Closure of Livesey Museum will lead to cultural exclusion
It was with great sadness that I learned of the planned closure of the Livesey Museum for Children in Southwark, south-east London.
The museum has long set an example of good practice for the ways in which museums can be genuinely relevant and accessible to their communities.
The Livesey's fantastic work with children and families has always created lively and stimulating environments where children are really welcome, safe and free to explore in a hands-on way that is not available in other local venues.
In many respects the fact that the Livesey does not have a collection has freed it to work more innovatively, allowing the needs and interests of its user group to guide its exhibition development. This is demonstrated in its close links with its community, bringing together local people with local practitioners.
These are not members of the general 'gallery-going' public, but local families with a genuine interest and engagement with the Livesey, who recognise it as an important community resource, which is why they are campaigning so hard to prevent the closure.
Part of the council's rationale for the closure is that the museum doesn't have a collection, but surely it has missed the point about the purpose of the museum as an interactive space for children to explore ideas, experiment and use their imaginations.
The idea, as described by one councillor, that these children and families could simply "go to the Tate" instead, misunderstands the purpose of the museum, which holds exhibitions specifically to engage younger audiences.
The Tate, while it has excellent programmes for families and young people, simply doesn't have the same remit. It doesn't have the intimacy or interactivity of exhibits that makes the Livesey so popular with local residents.
For a relatively small saving of £140,000 the London borough of Southwark will be losing a real gem and the sector will be losing leaders in family friendly provision.
If the rumours that the council plans to sell off the building are true it would be a real travesty of justice. The building was given to the people of Southwark and has been serving their needs since 1890. You somehow can't imagine such a closure passing off so easily in a more affluent part of the capital.
Given the government's recently announced Find Your Talent initiative to give young people the opportunity to experience at least five hours of high-quality arts and culture every week, this is surely the worst possible time for Southwark to lose a resource that has proven so successful in engaging young audiences.
Andrea Cunningham, Leigh on Sea
Long live the Livesey
The Livesey - Britain's first children's museum - is being closed. The news came in the same week that the government announced an aim of "five hours high culture" for every schoolchild.
The Livesey is a local-authority funded museum, but Southwark council says it is central government cuts that have made the modest running costs of £140,000 per year impossible to sustain. Twenty thousand children visit the museum each year, half of these from local schools. There is no other facility like it anywhere in the area.
The Livesey is an example of a museum doing exactly what it ought to do - involving and being led by the local community in exhibitions that are thought-provoking, meaningful and fun.
In recognition of its pioneering work of a national standard, it was shortlisted for the Guardian Family Friendly Museum Award, which Kids in Museums works on.
The local community, in a disadvantaged area of south-east London, feels the museum belongs to them. Closing it and, most likely, selling the land for development is selling off their cultural assets.
If we want our children to grow up experiencing, enjoying and belonging to the wonderful world that our museums can offer, then places like the Livesey have to survive. Without them, our children will grow up poorer. And the cost of that cultural deprivation will be far more than £140,000.
Dea Birkett, director, Kids in Museums
Who's speaking?
The review of Atlantic Worlds (Museums Journal February 2008, p48) fails to give a true picture of what the gallery presents, and it is astonishing to read "in keeping with last year's commemoration of the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade, the National Maritime Museum now gives greater prominence to the brutality involved in the trade".
As a former member of the gallery's advisory group, I know that the museum did not accept specific views of its African and Caribbean members. Because the museum assembled such a group, it might have given the impression that members agreed with the design, contents, etc, of the gallery.
We did not, and the museum was not bothered by our disapproval. It is the group's view that the gallery does not speak with the voice of enslaved Africans, but the African content is the curators' voice.
Visitors see images and objects that do not show adequately the history of African people in a positive light. The word "trade", as used with reference to the "transatlantic slave trade" is misleading, as that is not how enslaved Africans viewed it.
They, according to Ottobah Cugoano (1787), regarded it as "trafficking", a crime against their humanity that involved "transportation" for the purpose of "enslavement" and "exploitation". He, like millions of his fellow Africans, did not trade their bodies or souls.
The gallery displays objects and texts that engender sympathy and pity for the victims of enslavement, while showing the ingenuity of European people in conducting a traffic that brought individuals and nations prosperity and power. It has a mainly Eurocentric perspective.
Arthur Torrington, London
Heads up on Surf's Up
It was good to read Deborah Mulhearn's observations on museums documenting and displaying popular leisure time activities (Museums Journal February 2008, p32), particularly as it featured the Surf's Up exhibition.
However, I was a bit disappointed that the article failed to mention that the exhibition was organised and administered by the Royal Albert Memorial Museum (RAMM) following a successful bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF).
We worked closely with a number of surfing experts and partner museums, including the National Maritime Museum Cornwall, which later took the touring exhibition. Some credit is certainly due to the RAMM exhibition team who came up with the idea and the HLF for backing it.
Julien Parsons, collections and interpretation officer, Royal Albert Memorial Museum, Exeter
It was with great sadness that I learned of the planned closure of the Livesey Museum for Children in Southwark, south-east London.
The museum has long set an example of good practice for the ways in which museums can be genuinely relevant and accessible to their communities.
The Livesey's fantastic work with children and families has always created lively and stimulating environments where children are really welcome, safe and free to explore in a hands-on way that is not available in other local venues.
In many respects the fact that the Livesey does not have a collection has freed it to work more innovatively, allowing the needs and interests of its user group to guide its exhibition development. This is demonstrated in its close links with its community, bringing together local people with local practitioners.
These are not members of the general 'gallery-going' public, but local families with a genuine interest and engagement with the Livesey, who recognise it as an important community resource, which is why they are campaigning so hard to prevent the closure.
Part of the council's rationale for the closure is that the museum doesn't have a collection, but surely it has missed the point about the purpose of the museum as an interactive space for children to explore ideas, experiment and use their imaginations.
The idea, as described by one councillor, that these children and families could simply "go to the Tate" instead, misunderstands the purpose of the museum, which holds exhibitions specifically to engage younger audiences.
The Tate, while it has excellent programmes for families and young people, simply doesn't have the same remit. It doesn't have the intimacy or interactivity of exhibits that makes the Livesey so popular with local residents.
For a relatively small saving of £140,000 the London borough of Southwark will be losing a real gem and the sector will be losing leaders in family friendly provision.
If the rumours that the council plans to sell off the building are true it would be a real travesty of justice. The building was given to the people of Southwark and has been serving their needs since 1890. You somehow can't imagine such a closure passing off so easily in a more affluent part of the capital.
Given the government's recently announced Find Your Talent initiative to give young people the opportunity to experience at least five hours of high-quality arts and culture every week, this is surely the worst possible time for Southwark to lose a resource that has proven so successful in engaging young audiences.
Andrea Cunningham, Leigh on Sea
Long live the Livesey
The Livesey - Britain's first children's museum - is being closed. The news came in the same week that the government announced an aim of "five hours high culture" for every schoolchild.
The Livesey is a local-authority funded museum, but Southwark council says it is central government cuts that have made the modest running costs of £140,000 per year impossible to sustain. Twenty thousand children visit the museum each year, half of these from local schools. There is no other facility like it anywhere in the area.
The Livesey is an example of a museum doing exactly what it ought to do - involving and being led by the local community in exhibitions that are thought-provoking, meaningful and fun.
In recognition of its pioneering work of a national standard, it was shortlisted for the Guardian Family Friendly Museum Award, which Kids in Museums works on.
The local community, in a disadvantaged area of south-east London, feels the museum belongs to them. Closing it and, most likely, selling the land for development is selling off their cultural assets.
If we want our children to grow up experiencing, enjoying and belonging to the wonderful world that our museums can offer, then places like the Livesey have to survive. Without them, our children will grow up poorer. And the cost of that cultural deprivation will be far more than £140,000.
Dea Birkett, director, Kids in Museums
Who's speaking?
The review of Atlantic Worlds (Museums Journal February 2008, p48) fails to give a true picture of what the gallery presents, and it is astonishing to read "in keeping with last year's commemoration of the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade, the National Maritime Museum now gives greater prominence to the brutality involved in the trade".
As a former member of the gallery's advisory group, I know that the museum did not accept specific views of its African and Caribbean members. Because the museum assembled such a group, it might have given the impression that members agreed with the design, contents, etc, of the gallery.
We did not, and the museum was not bothered by our disapproval. It is the group's view that the gallery does not speak with the voice of enslaved Africans, but the African content is the curators' voice.
Visitors see images and objects that do not show adequately the history of African people in a positive light. The word "trade", as used with reference to the "transatlantic slave trade" is misleading, as that is not how enslaved Africans viewed it.
They, according to Ottobah Cugoano (1787), regarded it as "trafficking", a crime against their humanity that involved "transportation" for the purpose of "enslavement" and "exploitation". He, like millions of his fellow Africans, did not trade their bodies or souls.
The gallery displays objects and texts that engender sympathy and pity for the victims of enslavement, while showing the ingenuity of European people in conducting a traffic that brought individuals and nations prosperity and power. It has a mainly Eurocentric perspective.
Arthur Torrington, London
Heads up on Surf's Up
It was good to read Deborah Mulhearn's observations on museums documenting and displaying popular leisure time activities (Museums Journal February 2008, p32), particularly as it featured the Surf's Up exhibition.
However, I was a bit disappointed that the article failed to mention that the exhibition was organised and administered by the Royal Albert Memorial Museum (RAMM) following a successful bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF).
We worked closely with a number of surfing experts and partner museums, including the National Maritime Museum Cornwall, which later took the touring exhibition. Some credit is certainly due to the RAMM exhibition team who came up with the idea and the HLF for backing it.
Julien Parsons, collections and interpretation officer, Royal Albert Memorial Museum, Exeter
