Open Forum

I think the most interesting point from this week was the idea that a 'neutral' museum does not exist, and that a museum pretending to be neutral is actually adopting the narrative of the dominant group in society. For me this casts the net a lot wider and makes me think that museums have a broader role than I would have thought at the start of the week. In the poll, fewer people thought that museums have a role in tackling unemployment and helping youth offenders. But if the statement about neutrality is correct then surely it is problematic for a museum NOT to address these areas. Because in doing so it is adopting the narrative of power held by people in jobs without criminal records. I'm sure life is hard enough for people who are unemployed or need rehabilitation without them also being implicitly excluded from our cultural institutions.

The case studies over the last few weeks have forced me to rethink my idea about the role of museums in society. In one of my earlier posts I said that I thought it was the responsibility of museum professionals not to use their displays to generate emotions for political or cultural reasons. I now see that this is not possible. Museums are about culture and the human experience, and these are not objective things. They can only be understood through interpretation, so it’s not possible to be completely neutral. David Fleming sums this up perfectly when he says that ‘Museum neutrality is not merely the avoidance of a position; it is the covert adoption of a position, disguised as neutrality’. If museums can reach out to all members of a community, they are in a brilliant position to be able to tackle issues of social justice, and I now think it’s important that they do.