CONVERTING PRE-EXISTING BUILDINGS INTO VALUE ADDED MUSEUM SPACES by KATHY MARCHAND REINWARDT ACADEMY MASTER THESIS 2010 SUPERVISOR PETER VAN MENSCH CONVERTING PRE-EXISTING BUILDINGS INTO VALUE ADDED MUSEUM SPACES by KATHY MARCHAND FOREWORD In 2003 I gained my certificate in the field of architectural design at the Art Academy St. Joost in Breda. I gained my certificate with the design of Scryption, museum for written communication, at a new location. The ‘new’ location was a part of the ground floor of the Tivoli parking garage in Tilburg. This was no fictitious assignment; the museum really wanted to move to this location. During the design process there were constantly questions running through my head. Why does a museum want to locate in a parking garage? What is the relation between writing a letter and a pile of concrete with cars in between it? Is there in fact any relation//similarity or contrast// area of tension//dissonance at all? And isn’t that desirable? Despite the fact I gained my certificate these questions lingered after completing my study. Every time I cycled past the location I sought answers to my questions. To no avail. I did however realise that this was the area in which I wanted to immerse myself. I decided to follow the Museology Masters at the Reinwardt Academy in Amsterdam. After all, I would never be able to have an opinion about the design of a museum if I did not know enough about the institute ‘museum’. I had hoped to find answers to the questions that were on my mind. Not specifically for Scryption, but for conversion projects in general. At the Reinwardt Academy I learned a lot about the museum as an institution. I was introduced to all disciplines on an international level. The questions that I had regarding re-location and specifically conversion were never raised in the curriculum and thus not answered. Sources of literature in this field were few and far between. When I reached the last stage of my study and I was to choose a subject for my thesis it was immediately obvious to me which area to focus on. I would only then be able to find the answers to my questions. 03 CONVERTING PRE-EXISTING BUILDINGS INTO VALUE ADDED MUSEUM SPACES by KATHY MARCHAND CONTENT I Introduction I.I Theme: (re)location of a museum to a premises appointed for conversion I.II Definition of the problem I.III Focus I.IV Aim I.V Structure of the thesis 1 Relocation of museums in buildings appointed for conversion 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Designation 1.3 Intervention 1.4 Conversion 1.5 Analysis of types of museum accommodation 1.5.1 A survey of accommodation types of all registered museums in the Netherlands 1.5.2 Conversion in context of period and type of building 1.5.3 Conversion in relation to the theme of a museum 2 (F)actors with in conversion 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Reason to relocate 2.2.1 The ‘new’ company philosophy 2.2.2 From a company philosophy to pronouncements on the architecture of the future building 2.3 Availability of buildings 2.4 Municipalities and museums 2.5 Basis 2.6 Finances 05 CONVERTING PRE-EXISTING BUILDINGS INTO VALUE ADDED MUSEUM SPACES by KATHY MARCHAND CONTENT 3 Subjective justification: the building as a museum object 3.1 Introduction 3.2 De-contextualisation 3.3 Determining value 3.3.1 Subjective examination 3.3.2 Practical examination 3.3.3 Detailed examination 3.4 Ethics 3.5 Authenticity 4 Architectural issues: the building as a semiotic entity 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Architectural semiotics 4.3 Syntax 4.4 Semantics and pragmatics 4.4.1 Is there a relationship between the building and/or location and the theme of the museum? 4.4.2 Are the two entities in dialogue with one another? 4.4.3 The building as a story teller of the museum theme or as an entity in itself? 4.4.4 Does the museum look for tension with the building or does it avoid this? 4.4.5 Minimal measures or extreme adjustments? 4.4.6 Respect the hierarchy of an existing building or be adamant? 5 Conclusions and recommendations 5.1 Conclusions 5.1.1 Guideline 5.2 Recommendations and further research 06 CONVERTING PRE-EXISTING BUILDINGS INTO VALUE ADDED MUSEUM SPACES by KATHY MARCHAND CONTENT References Appendixes Appendix 1 List of Dutch Registered museums from the NMV (Dutch Museum Association) Appendix 2 Analysis of accomodation of registered museums Appendix 3 Summary Significance 2.0 Appendix 4 Report of decomposition of the historical construction, paired with a valuation 07 CONVERTING PRE-EXISTING BUILDINGS INTO VALUE ADDED MUSEUM SPACES by KATHY MARCHAND I INTRODUCTION I.I Theme: (re)location of a museum to a premises appointed for conversion Is it possible to re-designate already existing premises built for the purpose of a wholly different function or another target group (with other programmes and services) into a museum so that the housing is in line with the new function? Is it possible, in this situation, to provide the visitor with an unambiguous story? Or will it then be likely that the museum and the building both convey separate stories? How do you make this clear to the visitor? Do you have to respect the ‘new’ location or is it acceptable to ‘transform’ it to such an extent that it serves the purpose of the museum? Added to this is the ‘emotional’ factor; what do we experience when we visit a building and should this feeling remain the same if we apply a new designation to the building – times change after all? Museums only relocate once every 30-50 years.1 A process of relocation involves a lot of work. It is especially the process of conversion that includes many factors to consider and involves a whole range of external parties; a museum is dependent on the availability of vacant premises in good locations and subsidies and sponsoring by third parties. Due to this dependence a museum can find itself in a difficult position when faced with making a sound choice regarding the housing. In addition it is often the case that the museum simply does not have the know-how regarding the process of relocation to a re-designated premises because the director and his team of employees will on average only have to deal with this specific situation one time in their working life. It is also true that museums are not used to looking at the organisation in an abstract and subjective manner; in order to raise and maintain subsidies they focus on tangible means as these can be justified in, and measured with tangible results. Museums need to prepare well if they are to proceed with the relocation to a premises appointed for conversion. In order to avoid losing its way during the process, or being caught off guard by the myriad of parties involved, the museum needs a full overview of the process from the very start. Museums should apply a pro-active stance rather than hesitating and being dependent. However, in my opinion, museums too often settle for less when they are offered a building and therefore don’t make the most of all opportunities or challenges in order to fulfill the wishes of the museum into the building: “We’ll make do.” It’s my opinion that, on the one hand the museum is not fully aware of the impact that the architecture of the building has on the visitor and on the other hand, they pass by opportunities to use the museum architecture to the best of their advantage. It is seen as utopian to consider the most ideal situation of housing. But can we blame museums for seeing utopian 1 Vincent van de Kerk of ‘Berns MuseumManagement’ states this during the interview on 16 April 2009 09 CONVERTING PRE-EXISTING BUILDINGS INTO VALUE ADDED MUSEUM SPACES by KATHY MARCHAND thinking as a “non-issue?”2 On the other hand museums imply grand aims and ambitions in their mission and subsequently try to achieve these with presentations and activities. However, if an exhibition takes place within the museum walls, then these walls too belong to the context of the exhibition. Not merely referring to the walls as vertical dividers, in as much as what there is to ‘see’ and ‘experience’ between those walls. If the museum building and the location are not of added value to the mission, aims and ambitions, it will be difficult to communicate the intended message to the visitor. “While most visitors do not see a museum mission during a visit, the visitor does gain a sense of what your mission is about based on his or her experience there. The evidence of your museum mission intended or not, is in fact visible to the visitor in the visual and aesthetic impression of the museum and as a result of that individual’s museum experience. The physical plant, the way the visitor is treated, the emphasis of the collections, the design and contents of the exhibitions, the programs offered, and who staffs the museum all send clear messages about museum values, priorities, and the role the visitor plays in the well being of the museum.”3 Is it fair to blame museums for these abovementioned reproaches when there is nearly no written background on relocation and in fact none in the case of conversion, specifically for museums? The critics often don’t get further than analysing newly-built development properties (designation) and then they are predominantly art museums, which are a relatively small percentage of the entire museum scope.