural Life for Metropolises and Recreation Areas? Museums as Subjects of the Policy of Regional Development

Studies of cultural anthropology, history of art and educational science at Bonn, doctorate studies of history at Osnabrück; academic trainee in the State Museum Koblenz (Rhineland-Palatinate), museum consultant at the Westphalian Museum Office, Münster (Rhineland-Westphalia).

Since 2001 at the University of Applied Sciences Leipzig, Leipzig (Saxonia), Faculty of Media; professor for theoretical and historic museology. Chair of the jury of the “Arnold-Vogt-Preis für Museumspädagogik” (an academic price for studies in German language, dealing with museum education, yearly since 2006); editor of two museological book series.

More Cultural Life for Metropolises and Recreation Areas? Museums as Subjects of the Policy of Regional Development

In Germany, the policy of regional development belongs to the duties of the federal member states (“Länder”) and therefore it gets different accents in the 16 states of the federation; nevertheless the regional development plans reflect on museums only with two interests: the enrichment of the metropolises and of touristy regions. Obviously there is an intersection with touristy cities. This basic tendency of the policy of regional development reflects both the need of postindustrial regions for new economic opportunities and the – global as well as German –anticipation of a striking increase of tourism with cultural accents.

Within a former research project, based on statistical data concerning Northwestern Germany’s museums in 1990, I could point out two aspects which are connected with the policy of regional development: The metropolises and the historical capital towns possess high quantities of museums and the majority of museums with above-average areas; compared to the number of inhabitants, the touristy regions (coastline, low mountain range) show the highest relative quantities of museums, but not at all the best results in the visit statistics – an improve that the authorities invest in new museums within touristy regions hoping to get an additional impulse for the local tourism but getting no adequate results.

For the Saint-Petersburg conference, I want to compare these conclusions with the actual situation of museums in Saxonia. The territory of this federal member state was part of the German Democratic Republic and therefore it saw a very restrictive museum policy: because the founding of museums depended on an approval by the central government in (Eastern) Berlin the quantity of museums rested nearly unchanged. It is well known that the museum numbers exploded after 1990 but any interpretation of these data is missing: Does the increasing quantity of museums fill up the region evenly or are there disproportional allocations visible, comparable to the objectives of tourism policy seen before in Northwestern Germany? What about visit statistics: Are the museums which show success in that aspect spread over the whole state of Saxonia or does their localization follow the principle “metropolises and touristy regions”?

ikonka_pdf

Download

Alexander Nikonov, Colonel (ret.)
Military and Historical Museums, Subordinated to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation: Features Work

Director, Central Museum of Armed Forces (Moscow). For more than 30 years he was an officer of the Russian Armed Forces. He began to take part in the museum work since late 1970s in Archangelsk. Later on he came for service to Moscow and was a Chief of the Aircraft Defense Troops (1984-1991), than a senior officer in an Educational Department at the Ministry of Defense (1991), and since January 1992 Mr. Nikonov is a Director of the Central Museum of Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Under his leadership the Museum has changed a lot, extended its regular display and number of historical subjects to be presented in the museum-rooms.

Mr. Nikonov’s degrees are in Military College, St.-Petersburg State University and Moscow State University. He is Ph.D. in History.

He is a Member of Presidium of the Russian Association of Museums and active in an International Committee of Museums and Collections of Arms and Military History (ICOMAM).

His professional interest is in the field of military history of Russia in the XXth century. He has been involved with development of military history museums in the Russian Federation and internationally in Belarus, Ukraine, France, Belgium, Germany and others. Currently he is a Co-Chairman of the Society of the Berlin-Karlshorst Museum (German-Russian Institution).

Military and Historical Museums, Subordinated to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation: Features Work

In the Russian Federation there is a practice comes from the history to set up and operate museums subordinated not to the Ministry of Culture but to other ministries and departments. Some of “Departmental” museums are very large and well-known around the world. As for Ministry of Defense, it has three popular museums with unique collections. They are the Central Museum of Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, the Military Historical Museum of Artillery, Engineer and Signal Corps and the Central Naval Museum.

In some cases so-called Departmental Museums are a kind of non-core entities for their departments. So their activities have their own characteristics and sometimes even contradictions.

The first point is the Museum collections. We need to do everything to guarantee their condition and safety and to be engaged in adding the Museum collections. As for central museums it is a regular practice. But there are also a lot of small and local military history rooms under Ministry of Defense. They operate on the basis of army unites, cadet schools and Military Universities, profile institutes, etc. Sometimes they are so tiny that only enthusiasts work there. It is our mission to support them and not to lose any of the real objects from their collections. They also are very important for us.

The second point is inconsistency in regulation of Museum activities in documents of two Ministries. It follows the problem for us. Two Ministries (Culture and Defense) coordinate museums activities, both of them play out their control functions and sometimes their rules are not the same or consistent. As a result, for example, Departmental Museums are confused while checking their collections because of different requirements and demands come from each of Ministry.

The third point is financial support of the Museums. Their status has been changed several times during the last years. The Museums didn’t have enough support from their relevant Ministry so we were getting uncomfortable financial situation to perform our tasks. But now the situation is getting better but it is not stable yet.

The fourth point is members of stuff. It follows financial point so it is not easy to make the job in our Museums attractive for young specialists. The stuff is getting older. The qualification of new staff-members is often insufficient. But Museums are science institutions and we need well-educated and experienced in military history employees.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Amy Ballard
Museums, Social Memory and Public Discourse: a European Perspective

Amy Ballard has been with the Smithsonian Institution since 1976. In her current position as senior historic preservation specialist, she reviews Smithsonian design and construction projects for historic preservation compliance. A graduate of American and George Washington Universities, she has a lifelong interest in Russian culture. She was the recipient of a Likhachev Foundation fellowship which allowed her to write the St. Petersburg Music Guide website and participate in a historic preservation conference held by the foundation in St. Petersburg. She has lectured on the Smithsonian and historic preservation in St. Petersburg, Khabarovsk and Vladivostok, Russia, and Tbilisi, Georgia. She serves on the boards of Hillwood Museum, Historic Congressional Cemetery, Washington, D.C. and the United States International Council of Monuments and Sites (USICOMOS). She is co-author of the book A Guide to Smithsonian Architecture.

The National Museum of African American History and Culture: Public Participation in the Nation’s Capital

In 2015 the National Museum of African American History and Culture will open as the 10th museum in the Smithsonian’s collection. The story of the museum’s location on the National Mall and its design involved not only the United States Government, but the participation of the public and interest groups.

In 2001, President George W. Bush appointed a Presidential Commission to study possible sites and financing for the proposed museum. It was recommended that the museum be placed on the National Mall. In 2003 the United States Congress delegated the site selection to the Smithsonian Board of Regents. Four sites were studied, and the board selected the mall site.

Design and construction projects are reviewed in-house at the Smithsonian and follow the institution’s historic preservation policy. Depending on the size and scope, a project may also be reviewed by four external agencies: the District of Columbia Government’s Historic Preservation Office, and three United States government agencies: the United States Commission of Fine Arts, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the National Capital Planning Commission. In the case of the National Museum of African American History and Culture, these agencies were involved in the review of the design, and its impact and effect on surrounding historic properties, views and vistas. It was determined that the new structure would have an “adverse” effect to historic properties as stated in the Section 106 review regulations of the National Historic Preservation Act. The question of how to mitigate and minimize this adverse effect was the challenge that the Smithsonian and the regulatory agencies had to meet, while at the same time not sacrificing the original design intent of the architect.

Public involvement played a crucial role in ensuring NMAAHC’s design would complement the National Mall and have minimal effect on the surrounding historic properties, or the Area of Potential Effect (APE). The final design was achieved by over five years of consultation and work with the architects, the regulatory agencies and the Smithsonian. Over thirty meetings were held just with the agencies and the consulting parties, and several were open to the general public for comment.

A legally binding Programmatic Agreement was signed between the agencies and the institution. It stipulates the measures the Smithsonian will undertake to mitigate the adverse effect of the building. The public participation ensured that this important new museum will share an honored place on the National Mall with the best design possible.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Hiba Qassar
Politics, Identity and the Role of Museums in the Middle East

Entered a PhD. Museology Program in Florence University, Italy (2011). Entered a Near Easter Archeology program in Damascus University (2009-2010). Graduated with a Bachelors Degree in Archaeology from Aleppo University, with a very good rating and a final average 78.37% (2007-2008). Graduate of the high school Scientific Secondary Degree in Al-Hasakeh-Qamishly (Al-Qadissiyah school), 2003-2004. Graduate of the intermediate school in Al-Hasakeh-Qamishly(El-Ittihad private school), 1999-2000. Volunteer in Aleppo museum, Near Eastern department (2005). Work in the Italian mission in Tell-Barri. Member in the American mission in Tell-Moza (2006-2010). Member in the Syrian-Belgium mission working in Tell-Chagar Bazar,Syria (2010). Won a fellowship in the University College of London in Qatar for three months under the supervision of Dr. Karen Exell (2013). Principal assistant in unit J6. Field work included planning and supervising excavations, documenting results in English, and supervising new assistants. Lab work included generating graphics and data analysis (2008). Supervising the pottery database in tell Mozan, and analyzing pottery (2009). In 2010 excavated with the Belgium-Syrian archaeological mission in Tell Chagar Bazar, with the Polish archaeological mission in Tell Arbid, with the American mission in Tell Umm el-Marra.

Politics, Identity and the Role of Museums in the Middle East

Societies in the Middle East are living through a period of dramatic political and social change. These new changes which appeared as revolutions in some countries like Syria and Egypt or as rapid development due to oil wealth in Qatar are writing the new history of the modern Middle East socially and politically. Despite the international recognition and awareness of the crucial role of museums in engaging with the public and in creating civil societies, museums in the Middle East have arguably failed to achieve this. Even in countries such as Syria and Egypt with their long history and the important national collections museums are considered by the local people as unwelcoming institutions and places dedicated for tourists who may appreciate better what is displayed. This has led to reduced the social role and value of museums in these countries.

Qatar, an emerging country in the Middle East, which appeared on the economic and the political map of the region a few decades ago is going through a period of rapid change due to the new oil and natural gas resources. The rapid development in the economy of the country has been a catalyst for many changes in the structure of the society, values and the concept of the identity. Museums in Qatar are trying to foster new civil values and authorizing the new concept of identity among the people. By creating a high quality museums and exhibition Qatar is trying to activate the role of museums in society to achieve its “national” agenda.

In this paper I will discuss the role and the challenges of museums in the Middle East in building modern civic values and “new” national identity corrisponds the rapid changes that are going through, discussing case studies of museums in Syria and Egypt as contrast to museums in Qatar. The paper will first argue that in Syria and Egypt the governments neglected to integrate museums with society in spite of their potential for encouraging tolerance and building new civil concepts. This will be followed by an assessment of how museums in Qatar are considered to take an active role in the new changing society. Finally the paper will look at the future role of these institutions through the current situation of each country in fostering civil values of tolerance and social inclusion.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Lyudmila Bakayutova
The A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications. Management and Financing of a Corporate Museum

Dipl.Engineer, PHD in Culture, Director of the Federal State Budget-funded Institution “A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications”.

Born in Leningrad. In 1972 she graduated from the Faculty of Architecture of Leningrad engineering-and-construction Institute; in 1984 – from the Leningrad branch of the Central Institute of Post-graduate Education in the area of national economy; in 1994 – from the International Institute of Scientific Business “IMC” (Buckingham, United Kingdom); in 2008 defended a thesis applying for the degree of PHD in Culture in the Saint-Petersburg State Institute of Culture and Arts on the topic “Modernization of activity of technical museums (domestic and foreign experience) on the example of museums of communication”.

Since 2000 till the present time L.Bakayutova is the director of the Federal State Budget-funded Institution “The A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications”. She took direct part in the renaissance of the museum (2000 -2003), which was closed for visitors since 1974 till 2003. As part of team of authors she is a Laureate of the prize of Government of Saint-Petersburg in the field of literature, art and architecture for developing a design concept and project of exhibition of A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications. Currently the activity of L.Bakayutova is directed at solving strategic, management, organization, planning-and-reporting, administrative and economic, financial, personnel and topical issues. During the period of directorship of L.Bakayutova A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications became a methodological and coordination center of departmental museums of communication, historical-and-cultural center of the branch “Communication”. L.Bakayutova largely contributes to the development of philatelic movement in Russia, supports the image and corporative goals of the branch movement; contributes to strategic decision-taking in museum community; conducts the work on international cooperation dealing with preserving historical heritage in the field of communication. L.Bakayutova is the Assistant Professor of the Chair of Museology and preservation of monuments at the Institute of Philosophy of Saint-Petersburg state University and delivers two courses of lectures on management and marketing in the activity of museums.

The A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications. Management and Financing of a Corporate Museum

Federal State Budget institution “The A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications”, which celebrated its jubilee in 2012, is a non-commercial organization of culture, providing for preservation, augmenting and public presentation of museum collections and museum objects (articles) related to the sphere of communications, as well as dealing with enlightening, research and educational activities. The funds of A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications include about 8.0 million of units, mainly this large number is explained by the inclusion of State stamp collection of Russia. Federal Agency of communications (Rossvyaz) is the founder and owner of the museum property in keeping with the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No.1732-r dated December 30, 2004.

During the last year a lot was written about the heroic rebirth of A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications by the 300-year jubilee of Saint-Petersburg after a long (30-year) pause, caused by the emergency state of the building and part of museum objects, as well as about the role, which was played by the community of communications specialists in this rebirth. The most complete description of the reconstruction process and the rebirth of the museum was published in my article “ Architectural monument seen through the prism of scientific-and-technological progress” included with the collection of articles “Architectural monument – from the palace to the museum”, which includes the materials of the scientific-and-practical conference of the State Museum and Reserve “Petehof” .

During the previous years my publications “History of Modernization of A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications” // Reliquia. –– 2006. –– No. 1. –– Pp. 22––28 ; No. 2. –– Pp. 52––59 and “Dedicated to 135-year anniversary of foundation of A.S.Popov Central Museum of Communications” // Materials of the First All-Russia conferences of Communications Museums “Departmental Communications Museums: problems and perspectives”, September 17–19, 2007/ A.S.Popov Central Museum of Communication; –– SPb, 2007. –– pp. 27––35, told in greater detail about the museum, which was initially created as part of the Telegraph and then Postal-and-telegraph museum, and which pursued its activities as a departmental museum, which matched the demands of the branch of industry and implemented the scientific and cognitive policy, directed exclusively at the interests of the department.

And finally, in the collection of papers “Communications museums: popularization of science and technology”: Materials of 4th All-Russia communications museums (October, 10-12, 2013).- SPb: A.S.Popov Central Museum of Communications, 2013.- 180 p. with ill. ISBN 978-5-903733-30-9, p. 8-28, without repeating my previous papers and based on the current experience, in my article “Ten years after rebirth” I supplied a short characteristic of no less heroic decades of museum history after it was opened to the public in May, 2003.

And once again The A.S.Popov Central Museum of Communications is analyzed a historical-and-cultural center of the branch “Communications”, its message is directed at contributing to education of young generation of scientific-and-engineering intelligentsia, professional orientation and providing for succession in preparing museum specialists.

In order to qualitatively perform its mission and to meet the tasks set by our branch, the museum has to solve many administrative and financial problems, perform long-term strategic planning, based on authentic and exhaustive information, obtained in the process of performing marketing research of leisure market. In order to provide for sustainable development of a department museum, first of all, we need support of the founder embracing all directions of activity. For this purpose it is necessary to find the correct rhetoric of managing the departmental museum, which will enable to attract the attention of the founder to solving museum problems and to hold his attention as long as possible. Interaction with the founder (which is not the Ministry of Culture) is different from the relations with the founder -- Ministry of Culture. It is about these differences and results of mutual interaction that I’m planning to speak in my paper “A.S. Popov Central Museum of Communications. Management and Financing of a Corporate Museum”

ikonka_pdf

Download

Md. Abdul Kuddus
Political exercise to museum collections in Bangladesh: an overview

Preventive and Remedial Conservation, Store Management and Research of museum objects, Varendra Research Museum, University of Rajshahi, Museum Road, Hatem Khan, Rajshahi – 6000, Bangladesh

He is a Member of: Permanent Committee of Rajshahi City Corporation on Historical and Archaeological Heritage Preservation, and Tourism Development, Rajshahi City Museum Planning Committee, and Museum Manual Preparing Sub-committee; Bangladesh History Council; Bangladesh Museum Council; State Alumni Association of Bangladesh; US State Alumni Association.

Political exercise to museum collections in Bangladesh: an overview

Museum concept continues to grow in many developing countries, but is often incorporated this growing practice slowly, incorrectly, or not at all. Despite the best intents, museum may apply unrealistic standards, guideline, or lists of best practice, with no clear sense of priority, or of realistic expected benefits. These phenomena are observed in Bangladesh owing to various reasons.

The museums Bangladesh are not been income-generating institutions as yet, and are considered as loss project. The respective government cannot afford the demands to patronize museums due to undeveloped growth of economy. The ruling politicians are keen to meet up fundamental needs like foods, wears, dwellings, heaths, communications etc. for low income people.

For the lack of insufficient knowledge, the attitudes are somehow vacillated by the authorized authority like politicians or bureaucrats. In some cases, their unaware posture, misguided zeal or motivated self-advancement may cause of obstacles in developing or modernizing a museum.

Museum workforce consists of multi-disciplinary expertise of art-history, archaeology, ethnology, ecology, calligraphy, paleography, climatology, meteorology, conservation science, display methodology, etc. For which a museum is considered as a specialized institution. However, many of the institutional key-personnel often are deputed from different professionals who sometimes may not have adequate skills in this field. When the sustaining government changes frequently, re-shuffling the positions take place again. As a result, building up of skilled museum personnel becomes hampered.

For the sake of political purpose as well as religious ego, very important objects may screen out from museum display or might be disappeared forever.

The inside atmosphere of the museum is very often influenced by political fancy. The respective persons, if they are motivated by confined political ideology or religious ethics, may describe an object bi-passing original history. This type of attitudes might slow down the objectives of establishing a museum.

Museum’s antiquities should not be treated as a victim of religious or political jealousy or conflict. The concerned political leaders or government need to realize the importance of museum as it is an institution for reflecting national or regional identity, and should come forward to its protection and improvement. Otherwise, museum will remain undeveloped as it is now. With the extinction of a museum, the globe may lose a lot of valuable information.

The attempt of this article is to discover different kinds of existing asymmetry upon museum in Bangladesh aspect.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Klaus Mohr M.A.
Heimatstuben („Motherland’s Rooms“) – Special Marks on the German Museum Landscape

Born in 1958, studied Folklore, Modern History and Sociology (Universities of Regensburg and Munich), degree M. A. 1987. Professional activities in several regional museums in Bavaria (Agricultural Museum Regen, District Museum Walderbach, District Museum Bogenberg). Freelance cultural and historical projects (documentation of local craft tradition). Work focuses on scientific inventory and conception of cultural historical exhibitions. Currently, collection manager for the Sudeten German Museum in Munich and Director of the Association for the cultural home collections, an association of Sudeten-German local museums.

Heimatstuben („Motherland’s Rooms“) – Special Marks on the German Museum Landscape

After the 2nd World War most of the German-speaking population in the countries of Eastern and East Central Europe was deported from their residential areas to occupied Germany. Using the example of the Germans from Bohemia and Moravia in what was then Czechoslovakia, up to today the so-called Sudeten Germans, it is shown, how these people also using its own museum-like institutions tried to integrate while maintaining their cultural identity in the new home. They founded namely soon own small museums that were dedicated to their areas of origin, the so-called Heimatstuben. The term Heimatstube is not easy to translate. It means a special kind of small local museum of expellees.

The Heimatstuben are a special feature in the international field of museums. They are available in this form in large numbers only in Germany and Austria. Mostly they were just trying to collect memorabilia from the respective origin and to show in this way that there had been a cultural tradition. This was to assure on the one hand of their own identity, on the other hand they wanted to present themselves to the new home community as culturally equivalent. A didactic preparation or historical context, however, was mostly neglected.

The Heimatstuben thus fulfilled from the beginning other functions than conventional museums. Those are defined by the classic tasks of collecting, preserving, exploring and exhibiting of objects. The Heimatstuben, however, mostly set the accents differently: a very important function they fulfilled initially as places of social encounter of people affected by the expulsion. The Heimatstuben served – and are used to some extent today – as places for weekly meetings or annual home meeting with participants from all over Germany and abroad. The sociability so ranked often before the actual museum tasks. As museums Heimatstuben were well thought, but not as museums in the sense of sober showrooms and scientific documentation. In addition to its social function, the Heimatstuben fulfilled explicitly political features: At the time of the Cold War there was often the demand for revision of the results of the Second World War in the foreground. After the fall of the Iron Curtain many Heimatstuben stressed its possible function as a cultural bridge to the old home-country. This feature has been found in many cross-border projects. Despite many achievements in this area most Heimatstuben today have an uncertain future. The main problems are the aging of their volunteer caregivers, conservation problems and low public interest in the subject. But Sudeten German Museum and authorities at federal, state and local governments try to give the Heimatstuben the necessary assistance.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Julia Kupina
Flag on the Roof: Museums, National Narratives and Identity in Tajikistan

Deputy Director of Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Kunstkamera) Russian Academy of Sciences (since 2003 till present) and Head of the Kunstkamera Exhibition Department (since 2002 till present). PhD (History). Employed in Kunstkamera Museum as a researcher since 1989.

Graduated from the Historical Faculty at Leningrad State University (1984) and the Getty Museum Management Institute (2002). Fellow of the Fulbright Program of the USA Congress (1997).The main activities deals with the interpretation of the collections through museum exhibitions, public programs and publications. Expert of the UNESCO/ICOM projects on museum development and cultural heritage preservation in CIS countries and Mongolia (2006-2014).

Flag on the Roof: Museums, National Narratives and Identity in Tajikistan

This paper challenges the phenomenon of museums in the post-Soviet Central Asian countries with focus on Tajikistan. It presents an evolution of the museums as cultural, educational and ideological institutions over the last century. The author investigates the regional and national manifestation of museums in Tajikistan, their use as a tool to represent, project the desired histories, education, soft power and social cohesion. The paper presents how museums in modern CIS countries of Central Asia along with other exhibitionary media and festival activities are used by political forces to present and forge ethnic, state and national identities through the symbolic use of tangible and intangible heritage. The economic and political situation in the region influence the re-creation of national museums and heritage revivalism, which is aimed to contribute the government-highlighted aspects of national policy, stateness, development of education and tourism growth. Museums and heritage are officially promoted in the CIS countries of the Central Asia as part of the multiple state’s future vision plans, some essential practical actions and projects have been undertaken by governments and different international organization to reach this goal. The projects of the construction of new buildings of national museums in the state capitals provide rich material for analysis of this issue along with the analysis of the state of the local museums in the provinces. The aspects for presentation will include the following: narratives of national museum in Tajikistan; relation of museums to society, culture and government; creation and promotion of the desired history, political meaning and social cohesion; portray of nations through exhibitions; use of heritage and museums to consolidate and project nation and state; re-development of the museum network in the region under the new political circumstances.

Today museums in Central Asia are going through re-development and re-imagination, are jointed by new museums and exhibitionary media. They are aimed at the projection of the concept of national self internally and externally, at the legitimization of the ancient past and present as an indivisible whole. The especial meaning is given to the archaeological and ethnographic collections and sites. Thus, one may observe the merging of the authoritative type of museum with the idea of ethnic homogeneity instead of diversity of the state population.

The paper is based on information acquired by author through work in the region as an expert for UNESCO projects of preservation museum collections and development of the museum field.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Alexander Stetsenko
Activity of non-governmental museums as one of the necessary conditions of preservation and development of culture.

Main points of the paper by the First Deputy, Director General, Museum named after Nicholas Roerich of the International Centre of the Roerichs (ICR), Vice-President of the ICR Alexander Stetsenko titled “Activity of non-governmental museums as one of the necessary conditions of preservation and development of culture.”

Non-governmental museums in Russia constitute not more than 2% of their total number. One of the key reasons of such a low percentage of non-governmental museums is that the authorities do not sufficiently appreciate the role of society in the preservation and development of culture.

As Nicholas Roerich observed, culture is the heritage of entire nation. Passing through the hearts and minds of people its energy ennobles and enlightens not only man but also his environment, and brings peace. Nicholas Roerich’s appeal (Peace through Culture), being the main content and objective of the Roerich Pact, is not an abstract vision but a call for action. It is precisely due to public initiative that the treaty for the preservation of the cultural heritage of mankind was signed in 1935 and laid foundation for the development of the entire system of the international humanitarian law on the preservation of cultural heritage. The Roerich Pact is aimed at the preservation of peace on the planet.

Great power is vested in the social movement. It should be utilized for creation. And this happens when its activity is directed towards culture. According to the history it is an extremely rare occurrence. When the psychic energy of the masses is detached from the constructive power of culture it results in destruction. The recent events in Ukraine, Middle East and other parts of the world where armed conflicts continue, prove it rather convincingly. Without culture there is no peace. History demonstrates that mere political and economic measures are incapable of guaranteeing sustainable peace on the planet.

Only culture-oriented mass social movement is capable of preserving culture and peace on the planet. In this process museums, including non-governmental ones, play an important role. Museums involve the widest social circles in their cultural activities. The history of the non-governmental Museum named after Nicholas Roerich speaks eloquently for it.

As Academician Dmitry Likhachev remarked, “Organizing of cultural life is a duty of not only state bodies, but also of the non-governmental institutions. And first of all it is a duty of culture foundations where all men endowed with creative initiative should feel like masters, not supplicants.” Therefore, addressing the President of the Russian Federation, he wrote: “I am deeply convinced that culture should be primarily under public control and secondarily under state control.” Until the authorities start supporting the activities of non-governmental museums we will not be able to preserve our great culture.

ikonka_pdf

Download

Olga V. Taratynova
Specific features of the modern-day development of Russian museums-preserves

Director, Tsarskoye Selo State Museum-Preserve, Saint-Petersburg, Russia

Specific features of the modern-day development of Russian museums-preserves

The purpose of this presentation is to define the problems and their solutions that Russian former suburban imperial residences (museums-preserves) encounter as a specific type of museum. Their specific features are their seasonal work and multiform economic activity.

The suburban residence museums are regional town-forming factors influencing the urban planning policy and economic development of surrounding areas.

Museum as a tourist attraction. The economic diversity of museums-preserves allows their development as multifunctional centers of tourist attraction, sometimes going beyond traditional museum activities.

Many of the museums-preserves currently face the problem of “overload”, especially during summer when the number of tourists exceeds the buildings’ capacity. The annual growth in attendance leads to searching for solutions.

The problem can be solved, in the first place, by “streamlining” the visitor flow and by the flexibility and efficiency of tour organizers, as well as by creating other tourist attractions and offering special programs based on social, age and professional interests. Such programs can be family-friendly, eco-oriented, and so on.

Financing for museums-preserves. Most Russian museums have the federal government as their main “donor”. Things are different in Europe and America. For example, the American government finances only a few national museums, while the rest live off the money from trustees and private charities. The most active museums can earn no more than 20-30 percent of their budget.

European museums are more dependent on government subsidies, thus an economic crisis in one country or another has a direct impact on them.

Russia’s tendency of late years is the growth of non-budget financing in a museum’s overall budget. The Ministry of Culture approves of various museum-related activities which help increase a museum’s income. Although, each particular case requires a good sense of proportion and control lest we cross the line between the museum and an entertainment center.

ikonka_pdf

Download