Moral discourse and argumentation in the public sphere: Museums and their visitors

Noy, Chaim

doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2017.01.005

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Noy’s (2016a, b, 2017a, b) studies are single case studies investigating museum visitor participation, communication studies, and ethnographic theoretical perspectives. Noy (2016a) examines the Florida Holocaust Museum (FHM), while Noy’s (2016b, 2017a, b) studies are case studies of the National Museum of American Jewish History (NMAJH) in Philadelphia. All four of Noy's articles investigate aspects of museum commenting systems.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the demonstration of the importance of the Habermasian notion of the public sphere in analyzing the exhibition contributes to building a theoretical framework for the empirical study of the cultural public sphere, which is ambitious and may serve as a building block for future research. Noy (2016aNoy ( , 2016bNoy ( , 2017aNoy ( , 2017b are single case studies investigating museum visitor participation, communication studies, and ethnographic theoretical perspectives. Noy (2016a) examines the Florida Holocaust Museum (FHM), while Noy (2016bNoy ( , 2017aNoy ( , 2017b are case studies of the National Museum of American Jewish History (NMAJH) in Philadelphia.…”

Section: Visitor Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The studies of museum visitors and the public sphere focus on how museums try to engage visitors as participants. Various visitor participation frames have been studied, from exhibitions (Coleman, 2016;Sherman, 2014) to different visitor book technologies (Noy, 2016a(Noy, , 2016b(Noy, , 2017a(Noy, , 2017b. Sherman (2014) aptly describes the aims of museum-public sphere activities to bring back socially relevant museum conversations into public life.…”

Section: Visitor Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mapping the research on museums and the public sphere: a scoping review

Vårheim

Skare

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeIn museum research, museums are held as vital in maintaining the public sphere. This scoping review takes stock of the present status of museum–public sphere research by providing an overview of the existing literature as a point of departure for future research. In short, it maps the research aims, theoretical concepts, research methods and findings within the field and identifies research gaps.Design/methodology/approachA scoping review methodology is used to provide a knowledge synthesis of the museum–public sphere literature. This approach is instrumental for researching multi-disciplinary, fragmented or underdeveloped research fields. Reviews can help identify otherwise easily overlooked gaps in the research literature and are an essential tool.FindingsOverwhelmingly, the published literature consists of case studies, some of which are theoretically ambitious. Still, cases are selected without explicit goals regarding analytical or theoretical generalization, and the studies are not placed within a theory-building framework. Moreover, the museum–public sphere research primarily focuses on museums in the core Anglosphere countries and is conducted by researchers affiliated with institutions in those countries. The museum–community relationship is a common research theme addressing engagement with the public through either visitor participation or community participation.Originality/valueThis is the first published scoping review or systematically conducted review and knowledge synthesis of the museum–public sphere research literature to our knowledge. The article finds and discusses a range of research gaps that need to be addressed theoretically and empirically.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Visitor Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Visitor Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mapping the research on museums and the public sphere: a scoping review

Vårheim

Skare

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Importantly, in this study, particular attention is paid to ‘how much imposition of the interviewers’ agenda’ (De Fina, 2009: 255) took place in the interviews, given the interviewers’ affiliation with Belgian WWII memorial sites. Museums and memorial sites have historically been synonymous with ‘authority, authenticity [and] singularity’ (Kidd, 2014: 2), as they often exert their ‘authorial curatorial voice’ (Noy, 2017: 46) to create ‘epistemic cultures’ (Porsché, 2018: 9) in which they present ‘what should be known or remembered’ (Porsché, 2018: 37). By extension, the interviewers’ institutional affiliation provides them with epistemic authority regarding WWII, which potentially allows them to act as representatives of WWII master narratives.…”

Section: Research Question Data and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epistemic competitions over Jewish Holocaust survivors’ stories in interviews

Schoofs

Mieroop

2021

Discourse & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we scrutinise epistemic competitions in interviews about World War II. In particular, we analyse how the interlocutors draw on their epistemic authority concerning WWII to construct their interactional telling rights. On the one hand, the analyses illustrate how the interviewers rely on their historical expert status – as evidenced through their specialist knowledge and ventriloquisation of vicarious WWII narratives – in order to topicalise certain master narratives and thereby attempt to project particular identities upon the interviewees. On the other hand, the interviewees derive their epistemic authority from their first-hand experience as Jewish Holocaust survivors, on which they draw in order to counter these story projections, whilst constructing a more distinct self-positioning to protect their nuanced personal identity work. Overall, these epistemic competitions not only shaped the interviewees’ identity work, but they also made the link between storytelling and the social context more tangible as they brought – typically rather elusive – master narratives to the surface.

show abstract

“…In this vein, it may be stimulating to think of the (digital) public sphere as not only infused with moral values and activities, but also as being constituted as a public spere in and through them. We have witnessed this in various public interactional settings and contexts, both online and offline (Noy, 2017;Tileagă, 2012). It suggests not only the politicization of the public sphere, but the constitution of digital spaces of discourse as public.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

The ethnomethodology of metapragmatics in everyday interaction

Noy¹

2022

LUD

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This discussion note is inspired by, and in turn expands on, a few themes and threads laid out in Judith Bridges’s “Explaining ‘-splain’ in digital discourse”. The note stresses the focus and contribution linguistic anthropologists have made to understanding various types of indexical meaning-making practices, and the order of indexicality. This discussion note also briefly details the affordances of the word “explain” and the suffix “x-plain”, which may account for why this suffix, and not others, has come to be used so frequently.

show abstract

Moral discourse and argumentation in the public sphere: Museums and their visitors

Cited by 9 publications

References 22 publications

Mapping the research on museums and the public sphere: a scoping review

Mapping the research on museums and the public sphere: a scoping review

Epistemic competitions over Jewish Holocaust survivors’ stories in interviews

The ethnomethodology of metapragmatics in everyday interaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About