History of Museums

Museum building in colonies

by Suresh Pillai

it is the second part of my essay on Museumisatiom

MUSEUMISATION OF THE PRESENT

by Suresh Pillai

‘The British State and the Anglo-French Wars Over Antiquities, 1798-1858’, Historical Journal, 50:1 (2007), 1-24

by Holger Hoock

Egypt Exploration Society Invades ... London Underground?

by Amara Thornton

Thornton, A. 2012. Egypt Exploration Society Invades ... London Underground? The EES Newsletter, 4, pp.4-5.

Australia in the Museum of Economic Botany

by Alison Clark

Museología, sociología e historia crítica de los museos: nuevas perspectivas

by Julien Bastoen

To be published in 'Museo y Territorio' (Museo del Patrimonio Municipal, Málaga, Spain), #3

En la actualidad, bajo la influencia de las nuevas tecnologías de la información y la comunicación, las nociones de... more En la actualidad, bajo la influencia de las nuevas tecnologías de la información y la comunicación, las nociones de red, comunidad e interactividad nunca han sido más importantes en el debate sobre la proyección social de los museos1. Sin embargo, no deberíamos olvidar que su impacto social fue siempre importante, aunque se revele complicado estimarlo con precisión, al considerar períodos anteriores al siglo XX. La teoría del actor-red, fue elaborada en la década de los ochenta por investigadores del Centro de Sociología de la Innovación en la Escuela de ingenieros de minas de París, entre los cuales destacan: Bruno Latour y Michel Callon. Dicha teoría ha sido originada por investigaciones llevadas a cabo en los campos de las innovaciones sociotécnicas, la evaluación y el análisis dinámico de las políticas de investigación, así como de estudios sobre cultura, medios de comunicación y usuarios. Supone una lectura interaccionista, relativista y reflexiva de los procesos de innovación científica y tecnológica. Esta lectura resulta no sólo de la observación in situ de los actores, sino también del análisis y modelización de las controversias que suelen anunciar o acompañar las innovaciones. Uno de los pilares de la teoría del actor-red es el principio de simetría: primero, los actores no-humanos son tan importantes como los actores humanos; y segundo, tan importante es el fracaso como el éxito a la hora de explicar la evolución de un proceso de innovación.

La teoría del actor-red fue la base epistemológica para el desarrollo de un proyecto de colaboración internacional, el Mapping controversies on science for politics (Macospol), cuyo objetivo principal es el experimento de herramientas visuales para que sea accesible y entendible lo complejo de las controversias científicas, tecnológicas y socioculturales, mediante la modelización de las interacciones entre los actores humanos y no humanos. En el marco del mismo proyecto, un grupo de investigación situado en Mánchester y dirigido por una pupila de Bruno Latour, Albena Yaneva, ha desarrollado herramientas visuales para mapear la polémica que surgió entorno al proyecto de construcción del Estadio Olímpico de Londres. La misma Albena Yaneva publicó en 2009 una memoria de investigación que abre – estamos convencidos de ello – nuevas oportunidades para la museología crítica. Llevó a cabo un estudio sociológico entre 2001 y 2004 en la firma de arquitectura OMA, a quien le habían encargado el diseño del proyecto de ampliación del Museo Whitney de Arte Estadounidense en Nueva York. Le dejaron observar el proceso creativo (design process) a la luz del análisis de las “cajas negras”, o sea, conjuntos de huellas gráficas, hemerográficas y bibliográficas recopiladas por los arquitectos con el fin de documentar las controversias que habían levantado los anteriores proyectos de ampliación del ya polémico edificio de Marcel Breuer. Su análisis se encaminaba de forma paralela hacía la reconstrucción de la trayectoria social de la sede del Museo Whitney a lo largo de varias décadas; esa trayectoria, la plasmaron las interacciones de un conjunto muy heterogéneo de actores individuales e institucionales (curadores, administradores, artistas, conservadores, arquitectos, ingenieros...) y no-humanos (reglamentos de planificación, programas de arquitectura, etc.).

De hecho, el estudio que realizó Albena Yaneva desde el punto de vista de una firma de arquitectura, lo hubiera podido llevar a cabo desde el punto de vista de los profesionales de museos. Sin embargo, lo que vale para estudiar controversias contemporáneas en torno a innovación museográfica, ampliación o creación de museos, puede que no valga para analizar controversias decimonónicas. Dado que el estímulo de la reflexividad de los profesionales en situación de interacción es la condición del éxito de la investigación sociológica, ¿cómo compensar la ausencia de testigos vivos de los procesos de innovación/creación y de las controversias que los acompañaron? A modo de respuesta, proponemos dos enfoques complementarios en el mismo caso, el Musée du Luxembourg, a fin de comprobar las condiciones de posibilidad de la aplicación en el campo de la historia crítica de los museos de las herramientas conceptuales y visuales usadas por la sociología de la innovación.

Destins croisés du Musée du Luxembourg, de la Tate Gallery et du Museo de Arte Moderno dans les années 1890 : La transtextualité à l’œuvre dans le domaine muséal

by Julien Bastoen

Published in: 'Musées de la nation : créations, transpositions, renouveaux' (Anne-Solène Rolland et Hanna Murauskaya, eds.). Paris: L’Harmattan (coll. Patrimoine et sociétés), 2008, 183-203

Généralement envisagé sous l’angle de sa position privilégiée de prototype, voire de mythe fondateur, le Musée du... more Généralement envisagé sous l’angle de sa position privilégiée de prototype, voire de mythe fondateur, le Musée du Luxembourg a très longtemps échappé aux études comparatives. Ce phénomène a perduré jusqu’à ce qu’un chercheur espagnol, Jesús Pedro Lorente, replace ce musée dans la perspective du développement d’un réseau informel et international d’institutions privées et publiques destinées à promouvoir l’art contemporain, élargissant ainsi à l’Europe et à l’Amérique du Nord le point de vue adopté par Daniel J. Sherman quelques années plus tôt, dans une thèse pionnière. Contaminée par la prégnance du modèle établi par le Louvre, l’analyse problématique des relations entre le Musée du Luxembourg et ses émules étrangers demeure en outre menacée par la tentation « d’isoler les développements nationaux de leur contexte européen ». Un autre risque relève d’un point méthodologique : pour étudier les possibles « modèles », ne vaut-il pas mieux procéder d’abord à partir d’une analyse des enjeux de la création des « imitations » ? En outre, il est bien difficile de trancher la question à l’heure d’aborder les pratiques de l’imitation, de la copie, de la parodie et du pastiche, qui toutes ne peuvent pas prétendre traduire la complexité d’un procédé de transfert conscient et sélectif de données originales plus ou moins formelles d’un contexte socioculturel à un autre. Si certaines de ces pratiques – la parodie, le pastiche ou même la transposition – relèvent de la logique de l’hypertextualité, d’autres, comme la citation, l’allusion ou le plagiat, relèveraient de l’intertextualité, ou encore de la métatextualité, comme c’est le cas du commentaire : certaines de ces pratiques n’excluent pas, nous allons le vérifier, la possibilité d’une réversibilité de la logique transtextuelle que le texte source entretient avec le texte qui en est l’émanation directe ou indirecte. Toutefois, dans quelle mesure la convocation des trois pratiques littéraires que nous venons d’énumérer permet-elle d’éclairer les procédés à l’œuvre dans le processus de création de deux musées nationaux à la fin du XIXe siècle? La réponse à cette question présupposera la vérification de deux hypothèses : premièrement, que la notion de « modèle » n’est pas pertinente pour le champ muséal ; deuxièmement, que l’idée d’une diffusion, qui évoque un mouvement centrifuge, multidirectionnel, assimilable à l’exportation d’un produit culturel, ne se justifie pas, tout au moins dans les cas que nous avons choisi d’étudier dans une perspective comparative, en nous appuyant sur un examen approfondi des archives et de la presse.

Pepper the Walls with Bullets: Lina Bo Bardi's Museu de Arte de São Paulo

by Gabriela Campagnol

Co-authored with Stephen Caffey; 2010 Creating_Making Forum

The Material-Cultural Turn: event and effect.

by Dan Hicks

Cite this paper as: Hicks, Dan 2010. The Material-Cultural Turn: Event and Effect. In Dan Hicks and Mary C. Beaudry (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Material Culture Studies. Oxford: OUP, pp. 25- 98.

The full references are provided in the bibliography for the published volume.

İzmir Kent Arşivi ve Müzesi, Mimarlık 319(2005)

by Fikret Yılmaz

Sir Joseph Hooker's collections at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew

by Mark Nesbitt

Goyder, D., P. Griggs, M. Nesbitt, L. Parker & K. Ross-Jones. 2012. Sir Joseph Hooker's collections at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Curtis's Botanical Magazine 29(1): 66-85.

A brief look at the history of museums in the Region and wider Middle East

by Pamela Erskine-Loftus

Introductory essay for 2A Art & Architecture special edition ‘Museums in the Middle East’, issue 13, winter/spring 2010

Consuming Colonialism: Curio Dealers’ Catalogues, Souvenir Objects and Indigenous Agency in Oceania

by Rodney Harrison

Harrison, R. (2011) Consuming Colonialism: Curio-seller's catalogues, souvenir objects and Indigenous agency in Oceania. In S. Byrne, A. Clarke, R. Harrison and R. Torrence (eds) Unpacking the Collection: Networks of Material and Social Agency in the Museum. Springer, New York; pp. 55-82.

Available online at http://www.springerlink.com/content/x16473212586l451/

This chapter explores the potential for a study of colonial curio dealers’ catalogues in producing particular forms of... more This chapter explores the potential for a study of colonial curio dealers’ catalogues in producing particular forms of colonial desire that contributed to the production of a market in ethnographic souvenirs in Britain and its colonies in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Curio dealers occupied an integral space in a network which connected museums, tourists and indigenous artisans, but have been largely ignored in studies of colonial relations and material culture. Previous work on Kimberley Points has suggested Indigenous Australians produced markets for the sale of certain curios to colonial collectors which fulfilled complex roles within the groups who manufactured them, as well as those who received them through purchase, trade or exchange. Focussing on the 1929 catalogue of a Sydney-based curio dealer, Tyrells Museum (formerly Tost and Rohu Taxidermists, Tanners, Furriers and Island Curio Dealers), this chapter demonstrates that such catalogues not only have the potential to reveal changes in market demand, price and desirability of ethnographic objects, but also how artefacts were transformed from functional objects into ornaments, changes in their method and context of manufacture, as well as changing colonial relations between indigenous and non-indigenous people.

Networks, Agents and Objects: Frameworks for Unpacking Museum Collections

by Rodney Harrison

Byrne, S., A. Clarke, R. Harrison and R. Torrence (2011) Networks, Agents and Objects: Frameworks for Unpacking Museum Collections. In S. Byrne, A. Clarke, R. Harrison and R. Torrence (eds) Unpacking the collection: Museums, identity and agency. Springer, New York; pp. 3-26

Available online at http://www.springerlink.com/content/v5310j3ut12n8mk6/

Although on face value, museum collections are largely perceived as static entities hidden away in storerooms or... more Although on face value, museum collections are largely perceived as static entities hidden away in storerooms or trapped behind glass cases, new research shows that over time and across space interactions between objects and a wide range of people have generated a complex assemblage of material and social networks. Based on a broad collection of source materials, studies examining the people who made, sold, traded, studied, catalogued, exhibited and connected with objects reveal a dynamic set of material and social agencies that have been instrumental in creating, shaping and reworking museum collections. By integrating and reworking theories about agency and materiality and by drawing on insights from Actor-Network Theory, contributors to this volume have uncovered new ways to think about relationships formed between objects and individuals and among diverse groups spread across the globe. The research also demonstrates that ethnographic collections continue to play important roles in supporting and reworking national identities as well as to challenge these through ongoing negotiations and sharing of ideas among both the guardians of these objects and their creator communities. These insights have important implications for designing curatorial practices in the future.

Reassembling Ethnographic Museum Collections

by Rodney Harrison

This is the final submitted version of a review chapter that will appear as the Introduction to Rodney Harrison, Sarah Byrne and Anne Clarke (eds) Reassembling the Collection: Ethnographic Museums and Indigenous Agency, to be published by SAR Press

This volume addresses itself to fundamental questions about the nature, value and efficacy of museum collections in a... more This volume addresses itself to fundamental questions about the nature, value and efficacy of museum collections in a postcolonial world, and the agency of indigenous people in their production. Its primary focus lies with those objects which, by way of their specific histories, have been defined as ‘ethnographic’, however, the question of the contexts in which things are defined as ‘art’ as opposed to ‘artifact’ (e.g. Clifford 1988, 1997; Danto 1988; Putnam 1991; Marcus and Myers 1995; Gell 1998; Thomas 1999; Myers 2001) also constitutes a key concern. The book is most appropriately situated within the context of various postcolonial critiques of the role of museums and museum collections in the politics of indigenous representation (e.g. Clifford 1988; 1995; O’Hanlon 1993; Greenfield 1996; Lidchi 1997; Barringer and Flynn 1998; Russell 2001; Karp and Levine 2001; Fforde, Hubert and Turnbull 2002; Kramer 2006; Cuno 2008; Lonetree and Cobb 2008; Sleeper-Smith 2009), and a reaction to the perception that indigenous people had little or no ‘agency’ in the processes which were responsible for the genesis of ethnographic museum collections (themselves largely a phenomenon of the exercising of asymmetrical colonial power relations in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries). Nonetheless, in seeing this book as a product of that literature and its accompanying themes, what sets it apart from much of the current literature is that it makes a significant attempt to move beyond the concerns of the politics of representation which have tended to dominate critical museum studies (Macdonald 2011), to consider the affective qualities of things alongside their representational role within the museum. Similarly, in considering the complex material and social interactions of things, people and institutions which constitute ethnographic collections, we attempt to move beyond the observation that indigenous people and ethnographic objects ‘had (and continue to have) agency’, to consider how concepts of agency and indigeneity need to be reconfigured in the light of their study within the context of the museum. In doing so, the volume develops a series of new concepts and considers their application to historical and contemporary engagements between ethnographic museums and the various individuals and communities who were (and are) involved in their production. The themes of the volume have profound implications not only for understanding the ongoing processes which have formed museum collections in the past and present, but also for developing new and innovative curatorial practices in the future. Key concepts include the idea of museums as meshworks and material/social assemblages; the ways in which the application of an ‘archaeological sensibility’ might inform approaches to understanding the past and present relationships between people, ‘things’ and institutions in relation to museums; and the ‘curatorial responsibility’ which arises from a reconsideration of the nature of museum ‘objects’.

Assembling and Governing Cultures ‘At Risk’: Centers of Collection and Calculation, from the Museum to World Heritage

by Rodney Harrison

This is the final submitted version of a chapter which will be published shortly in Rodney Harrison, Sarah Byrne and Anne Clarke (eds) Reassembling the Collection: Ethnographic Museums and Indigenous Agency (SAR Press)

In this chapter, I argue that the spectre of risk, vulnerability and loss haunts and helps account for the development... more In this chapter, I argue that the spectre of risk, vulnerability and loss haunts and helps account for the development of the salvage paradigm which drove the development of both late nineteenth/early twentieth century ethnographic museum collections, and the various cultural heritage lists and registers which were developed throughout the twentieth and early twenty-first. In doing so, I suggest that both might be understood to represent centers of (and for) collection and calculation as defined by Bruno Latour (1987; see also Bennett this volume). Latour uses this term in his model of the construction of scientific knowledge to describe the production and accumulation of ‘immutable and combinable mobiles’—objects, specimens, charts, maps, tables, field notebooks and other recorded observations—which are collected from the peripheries (or ‘field’) and returned to a centre where they are able to be combined and interpreted in different ways. This allows centers of calculation to ‘act at a distance’ (1987:229) through the same networks of collection and distribution by which the mobiles are returned, as well as new networks that are created as a result of the assembling and reassembling of these mobiles at the centre. In suggesting that both museums and heritage registers can profitably be viewed as centers of collection, I seek to draw the processes and forms of agency involved in the formation of ethnographic museum collections into closer conversation with those which have contributed to the development of the UNESCO World Heritage Lists (including the UNESCO Lists of Intangible Cultural Heritage). I argue that they not only share their raison d’être as assemblages which are brought together in response to perceived risk, but that they are also a product of a single genealogy, sharing intellectual and institutional histories. Similarly, they both reflect anthropological debates about ‘culture’ and ways of dealing with the relationship of the universal to the particular. This has broad implications for the way we understand not only the rise of intangible heritage in the late twentieth century in relation to forms of minority and indigenous agency, but also the ways in which we might locate indigenous agency in the formation of ethnographic museum collections in the past and present. In particular, I follow Tony Bennett’s (1995) argument regarding the universal mission of museums to explore the ways in which indigenous people and other ethnic minorities have made counter-claims to representation in World Heritage since its introduction in the 1970s alongside the growth of international indigenous rights movements which mirror earlier developments relating to their representation within ethnographic museums. I also explore the ways in which lists such as the World Heritage List ‘materialize’ and stand in for objects, places, and practices and in doing so, continue older museological forms of governance in relation to the categorization of the boundaries between humans and ‘things’.

Viajeros extranjeros en el Museo Nacional de México. Del proyecto imperial a la redefinición republicana (1864-1877)

by Rodrigo Antonio Vega y Ortega

Celina Lértora (coord.), Geografía e Historia Natural: Hacia una historia comparada. Estudio a través de Argentina, México, Costa Rica y Paraguay, Buenos Aires, Ediciones FEPAI, 2010, volumen IV, pp. 185-224. ISBN: 978-90-9262-57-7. Dictamen externo].

El Museo Público de Historia Natural, Arqueología e Historia (1865-1867)

by Rodrigo Antonio Vega y Ortega

Azuela, Luz Fernanda y Rodrigo Vega y Ortega, en Luz Fernanda Azuela y Rodrigo Vega y Ortega (coord.), La Geografía y las ciencias naturales en el siglo XIX mexicano, México, Instituto de Geografía-UNAM, 2011, pp. 103-120.

Il Regio Museo Industriale Italiano

by Luca Giacomelli

in Torino. Prima capitale d’Italia, direzione scientifica di E. Castelnuovo, E. Pagella, Istituto della Encliclopedia italiana Treccani, Roma 2010, pp. 117-124.

Inventari del Regio Museo Industriale Italiano dell’Archivio Storico di Torino.

by Luca Giacomelli

in V. Marchis (a cura di), Disegnare, progettare, costruire. 150 di arte e scienza nelle collezioni del Politecnico di Torino, Editris, Torino 2009.