In the last few weeks, I had the chance
to talk to a couple of colleagues regarding some accessibility issues in their
exhibitions. Things like poorly illuminated labels, bad contrast between
letters and background, labels placed too low, objects exhibited at a high
level and without inclination, long and complicated texts. I believe that these
are issues that can easily be solved, without any further investment in money,
just with some forward planning and the concern not to exclude. Actually, when
exhibitions are designed to be inclusive, not only do they not cost more, but
they can actually bring more money in, as more people will be able to access
them.
I felt a bit puzzled when the people I
approached told me that they knew all about those problems. Why did things
happen that way, then? Is it possible that we are consciouly creating barriers
to our exhibitions’ content? What do we do them for, then, if not for people to
enjoy them?
I feel the same kind of puzzlement in
conferences or training courses, when we discuss issues of management,
communications, marketing, visitor services, education, etc. Quite often, some
colleagues approach me and say: “We’ve been telling our superiors what you’ve
just said to for years and years.”
Thus, it seems that there’s no lack
museum professionals (including museum guards) who are aware of a number of
small and big management or communications problems. We have also got feedack from visitors themselves, through
visitor books, comment cards, visitor studies, etc. Finally, there is also the
contribution of academics, thinkers, bloggers, such as Maria Isabel Roque - who
recently reminded us of some of the things that are still to happen, in her
insightful post Acerca do que (ainda) falta ao património - or Luís Raposo - one of the few museum professionals in Portugal who
regularly share their views publicly, his latest opinion article concerning the
opening of the new Coaches Museum and future plans for museums in Lisbon’s
Belem area.
So, we can’t complain that we haven’t
already got truly valuable feedback – both from insiders and outsiders - which
can help build strategies, correct mistakes, make decisions, register trends,
understand changes and developments. Why don´t decision makers and those
directly responsible for museum management act on it? What´s stopping us, what
kind of barriers are we dealing with? Why are we going after more studies, new
studies, if we haven’t done anything yet about the things we already know? Why
existing knowledge seems to have no impact whatsoever on museum management and
practices?
Here’s my attempt to identify some
reasons:
It might be because, despite politically
correct statements that museums are at the service of society, they are rather
at the service of those who manage them. People – those who come and those who
don’t come – and their interests and needs are actually not our principal
concern. Objects are and it’s enough that they look beautiful for those who
know how to appreciate them.
It might be because in this field we work
with very short-term plans, which follow the electoral circles and which may
easily be abandoned, with no further explanation or responsibilities taken.
Thus, big and small issues remain and their discussion is perpetuated without
brining any concrete developments.
Finally, it might be because we tend to
settle for what’s “good enough”. We know what the problems are, but there comes
a moment when we cannot insist anymore: either because we can’t get our
arguments across or because we feel that we cannot expect or demand more from
other people. Only that “good enough” is not good enough and the argument of
“one step at a time” doesn’t always take us as far as we should go. In fact, it
often keeps us just where we are.
More on this blog
No comments:
Post a Comment