At the end of March, Museums Journal organised a debate about the future of interpretation in historic houses. A transcript of the discussion appears in this issue of the magazine (see page 26).
It has been heavily edited, not because it was particularly racy, but because everyone had a lot to say (the original version was 20,000 words long and we only had space for about 10 per cent of that).
The people we brought together are all leaders in their fields and they talked about how interpretation is changing in historic houses, and what they can learn from museums and vice-versa.
It was clear from the discussion that there are some interesting approaches to storytelling and engaging audiences that are now being used in historic properties. But to focus on just one method would be wrong. Good interpretation involves a mix of styles across a range of properties.
Too much conservation-in-action, or first-person interpretation, or contemporary art commissioning can get boring and repetitive. And it could make one country house seem much like another - something to be avoided at all costs.
I recently visited Tyntesfield, a National Trust property in north Somerset. Many in the museum part of the heritage sector were sceptical when the National Heritage Memorial Fund (NHMF) was persuaded to fork out nearly £17.5m to rescue the house in 2002. It was the single biggest donation the NHMF has ever made, and was the equivalent of three years' expenditure for the fund.
On a fantastic spring day, with an Easter bunny hunt laid on to entertain kids, and welcoming staff and room stewards sharing their knowledge of the remarkable house, it seemed worth it.
But then I was lucky enough to have a car so I could get there in the first place. The National Trust acknowledges that getting to a lot of its properties is tricky without your own transport, which raises big questions about sustainability.
And not just from an environmental point of view. The rising price of fuel could lead to fewer visitors to some of these properties, which may mean that they are no longer economically viable.
And it made me wonder how far country houses can go towards widening their audiences - the majority of the poorest 40 per cent of UK households do not own a car, and it is this group that is still largely absent from visitor profiles. (My visit to Tyntesfield reinforced this - everyone was very polite, white and middle-class.)
The National Trust, English Heritage and Historic Royal Palaces are all keenly aware of the need to be more inclusive. After all, one of the trust's founding mottos was 'for ever, for everyone'. Maybe now is the ideal time for museums to share the experience of broadening audiences that they have accumulated over the past few years.
Sharon Heal, editor
sharon@museumsassociation.org
It has been heavily edited, not because it was particularly racy, but because everyone had a lot to say (the original version was 20,000 words long and we only had space for about 10 per cent of that).
The people we brought together are all leaders in their fields and they talked about how interpretation is changing in historic houses, and what they can learn from museums and vice-versa.
It was clear from the discussion that there are some interesting approaches to storytelling and engaging audiences that are now being used in historic properties. But to focus on just one method would be wrong. Good interpretation involves a mix of styles across a range of properties.
Too much conservation-in-action, or first-person interpretation, or contemporary art commissioning can get boring and repetitive. And it could make one country house seem much like another - something to be avoided at all costs.
I recently visited Tyntesfield, a National Trust property in north Somerset. Many in the museum part of the heritage sector were sceptical when the National Heritage Memorial Fund (NHMF) was persuaded to fork out nearly £17.5m to rescue the house in 2002. It was the single biggest donation the NHMF has ever made, and was the equivalent of three years' expenditure for the fund.
On a fantastic spring day, with an Easter bunny hunt laid on to entertain kids, and welcoming staff and room stewards sharing their knowledge of the remarkable house, it seemed worth it.
But then I was lucky enough to have a car so I could get there in the first place. The National Trust acknowledges that getting to a lot of its properties is tricky without your own transport, which raises big questions about sustainability.
And not just from an environmental point of view. The rising price of fuel could lead to fewer visitors to some of these properties, which may mean that they are no longer economically viable.
And it made me wonder how far country houses can go towards widening their audiences - the majority of the poorest 40 per cent of UK households do not own a car, and it is this group that is still largely absent from visitor profiles. (My visit to Tyntesfield reinforced this - everyone was very polite, white and middle-class.)
The National Trust, English Heritage and Historic Royal Palaces are all keenly aware of the need to be more inclusive. After all, one of the trust's founding mottos was 'for ever, for everyone'. Maybe now is the ideal time for museums to share the experience of broadening audiences that they have accumulated over the past few years.
Sharon Heal, editor
sharon@museumsassociation.org
