See what others are saying and join the debate by emailing your response to greg@museum-id.com
Richard Benjamin - Director, International Slavery Museum
In a word no. It is naive to assume that the museum professionals who have overall jurisdiction over a museum space are totally objective in deciding what happens here, what goes where and why. One could argue that hosting a BNP open evening is a good idea for freedom of speech. On the other hand, you could see that as supporting the concepts of manipulation and disinformation. Why is taking a stance against current issues and social ills such as the propagation of racist rhetoric and ideologies such a worrying prospect for many in the museum world? Do we not for instance have the expertise to challenge the ridiculous notions of racial superiority or a racially pure Britain? I think we have, and that is why a museum which exists in the current national and global political landscape needs to stop being neutral.
Matthew Cawley
Richard Benjamin chooses a very extreme example to challenge the question of neutrality. If the question of neutrality is applied to historical debate in museums the answer becomes less clear cut. Take for example the International Slavery Museum, it retreats from including academic debates of abolition of the slave trade. The museum attempts to address the ‘silence’ of Black history that was symptomatic of British museums and highlights important aspects of a past that is not widely known. In particular the roles African’s played (through opposition and uprisings) in the fight for abolition. However, this becomes the focus of the museum so much so that the complexity of abolition of the slave trade is almost lost. The banner at the entrance asks visitors to “remember not that we were freed but that we fought”. Whilst African’s did fight for their freedom, the work of white abolitionists also played a role some academic research even suggest other reasons for abolition. Eric Williams’ work suggests it was no longer profitable whilst David Biron Davis argues that there were complex political reasons for abolition. So, perhaps when addressing academic debates in museums neutrality is not a bad thing. History is in a constant flux and there are rarely absolutes, presenting several viewpoints and allowing the visitors to engage with these can only be good. After all this would likely promote further interest in the topic and perhaps even further research by the visitors and that can only be a good thing.
Piotr Bienkowski
It really depends on what you assume 'neutrality' to be. I am not sure it exists: and I cannot see how any institutional space can ever be neutral, since it is set up and funded for particular purposes as part of a political process. In my experience most museums are NOT neutral spaces and never have been. Because of their history, because of the disciplinary education of most of their staff, and because of the type of classificatory information that they amass about their collections, museums privilege a particular type of knowledge. Their default position is one of the axiomatic value of scientific and academic authority: they regard this as somehow universally accepted, normal and common sense, and most museum directors will return to this position as a reflex when they feel threatened. But this is not neutrality! It is a particular worldview, and museums on the whole, with notable exceptions, are still not very good at bringing in emotional and spiritual approaches and values, and exploring alternative stories which may conflict with what is academically acceptable. Personally I feel the role of museums, and increasingly so in today's world, is to bring different cultures and subcultures together in an effort to create listening and understanding. This means actively seeking and bringing together groups and points of view which may be in fundamental disagreement, and challenging assumptions and preconceptions, including the assumption that the academic approach is somehow 'objective'. And that approach of course is in no way neutral, since it accepts that there is no such thing as objective knowledge, only points of view, all of which should be laid out together in order to gain an understanding of our human and non-human world.
Tim Desmond, Chief Executive, Galleries of Justice Museum
Museums should be neutral spaces which provide a safe environment to engage visitors in social and historical issues. H
owever museums do have a responsibility to provoke and stimulate people to learn from history. My vision for a republic for museums is to: Learn about the Past; Act in the Present and Change the Future. Our sector cannot be passive and think that success rests on visitor numbers alone, we have an opportunity to shape the way society sees itself and we mustn’t waste it by sitting on the fence.
Paul Barnett, Acting Director, Bristol Museum and Art Gallery
This is a fast changing, ever more complicated world and our cultural institutions need to reflect the diversity we all experience every day in their thinking and their work. So given the legacy of many of our museums is a hundred years of a white anglo saxon tradition, how can we remain neutral if we are to redress this imbalance? The work of the Bristol Black Archives Partnership is a fine example of how to change things, with an active community led partnership, HLF funding to start up, and the support of committed staff within the Bristol Museums, Galleries and Archives service. David Lammy picked up on this in 2007 and suggested this good practice was shared nationally. But where is the mechanism for this radical debate nationally that leads to a change in the approach of our Museums, and moves the sector on? The overwhelming response here to Banksy has shown that all sections of society want Museums to take a less neutral view and rather to help reflect and articulate what we feel passionate about in the world. In the absence of national leadership, let us commit to our buildings being places of radical debate, and let us promise ourselves that we will act on the often challenging conclusions that comes from this process. Any takers?
