Motivations for participating in museums’ interventions

Abstract

ABSTRACT:The article examines what motivates people to participate in a cultural institution's participatory interventions. In recent decades, the changing roles of cultural institutions and the concepts of defining museum audiences are brought together in the case study of the Estonian National Museum's participatory interventions. This paper indicates that motivations for participation are emotional and personal, that social goals are often overestimated, but the wish to cooperate and gain recognition from institutions have often been underestimated as motivators. The museum's roles to support intercultural dialogue and facilitate diverse views were not supported by the participational interventions. Analysis indicated that being a participant does not make people more critical or dialogical in a museum context, as the topics the participants chose to be involved with are appropriate to their own experiences, contexts and assumptions. CHanGinG roLes of MUseUMsThe modern cultural and institutional roles of museums are characterized by the complexity of the relations, pressures and goals surrounding them. Museums can be described as: temples of civilization, sites for the creation of citizens, forums of debate, settings for cultural interchange and negotiation of values, engines of economic renewal and revenue generation, imposed colonialist enterprises, havens of elitist distinction and discrimination, or places of empowerment and recognition etc (Kratz & Karp, 2006: 1-4). All of which generate new circumstances and opportunities of development.In order to examine the multiple roles of a museum, I selected the six most prominent topics in modern museum discourse: 1) Museums are governmental, collective and educative. The view that heritage is a valuable source of meaning making, a collective representation of tradition and ideals, which is closely connected to informal public education and guided by official cultural policy (for example Hall, 2005; Bennett, 2006: 59).2) Heritage as facilitator. The idea that the museum is in control of 'facilitating the world to people' , where heritage and tradition are envisaged as a social glue that might be used to stick together disparate bits of society and to attach those sectors that seem to have become detached (Macdonald, 2008;Ciolfi, 2012).3) Heritage's importance to cultural tourism and economy. In the contexts of the creative industry and cultural tourism, there are successful sectors amongst which heritage-related activities have considerable economic importance (Menger, 2010; Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, 2006). 4) Global and technological change. Museums are elements of globalized flows of information, people and ideas; they reach beyond their spaces and national boundaries through the Internet. Technology has caused changes in the notions of objects and exhibitions, and placed the concepts of real and original artefacts on the public agenda (Ross, 2010).5) Issues of expertise. Digitalised collections have made museum collections more open, more visible and more used ...

The Routledge Handbook of Museums, Media and Communication

“…None of the analysed initiatives discussed the wider cultural implications of the activities but focussed on potential personal gains. Consistent with and Lotina's (2016) arguments, Aljas (2015) purports that relevance to audiences is a crucial factor in designing and understanding appropriate museumparticipation activities.…”

“…Cultural-political ideals, cultural citizenship and the museum's relevance as a democratic institution are ongoing discussions in the museum world. These discussions must also include the benefits of going beyond one-way communication (Aljas, 2015). However, the museum itself must value different modes of engagement (Lotina, 2016).…”

“…The cultural-political Participants -people who by invitation or from their own agenda contribute to the museum by changing the power-relations in some way Users -people whose engagement with the museum goes beyond visiting and viewing, assumes using either museum's resources or part taking in museum activities Visitors -those who actually come to the museum whether onsite or online Audiences -those having some online or offline connection to the museum -in the sphere of receiving messages from the museum Public -everyone out there with the potential to be or to become interested in or connected with the museum ideals of citizenship, participation and the remodelling of democracy are often not visible (or even intended to be visible) in the context of museum-participation initiatives. Aljas (2015) classified participants' accounts of their motivations as personal-individual, personal-social and personal-institutional. This classification is explored further in Table II.4.1 and is based on the analysis of ten unique museum-engagement activities at the ENM.…”

“…These can work both in favour of and against the success of participatory activities. Aljas (2015) attempted to evaluate the relevance of these factors in relation to the activity's expected workload. The Museum of Broken Relationships -which began in 2006 as a temporary travelling exhibition of the material traces of people's failed romantic relationships and was established as permanent museum in Zagreb, Croatia -is a good example of how it relied on acknowledging participants and addressing their need to talk about their experience of different devastating relationships.…”

Curators With and Without Collections : A Comparative Study of Changes in the Curator’s Work at National Museums in Finland and in the Baltic States

“…However, there is still a significant lack of research on the affects of the new museology on collections and curators' tasks at museums. With regard to developments in the countries under analysis, the research has been dominated by studies of museum communication, cultural participation and museum audience relationships (see Runnel and Pruulmann-Vengerfeldt 2014;Aljas 2015;Lotina 2016). While recent studies in Finland have focused on museum workers' assessments of museum work and their connection with the shaping of identity (Hakamies 2017), the study of the relationships between museum work and the new museology in the Baltic countries has been, until very recently, a neglected field (Stoškutė 2017: 77).…”