The Role of Z. Z. Stránský in Present-Day Museology

2019 /08 /02 STUDIE/ARTICLES THE ROLE OF Z. Z. STRÁNSKÝ IN PRESENT-DAY MUSEOLOGY https://doi.org/10.5817/MuB2019-2-2 JAN DOLÁK ABSTRACT/ABSTRAKT: KEYWORDS/KLÍČOVÁ SLOVA: opinions, which is understandable. In some cases we can find certain The demise of significant Czech museum – museology – misunderstandings or small museologist, associate professor Z. Z. Stránský – Marxism – mistakes in these texts. Therefore Zbyněk Zbyslav Stránský, raised postmodernism I consider it necessary to analyse interest in his work and in its muzeum – muzeologie – the previous discourse, summarize competent evaluation. The authors Z. Z. Stránský – marxismus – the knowledge and thereby shift of individual texts mostly agree postmoderna the whole studied problem to with each other in their opinions, a higher level. In the core of this but sometimes they have different text I am dealing with reasons for views, which is understandable. The demise of significant Czech the rejection of Stránský’s concept However, several opinions museologist, associate professor rather than with its acceptance. clearly show that their authors Zbyněk Zbyslav Stránský (26 misunderstood some of Stránský’s October 1926 – 21 January 2016), Most authors indeed consider fundamental postulates. This text raised an international interest Z. Z. Stránský a significant analyses the international discourse in his work and in its competent world-renowned museologist and and comments on disputable evaluation. One entire issue of they accept his approaches with statements. It explains, extends and the Brno journal Museologica major or minor reservations, in critically evaluates the concept by Brunensia (2/2016) was devoted the most cases only partially. Stránský, and thereby shifts the to the personality of Stránský, General accordance exists that whole studied problem to a higher and ICOFOM issued in Paris his ideas significantly influenced level. a whole collected volume Stránský: museology in former Eastern Bloc, uma ponte Brno – Brasil for the inclusive of Yugoslavia. His concept Místo Z. Z. Stránského v současné Federal University of Rio de penetrated on a limited scale to muzeologii Janeiro (UNIRIO). Stránský is Asia and only a bit also to Africa. particularly often mentioned in However, we could also mention Odchod významného českého the collective monograph A History Scandinavia or other countries. muzeologa docenta Zbyňka Zbyslava of Museology, which also was Stránský’s influence was relatively Stránského vyvolal mezinárodní published in Paris and was edited distinct in Switzerland (Martin zájem o jeho dílo, respektive by Bruno Brulon Soares. A series Schärer), in West Germany and o jeho zhodnocení. Autoři textů se of obituaries, texts and personal Austria, above all due to works ve většině svých tvrzení shodují, memories appeared in print. A brief of professor Friedrich Waidacher1 někdy mají odlišné názory, což je anthology of Stránský’s texts was zcela pochopitelné. Objevily se však published in French by François 1 Waidacher’s Handbuch der allgemeinen i názory svědčící o nepochopení Mairesse – Zbyněk Z. Stránský Museologie was translated into Slovak, Chinese, některých dosti podstatných et la muséologie: Une anthologie Ukrainian, Lithuanian and Hungarian, which undoubtedly considerably boosted the postulátů. Tento text mezinárodní (French Edition), with a foreword dissemination of Stránský’s approaches. Stránský, diskusi vyhodnocuje, sporná tvrzení by Bernard Deloche. The authors in my opinion, unfortunately spent too much time commenting on texts of his significant promoters komentuje. Vysvětluje, rozšiřuje of all these works count among (Waidacher, Schärer), who in fact were influential a kriticky vyhodnocuje Stránského recognised prominent members disseminators of his ideas, although they did it in their own style. Stránský’s review of the book pojetí, a tak celou zkoumanou of the international museological Die Ausstellung. Theorie und Exempel by Schärer problematiku posouvá na vyšší community. They agree with each consists much empty and critical philosophising, úroveň. other in many of their comments, but the reader learns in fact nothing about the content of this book, which, in my opinion, is but sometimes they have different a very good piece of writing. STRÁNSKÝ, Zbyněk Zbyslav. Schärer, Martin R. Die Ausstellung: Theorie und Exempel. Museologica Brunensia, 2012, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 39–40. 15 M USEOLOGICA BRUNENSIA from Graz and activity of publisher found the academic researcher the activities of ICOFOM and did Christian Müller-Straten from Z. Z. Stránský who established not use its production. This second Munich. Stránský’s influence in museology as a university subject “non-ICOFOM” stream, in my French-speaking countries (André and began to maintain appropriate opinion, is dominant today. Desvallées, Bernard Deloche) and in domestic and international Spain (J. Pedro Lorente) was rather contacts.4 Stránský’s museology thus Well, what is the present view on ambivalent. Quite positive was acquired a fundamental “genetic” the work of Z. Z. Stránský like? the response to Stránský in Latin defect. It arose “from below”, in Professor Peter van Mensch, who America. We can name for example contrast to the other sciences. When took an active part in the Brno professor Anaildo B. Freitas from geologists found animal fossils, Summer School of Museology Rio de Janeiro, who even defended they recognised the necessity (ISSOM) even before the fall of a doctoral thesis dedicated directly of establishing palaeontology. the Iron Curtain, has probably to the personality of Z. Z. Stránský. The initial broadly conceived rightly been considered the major Stránský’s influence in English- research into human past resulted expert in “eastern”6 museology. speaking world was negligible. in specialisation and emergence Still before Stránský’s demise he Museologists from these countries of archaeology, ethnology etc. correctly wrote that unlike the were familiar with his ideas but Historians cannot do without concept of musealisation, Stránský’s they mostly did not accept them an at least partial knowledge of concept of museality was not widely (Patrick Boylan, Gaynor Kavanagh,2 ethnology or archaeology. But accepted.7 We can add that the term Susan Pearce and others).3 which representative of present- musealisation became known due day social or natural sciences to Western European thinkers (e. g. Zbyněk Z. Stránský was one the needs the results of museological Hermann Lübbe) rather than by leading figures in museological research in his/her scientific Stránský’s effort. Stránský himself thinking which began to form in work? Stránský’s museology did not contradict this statement, Central Europe since about the mid- exhibited a sort of “insularism”; either. Van Mensch shifted the term -1960s, with significant contribution in Czechoslovakia it was totally “muzeality” into the history of of experts from Latin America but unconnected with culturology or museology,8 claiming that it would also from other parts of the world. cultural anthropology, which led only be suitable for a breakfast I will designate this “school” as to its frequent non-acceptance or to talk, moreover, one with a touch “Central European”, fully conscious opinions that it should only serve of nostalgia.9 The significant Dutch of some inaccuracy of this term. At as a sort of training for museum museologist bases his rejection that time, the Moravian Museum workers. Stránský’s museology has on a never published lecture held in Brno was directed by Jan not been “daughter” of some other by Stránský in Leiden in 1986, Jelínek – a visionary, who knew scientific discipline. which I consider insufficient from very well that museums must get a methodical perspective, and on rid of daily routine and be able to Stránský’s ideas gradually became Stránský’s text for the Summer look not only “into the showcase” more known and more accepted School of Museology in 1995.10 but also “above the showcase”. within ICOFOM. The 1980 ICOM He felt the need to apply general General Conference in Mexico was 6 I deliberately put the frequently encountered term “eastern” in quotation marks. This way it is methods of work in museums. partly devoted to “the systematic mainly used by colleagues from Western Europe. To make his ideas a reality, he and the theory of systems in As if the “east” began somewhere on the border between Germany and Bohemia and ended as museology”. In the early 1990s, a homogeneous area somewhere in Shanghai. Despite many mutual influences it would be 2 One of the few Brits who used the term ICOFOM formulated its mission: unnatural to mingle the Central European musealisation of an object. KAVANAGH, Gaynor. “establishing museology as a scientific (East European) approaches with the concept of Current Research in Museum Studies in Britain 5 discipline”. museology for example in Japan, India, China or and the Future Research Needs. Papers in Nevertheless, it must be on Taiwan. Museology, 1989, vol. 1, pp. 92–103. remarked that ICOFOM was by far MENSCH, Peter van. Museality at breakfast. 3 Peter van Mensch names correctly a British not ideologically heterogeneous and 7 The concept of museality in contemporary book, which in the passages about “museum its influence was not omnipresent. museological discourse. Museologica Brunensia, theory” mentions only English written sources, 2015, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 14–19. while the “new museum theory” began for the Many influential and frequently authors only with the publishing of the book

Load more