Crossing Borders Connecting European Identities in Museums and Online Simon Knell, Bodil Axelsson, Lill Eilertsen, Eleni Myrivili, Ilaria Porciani, Andrew Sawyer and Sheila Watson EuNaMus Report no 2 Crossing Borders Connecting European Identities in Museums and Online Simon Knell, Bodil Axelsson, Lill Eilertsen, Eleni Myrivili, Ilaria Porciani, Andrew Sawyer and Sheila Watson EuNaMus Report no 2 Copyright The publishers will keep this document online on the Internet – or its possible replacement – from the date of publication barring exceptional circumstances. The online availability of the document implies permanent permission for anyone to read, to download, or to print out single copies for his/her own use and to use it unchanged for noncommercial research and educational purposes. Subsequent transfers of copyright cannot revoke this permission. All other uses of the document are conditional upon the consent of the copyright owner. The publisher has taken technical and administrative measures to assure authenticity, security and accessibility. According to intellectual property law, the author has the right to be mentioned when his/ her work is accessed as described above and to be protected against infringement. For additional information about Linköping University Electronic Press and its procedures for publication and for assurance of document integrity, please refer to its www home page: http://www.ep.liu.se/. Linköping University Interdisciplinary Studies, No. 14 Linköping University Electronic Press Linköping, Sweden, 2012 ISSN: 1650-9625 URL: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-76372 Copyright © The Authors, 2012 This report has been published thanks to the support of the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for Research - Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities theme (contract nr 244305 – Proj- ect European National Museums: Identity Politics, the Uses of the Past and the European Citizen). The information and views set out in this report are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Cover photo: Simon Knell. Museum of the Romanian Peasant. in this European language, adds to a sense of national security and well-being, and increases the potential for international dialogue. Summary 4. This language, which developed in Europe and has been exported globally, con- tinues to evolve. New forms of representation, such as in art, permit new nations and nations lacking established art collections, and other forms of representation established in more territorially secure and wealthier nations, to participate inclu- sively in these pan-European cultural negotiations. Contemporary art shows, for The museum is deployed as a malleable technology in Europe. It is not a sin- example, have not discriminated between established art centres and countries gular instrument to be adopted and applied but rather an institution that is and cities only now considering the cultural and symbolic uses of art. It does not made to bend to national and local needs. The largely invisible soft architec- rely on acts of possession, only opportunities for performance. ture1. of the museum – the workforce – is the most important element in realising the possibilities of the museum. 5. The recognition of this shared language has underpinned collaborative, loan and travelling exhibitions. However, a preference for high art, and for representa- 2. In no nation does the national museum holistically define or represent that tions of established themes and actors in art, can produce an exclusive engage- nation. Its performances, like those produced in architecture, monuments and ment, which selects against smaller and newer nations. As yet, the full border- spaces in the capital, aim to represent the nation in its international cultural con- crossing potential of these shared forms of representation is not fully realised, text, and may also establish overarching artistic, historical, scientific, technological and this is particularly so in those parts of Europe where nations feel least secure, and cultural narratives. However, all European nations also possess regional and and political tensions exist between neighbours. local museums which contribute, in the form of a mosaic of identities, a more nu- anced understanding of the nation and its regional character. But just as there is 6. The danger in such border-crossing, however, is increased European cultural little to distinguish between the interior performances of the national museum, homogenisation which risks eroding the cultural diversity celebrated in Europe’s and the museological displays of the capital city, so regional museums merge into museums. The existence of a shared material language suggests the long-term landscapes littered with ‘objects’ which resonate with the past and with identity. operation of this cultural process. The problem has the potential to be exacer- Museological performances of national and European identity should not simply bated by the globalising effects of pervasive English and the Internet. If cultural be thought of as carefully curated and intentional narratives. policy is to activate national museums as instruments of greater social cohesion, it must, in parallel, introduce actions which ensure the resilient cultural difference. 3. In national museums Europe manifests itself not as a subject but as a connec- National museums, which have been founded on the principle of differentiation, tive material language through which nations express their internalised and com- even if in a shared European language, are well positioned to participate in these petitive identities. The existence of this language produces an implicit sense of Eu- double layered negotiations. rope in visual acts of nation-making. The ability of nations to present themselves 2 7. Conceptions of Europe are polycentric; Europe, its definition and cultural rep- and implications of events represented in this art. These objects perform today resentation, is nuanced by the national viewpoint. Countries on the Atlantic coast primarily as national icons; they have the potential to be points of dialogue. have viewed the continent in the context of global internationalism. Those in the centre and east, have seen Europe as a westward dimension to a wider geographi- 10. European national museums possess a wealth of objects which have crossed cal territory centred on the nation that also admits dialogue with non-European national borders. While these have produced much contestation, these objects territories and influences to the east and south. Many nations express a defining have undoubtedly performed an ambassadorial role. Pan-European elevation of sense of ‘inbetweenness’. There are no sharp boundaries to the deployment of ancient Greek and Roman artefacts, and Italian and Dutch paintings, for example, Europe’s representative language. Within Europe architectural styles and other owes much to the movement and foreign possession of these objects. This object forms of representation show particular patterns of adoption. At Europe’s bor- mobility has produced national museums which in the sheer diversity of material ders, they merge with other styles and forms of expression. they hold also represent Europe; both because the objects represent a spread of geographical territories but also because this eclectic aspect is a peculiarity of the 8. Some nations, such as Germany, Italy and the UK, hold a confederated sense of European museum model. It is not found globally. nation and national culture; a joining together of disparate elements. It is, how- ever, also possible for small nations to confederate culturally so as to increase 11. Regional museums play an important role in the production of distinctive na- their cultural power. National art museums in the Nordic countries have repeat- tional identities which nuance national stereotypes. In these museums, national edly worked together to develop and exploit these transnational commonalities identity becomes faceted, and attached to a mosaic of histories and material in art exhibitions. These countries provide a model for other regions in which the cultures. If Europe is polycentric in terms of national perspectives, then the na- relatively small size of nations disempowers them in European cultural dialogue. tion, too, is capable of exhibiting polycentricity according to the thematic (religion, class, industry, nature, and so on) and regional lenses through which it is viewed. 9. National art museums implicitly, and unavoidably, present narrow and exclu- sive traits of Europeanness. Christian symbolism is inevitably dominant in West- 12. The history of museum development in Norway reveals the multi-faceted ways ern art history but it is also implicit in possessions from the ancient Middle East. It in which regional developments construct new forms of representation, strength- is also present in historical paintings, particularly in national museums in central en rural identities, give weight and emphasis to particular events and regions, and and south-eastern Europe, which, for example, celebrate the overthrow of the Ot- even draw the centre of the nation away from the capital. It reveals the ‘invented- toman Turks. While some museums engage in the uncensored display of national ness’ and inventiveness of these national identities. art, others appear to engage in concealment believing such works embody out- dated political ideologies. These acts of selection permeate more widely