Thinking about who we are
Having just read your article, Who do we think we are? (Museums Journal August 2007, p14), I am torn between, on the one hand, enthusiasm for a museum that communicates, reflects upon and celebrates every aspect of 'Britishness' and, on the other hand, despair that prime minister Gordon Brown thinks that gathering this huge concept and condensing it into one building is the answer to whatever his question is.
This article has been, for me, one of the most thought-provoking that I have read in Museums Journal for some time. That said, I am drawn to (and support) Alec Coles' assertion that the 'museum' must be about Britain, and not just England and London. David Anderson's contribution illustrates the pitfalls of an England-centric attitude to British history.
Also, crucially, Wim van der Weiden's comment that 'museums should not be an identity factory' must be central to further debate. Indeed, all museums should engage more with a European perspective on identity as we have a lot to learn from several countries who are still recovering from violent conflict initiated as a direct result of cultural and ethnic difference.
Can I make an appeal for the museum world to respond to this issue by continuing debate and by developing exhibitions in cooperation with members of their local communities, rather than spending, possibly costly, time on discussing a single monumental piece of architecture and its associated contents.
If ever there was a need for an over-arching sense of purpose in the cultural sphere, then surely valuing diversity and its part played in British history is it.
A single museum cannot achieve Brown's aim. However, a central project-development grant fund, available to museums large and small, could.
Essex Havard, regional development officer, NIACE Dysgu Cymru
What a dispiriting mix of voices these six cultural practitioners were. I believe that until museums show pride in many of Britain's remarkable achievements, we will have little of real worth to present to Britain's diverse public.
Countless social and political reformers, including figures from various ethnic backgrounds, have made Britain a more progressive and humane society. We should be able to celebrate simultaneously the remarkable Florence Nightingale and Mary Seacole, the black 'Florence Nightingale'.
It need not be intellectually or historically difficult. If we have a better historical understanding of the many reforms pursued and won by British and transatlantic campaigners, we would have a clearer sense of what we mean by 'British values' and historical achievements.
As most British citizens benefit from those values today, the presentation of them as part of the British story should provide the keystone of any 'museum of Britain'. This is the kind of museum we need, not one that is burdened with post-imperial guilt: one that is all-embracing and all-inclusive, proud, confident, bold and upbeat; one that takes heart from the bigger picture, recognising how far we have come.
Moreover, I believe that is what most people in Britain would want. And why 'modern' Britain? It should not be largely that. How many more cultural practitioners do we need ? Sanjeev Bhaskar is the kind of figure I would like to hear more of.
As he said in his recent BBC2 programme, India with Sanjeev Bhaskar: 'It may come as a surprise, but lots of people in India still love Britain. They know all about the imperial power bit, but still see us as the country of fair play... I can't help thinking it's a shame we in Britain don't pride ourselves on those qualities.' How right Sanjeev is.
Philip Dunn AMA, Manchester
I look forward to reading Museums Journal, as it provides a lifeline to cultural goings-on in London and other cities. To reciprocate, perhaps Museums Journal might help city slickers discover cultural goings-on in the countryside or our market towns.
Save for your cover story of a project in the Fens earlier in the year, there seems to be a dearth of features on provincial museums. Does the sat nav not work if you leave the motorway?
Your recent feature on Britishness was a case in point. When you ask leading museum people (who are all based in cities) what makes modern Britain, why not consider the other half of the population who don't live in a major conurbation?
Consider the uniquely British social and cultural institutions that contribute to the well being of our citizens, particularly in the provinces. They may not play on Facebook every evening, but people who run community halls, fete committees and organisations such as the Women's Institute are as in tune with modern Britain (whatever that is) as teenagers in their bedrooms.
Countryside museums are at the centre of their communities and have been engaging local audiences for years through volunteering and social activities. Museums and other cultural organisations are revitalising declining market towns without the huge investment thrown at cultural activity in urban growth areas.
When provincial museums feature in Museums Journal, it is on curiously metropolitan terms. Sure, they promote diversity and community cohesion; last month the Museum of East Anglian Life held a fantastic Gypsy arts festival, uniting English Romany and European Roma artists and musicians.
However, please consider small provincial museums on their own merit. They are manifestations of community pride and a locally distinctive identity. Most are well run, business-like organisations that have to be entrepreneurial because they are unable to benefit from public subsidy from their cash-strapped rural district or county councils.
So Museums Journal journos, get out of your pristine Discoveries, shine up your immaculate Hunters and find out about the 'other Britain'.
Tony Butler, director, Museum of East Anglian Life, Stowmarket
What to do with disposal revenue
Simon Cane and Diane Gwilt's letter (Museums Journal August 2007, p12) raises some interesting points about how the proceeds from the sale of items from a museum's collection can be spent. The Museums Association's (MA) recent consultation on disposal found that many support the view that acquisitions should not be the only way of reinvesting proceeds.
The MA's revised guidance on disposal reflects this view and allows for proceeds to be spent to benefit a museum's collection, which may well be to improve the care of collections. The aim of the guidance is to provide more flexibility in this area, while continuing to ensure that collections are not viewed as assets that can be sold to generate revenue or cover running costs.
The intention of the new guidance is to encourage more museums to consider well-managed disposal as an integral part of good collections management and stewardship. It is supported by additional ethical advice on acquisitions, which requires museums to consider the long-term care, use and access for any new item when deciding to acquire.
We welcome the Institute of Conservation's continued support for our review of the ethical advice on disposal and look forward to working with them in the future to ensure conservation needs are reflected in any ethical advice.
Caitlin Griffiths, head of professional issues, Museums Association
Historical record
As a trustee of two museums, I always enjoy reading Museums Journal, but I thought this historical aspect of your article on Jamestown (Museums Journal May 2007, p38) article was not up to your usual standard.
The name of one of the three vessels was Susan Constant, not Contast; Roanoak Island is actually off the coast of North Carolina, not Virginia; and to say 'in 1698 the colony was burned to the ground' is rather like saying that in 1666 England burned to the ground.
By 1698, much of Virginia had been settled. Moreover, it was only the statehouse that burned to the ground, not the whole of Jamestown, giving Governor Francis Nicholson the excuse he had been looking for to move the capital to Williamsburg.
Anthony Lambert, London
Content on the go
I was interested to read (Museums Journal July 2007, p28) that the National Trust is 'being urged to adopt widespread use of audio-guides' and that a curator wondered whether visitors could be 'invited to download MP3 files on their way to a property'. One trust property, the Ashridge Estate, is piloting a better option - mobitour.
Using this system, the property does not need to lease or maintain expensive audio equipment, or tie-up staff time in issuing it, as visitors use their own mobile phones; in addition, the property receives an income each time the service is used and evaluation reports on what features visitors are most interested in.
Content can be changed instantly, accessed pre- and post a visit, and relayed in up to three languages. As a high percentage of UK residents and visitors own mobiles, mobitour has the potential to reach a wide range of users at sites wherever there is mobile reception.
James Cokeham, Mobitour Imagemakers Design and Consulting, Devon
It's not cricket for the London Olympics
The article on the attack on lottery funding to finance the 2012 Olympics (Museums Journal April 2007, p15) set out how much each of the distributors will have to contribute.
Am I the only person to be amazed that Sport England is contributing the least? According to your report, the HLF is having £35m more taken away from its share of lottery money than Sport England. This seems perverse when the Olympics is, after all, a sporting event.
Lesley Bossine, museum consultant, Hampton
Having just read your article, Who do we think we are? (Museums Journal August 2007, p14), I am torn between, on the one hand, enthusiasm for a museum that communicates, reflects upon and celebrates every aspect of 'Britishness' and, on the other hand, despair that prime minister Gordon Brown thinks that gathering this huge concept and condensing it into one building is the answer to whatever his question is.
This article has been, for me, one of the most thought-provoking that I have read in Museums Journal for some time. That said, I am drawn to (and support) Alec Coles' assertion that the 'museum' must be about Britain, and not just England and London. David Anderson's contribution illustrates the pitfalls of an England-centric attitude to British history.
Also, crucially, Wim van der Weiden's comment that 'museums should not be an identity factory' must be central to further debate. Indeed, all museums should engage more with a European perspective on identity as we have a lot to learn from several countries who are still recovering from violent conflict initiated as a direct result of cultural and ethnic difference.
Can I make an appeal for the museum world to respond to this issue by continuing debate and by developing exhibitions in cooperation with members of their local communities, rather than spending, possibly costly, time on discussing a single monumental piece of architecture and its associated contents.
If ever there was a need for an over-arching sense of purpose in the cultural sphere, then surely valuing diversity and its part played in British history is it.
A single museum cannot achieve Brown's aim. However, a central project-development grant fund, available to museums large and small, could.
Essex Havard, regional development officer, NIACE Dysgu Cymru
What a dispiriting mix of voices these six cultural practitioners were. I believe that until museums show pride in many of Britain's remarkable achievements, we will have little of real worth to present to Britain's diverse public.
Countless social and political reformers, including figures from various ethnic backgrounds, have made Britain a more progressive and humane society. We should be able to celebrate simultaneously the remarkable Florence Nightingale and Mary Seacole, the black 'Florence Nightingale'.
It need not be intellectually or historically difficult. If we have a better historical understanding of the many reforms pursued and won by British and transatlantic campaigners, we would have a clearer sense of what we mean by 'British values' and historical achievements.
As most British citizens benefit from those values today, the presentation of them as part of the British story should provide the keystone of any 'museum of Britain'. This is the kind of museum we need, not one that is burdened with post-imperial guilt: one that is all-embracing and all-inclusive, proud, confident, bold and upbeat; one that takes heart from the bigger picture, recognising how far we have come.
Moreover, I believe that is what most people in Britain would want. And why 'modern' Britain? It should not be largely that. How many more cultural practitioners do we need ? Sanjeev Bhaskar is the kind of figure I would like to hear more of.
As he said in his recent BBC2 programme, India with Sanjeev Bhaskar: 'It may come as a surprise, but lots of people in India still love Britain. They know all about the imperial power bit, but still see us as the country of fair play... I can't help thinking it's a shame we in Britain don't pride ourselves on those qualities.' How right Sanjeev is.
Philip Dunn AMA, Manchester
I look forward to reading Museums Journal, as it provides a lifeline to cultural goings-on in London and other cities. To reciprocate, perhaps Museums Journal might help city slickers discover cultural goings-on in the countryside or our market towns.
Save for your cover story of a project in the Fens earlier in the year, there seems to be a dearth of features on provincial museums. Does the sat nav not work if you leave the motorway?
Your recent feature on Britishness was a case in point. When you ask leading museum people (who are all based in cities) what makes modern Britain, why not consider the other half of the population who don't live in a major conurbation?
Consider the uniquely British social and cultural institutions that contribute to the well being of our citizens, particularly in the provinces. They may not play on Facebook every evening, but people who run community halls, fete committees and organisations such as the Women's Institute are as in tune with modern Britain (whatever that is) as teenagers in their bedrooms.
Countryside museums are at the centre of their communities and have been engaging local audiences for years through volunteering and social activities. Museums and other cultural organisations are revitalising declining market towns without the huge investment thrown at cultural activity in urban growth areas.
When provincial museums feature in Museums Journal, it is on curiously metropolitan terms. Sure, they promote diversity and community cohesion; last month the Museum of East Anglian Life held a fantastic Gypsy arts festival, uniting English Romany and European Roma artists and musicians.
However, please consider small provincial museums on their own merit. They are manifestations of community pride and a locally distinctive identity. Most are well run, business-like organisations that have to be entrepreneurial because they are unable to benefit from public subsidy from their cash-strapped rural district or county councils.
So Museums Journal journos, get out of your pristine Discoveries, shine up your immaculate Hunters and find out about the 'other Britain'.
Tony Butler, director, Museum of East Anglian Life, Stowmarket
What to do with disposal revenue
Simon Cane and Diane Gwilt's letter (Museums Journal August 2007, p12) raises some interesting points about how the proceeds from the sale of items from a museum's collection can be spent. The Museums Association's (MA) recent consultation on disposal found that many support the view that acquisitions should not be the only way of reinvesting proceeds.
The MA's revised guidance on disposal reflects this view and allows for proceeds to be spent to benefit a museum's collection, which may well be to improve the care of collections. The aim of the guidance is to provide more flexibility in this area, while continuing to ensure that collections are not viewed as assets that can be sold to generate revenue or cover running costs.
The intention of the new guidance is to encourage more museums to consider well-managed disposal as an integral part of good collections management and stewardship. It is supported by additional ethical advice on acquisitions, which requires museums to consider the long-term care, use and access for any new item when deciding to acquire.
We welcome the Institute of Conservation's continued support for our review of the ethical advice on disposal and look forward to working with them in the future to ensure conservation needs are reflected in any ethical advice.
Caitlin Griffiths, head of professional issues, Museums Association
Historical record
As a trustee of two museums, I always enjoy reading Museums Journal, but I thought this historical aspect of your article on Jamestown (Museums Journal May 2007, p38) article was not up to your usual standard.
The name of one of the three vessels was Susan Constant, not Contast; Roanoak Island is actually off the coast of North Carolina, not Virginia; and to say 'in 1698 the colony was burned to the ground' is rather like saying that in 1666 England burned to the ground.
By 1698, much of Virginia had been settled. Moreover, it was only the statehouse that burned to the ground, not the whole of Jamestown, giving Governor Francis Nicholson the excuse he had been looking for to move the capital to Williamsburg.
Anthony Lambert, London
Content on the go
I was interested to read (Museums Journal July 2007, p28) that the National Trust is 'being urged to adopt widespread use of audio-guides' and that a curator wondered whether visitors could be 'invited to download MP3 files on their way to a property'. One trust property, the Ashridge Estate, is piloting a better option - mobitour.
Using this system, the property does not need to lease or maintain expensive audio equipment, or tie-up staff time in issuing it, as visitors use their own mobile phones; in addition, the property receives an income each time the service is used and evaluation reports on what features visitors are most interested in.
Content can be changed instantly, accessed pre- and post a visit, and relayed in up to three languages. As a high percentage of UK residents and visitors own mobiles, mobitour has the potential to reach a wide range of users at sites wherever there is mobile reception.
James Cokeham, Mobitour Imagemakers Design and Consulting, Devon
It's not cricket for the London Olympics
The article on the attack on lottery funding to finance the 2012 Olympics (Museums Journal April 2007, p15) set out how much each of the distributors will have to contribute.
Am I the only person to be amazed that Sport England is contributing the least? According to your report, the HLF is having £35m more taken away from its share of lottery money than Sport England. This seems perverse when the Olympics is, after all, a sporting event.
Lesley Bossine, museum consultant, Hampton
