Museum Policies in Europe 1990 – 2010: Negotiating Professional and Political Utopia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Museum Policies in Europe 1990 – 2010: Negotiating Professional and Political Utopia Lill Eilertsen & Arne Bugge Amundsen (eds) EuNaMus Report No 3 Museum Policies in Europe 1990–2010: Negotiating Professional and Political Utopia (EuNaMus Report No. 3) Lill Eilertsen & Arne Bugge Amundsen (eds) 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. 15 ISSN: 1650-9625 Linköping University Electronic Press Linköping, Sweden, 2012 URL: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-81315 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 – Project 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: André Gali. Five hundred people formed a symbolic circle around the National Gallery in Oslo 2009 to protest against plans to relocate the museum. Table of contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 5 From Politics to Policy: Two Decades of National Museum Development in France (1989-2012) Felicity Bodenstein & Dominique Poulot .............................................................................................. 13 Norwegian Cultural Policy and Its Effect on National Museums Lill Eilertsen ................................................................................................................................................ 43 Museum Policy in Transition from Post-Soviet Conditions to Reconfigurations in the European Union Kristin Kuutma & Paavo Kroon ............................................................................................................. 69 Museum Policies in Hungary 1990 – 2010 Péter Apor ................................................................................................................................................... 91 From Ivory Towers to Visitor Centres? Hungarian Museum Policy in the Context of the European Union Gábor Ébli ................................................................................................................................................. 101 Cultural Policy in Greece, the Case of the National Museums (1990-2010): an Overview Alexandra Bounia ..................................................................................................................................... 127 European Union Approaches to Museums 1993-2010 Maria Höglund .......................................................................................................................................... 157 Author presentations ............................................................................................................................ 189 Eunamus – the project ......................................................................................................................... 192 Introduction As central producers of national narratives, national museum institutions have the power not only to define a nation’s relationship to the past, but also to reflect on its present situation. In a Europe realizing the impact of globalization and mass human migration, the notion of “national identity” is put to debate, and museums are accordingly being used by policy makers as instruments for negotiating identity, diversity, and change. To what extent and in which ways this happens differ of course from region to region, as national museum policies (and debates on such policies) have developed differently around Europe. This EuNaMus report studies how nations develop policy in order to deploy national museums in national redefinition. It focuses on museum utopias that have been negotiated by politicians and museum professionals in Europe 1990-2010. This report will establish some major perspectives on the development of museum political discourses during the last 20 years by comparing museum political material from five different countries: France, representing former colonial empires; Norway, demonstrating the Nordic countries’ variety of minorities and migrants; Estonia and Hungary, exemplifying the challenges of former European Soviet states; and Greece, allowing us to investigate the uses of classical antiquity. We also present the EU as an actor in the museum field. The cultural political development of each of the five countries in question will be presented separately, but with parallels drawn, contrasts pointed out, and genuine cases illuminated. The report material will help us discuss two main issues: How policy makers in different regions of Europe identify national museums as instruments for negotiating identity, diversity and change. How national museums in different regions of Europe formulate their position as political and cultural institutions. Important Findings We began this investigation by expanding upon our two framing issues: 1. How do policy makers in different regions of Europe identify national museums as instruments for negotiating identity, diversity and change? How is the role of national museums to be conceived in a Europe realizing the impact of and challenges represented by globalization and mass human migration? In which ways is the present and future role of national museums discussed in media and public debates? 2. How do national museums in different regions of Europe formulate their position as political and cultural institutions? How is cultural cohesiveness built and political change negotiated through the implementation of museum policies? Are the voices of old and new minorities heard and taken into account? 5 We end the investigation with our central finding: the situation, and hence the answers to the referred questions, differ quite distinctly between the analysed countries, yet commonalities exist. 1. Policy makers in different regions of Europe identify national museums as instruments for negotiating identity, diversity and change in similar ways. That is, the reports show that there are surprisingly few differences between “old” and “new” national states in Europe with regard to museum policies. To a certain extent it is valid to say that almost all European national states were established in the 19th century, since the prevailing ideology of nations and nationhood was fully developed during that century. However, a national state like France in the 19th Century had a very long integrated history as a separate state, while states like Hungary, Norway and Greece after a shorter or longer period were re-constructed as independent states in the 19th Century, and the Baltic republics did not become independent until early 20th Century – in all cases as results of long political and/or military conflicts. Hungary and the Baltic states were re-occupied by a colonial empire in the 20th Century and were not politically independent until after the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989/1990. In this respect, then, France is an “old” national state and Hungary, Norway, Greece and Estonia are “new” national states. In the museum field, however, both ‘old’ and ‘new’ national states developed strong national museums focussing on the national history. Eventually the national history served as basis for the narration of the history of colonial expansions: National museums in France, which is an “old” nation state and a former colonial power, focussed on the European and international position of the nation state. Being rather indisputable in earlier decades the reports from these five countries unanimously point at the fact that since the 1990’s museum policy has been an arena for political and academic debates on the relevance of the national narratives and of the national perspectives in the museum field. With Norway as an exception, all the analysed countries have passed new acts on museums since 1990: Estonia 1996, Hungary 1997, Greece and France 2002. These acts have contributed to defining organisational structures on a national level, in addition to determining which standards are expected by museums and which criteria should be used for state funding of museums. Norway has no general museum act, but museum policy has been actively developed through a series of white papers defining organisational structures, general scope