We need sensible debate, rather than simplistic lines, on the Titians
Like Felicity Heywood (Museums Journal, October 2008, p19), I am philosophical about the Duke of Sutherland's plan to sell his Titians.
Indeed, back in 2004 when another duke sold Raphael's Madonna of the Pinks, I was pitted against a National Gallery (NG) curator on BBC's Today programme, and suggested that some of the "retentionist" rhetoric did not bear scrutiny. But your columnist's comments go too far.
Heywood wonders how many Britons will see the Titians if they are acquired by the NG/National Galleries of Scotland, and asks if these galleries reach out to marginalised groups. VisitBritain's annual report for 2007 notes that the NG's 4.1m visitors made it the country's sixth most popular free attraction.
Tony Travers' 2006 LSE report on museums found that annual attendances at national and several regional museums exceeded those for many premiership football teams.
As for outreach, the NG's education department has a record it can be proud of, especially in south London. The NG regularly loans works to Bristol's City Museum and Art Gallery and Newcastle's Laing Gallery as part of its Touring Exhibitions Partnership. We can be confident that many, many people will see the Titians if they are acquired.
In going on to argue that the £50m asking price "could help right a lot of social ills", Heywood makes an interesting point. But why stop there? Quite apart from their Grant-in-Aid, museums up and down the country are sitting on artefacts that, if sold, would make life a lot easier for the "struggling and coping classes" to which she refers.
Happily, most of us recognise that it is simplistic to suggest that £50m spent on a Titian would be diverted from social welfare. Rather than a luxury we can put off until that happy day when all problems are solved, we recognise that contact with beautiful and historic artefacts forms an indispensable part of human life - and that such a life is more desirable than anything else, even than an existence without "struggle" (were that even possible).
Let's have an informed debate on the Titians, not the old bedtime story about how the wily national museum grinds the poor to feed the greedy duke.
Jonathan Conlin, school of humanities (history), University of Southampton
Acting out
Maev Kennedy's point of re-enactors being kerbed by Health and Safety (Museums Journal August 2008, p17) is a real one. However, I would like to set the record straight about re-enactors, of which there are two types - those who principally fight battles, and costumed interpreters who conduct living history.
Admittedly there is some crossover, and they both strive to be as accurate as possible to the period being represented. Most re-enactors pay for their own replica clothing and objects as well as undertake their own research out of strong personal interest - many use museums as their historical starting point.
There are strong links often made between original objects on display in museums or heritage sites and those used by costumed interpreters. They are directly copied for the interpreter to use in context, thus bringing objects to life rather than allowing them to sit in isolation.
Costumed interpreters allow access to learning through objects in a different medium to text panels, multimedia or display cases. People learn in many different ways and living history is one tool that can be used.
Being dyslexic I find living history a positive way of interacting and engaging with visitors who may not otherwise gain much from a museum visit. I am however biased, being a multi-period costumed interpreter.
We utilise replica clothing (costume is for fancy-dress parties) for visitors to try on to participate in activities with us. Using such well-informed individuals as a resource has been recognised for a long time by many professional organisations as a way of increasing visitor numbers.
Large numbers of living history events are held across the country all year round and attract many visitors to museums, archaeological and heritage sites. Rather than decry their use, surely we should judge these events in a positive light as an effective learning tool, enabling access for all.
Paul Thompson, museum archaeology officer, The Herbert, Coventry, and co-founder, Guarderobe Living History
Teaching slavery
I was interested to read Felicity Heywood's article on the issue of transatlantic slavery being taught on the national curriculum (Museums Journal September 2008, p19). Northampton Museums Service has just participated in the Shaping the Future project, led by Northamptonshire Black History Association and funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund.
This project has taken proactive measures to challenge racism through education and learning, and to integrate black British history into the interpretation of museum ethnographic collections.
The strength of this community-driven project has been that the contribution of members of BME communities in Northampton has enriched and informed our understanding of the human qualities of these objects and has portrayed the more positive and hidden histories of black communities globally.
Three object-handling resources and an educational resource pack on the theme of representations of empire have been produced for schools to teach children studying at Key Stages 2 and 3.
The diversity of the objects used within the handling resources reflect many cross-cultural themes, including missionaries, the opium wars, Benin, slavery, the scramble for Africa, life in the empire, trade and tourism, craft and collectors.
In addition to the representations of empire resource pack, the Shaping the Future project has produced other educational packs, giving teachers the resources to include diversity in their curriculum teaching.
Nikki Taylor, director, Shaping the Future project - Northamptonshire Black History Association; and Rachel Silverson, community history officer, Northampton Museums Service
Evolutionary statement
Following last month's editorial (Museums Journal October 2008, p4), Ecsite-uk, which represents more than 50 of the UK's science and discovery centres, is more than happy to share its position statement on science and evolution, which can be found at www.ecsite-uk.net/about/position-evolution.html. The statement was prepared in collaboration with Ecsite Europe, representing over 450 European science centres.
Penny Fidler, director, Ecsite-uk
Goodbye, Lenin
The review of the new Islington Museum, contained a number of errors (Museums Journal August 2008, p50). For a start, Islington was described as "a large London borough", when it's actually one of the smallest in the city.
The review criticises the fact that "most of the new space seems to be for storage", when the opposite is true. Your reviewer then criticises the museum for omitting subjects that are included in the displays. He says the museum "ignored" the story of Islington's role in campaigning for gay rights, when there is a panel and timeline on the subject.
Also, he says the stories of Islington residents Lenin and Tony Blair are "brushed over", when there are panels dedicated to both. Perhaps he missed them; other visitors have commended all three.
Then there are some contradictions. For example, in one breath, the review praises the museum for having themes that are "well-chosen and manage to differentiate the exhibition from other local history museums".
But then in literally the next paragraph, your reviewer criticises it for "lack(ing) the confidence to break away from the norm". We seem to be praised for being different - and then criticised for not being different enough!
Cheryl Smith, heritage manager, Islington council, London
Like Felicity Heywood (Museums Journal, October 2008, p19), I am philosophical about the Duke of Sutherland's plan to sell his Titians.
Indeed, back in 2004 when another duke sold Raphael's Madonna of the Pinks, I was pitted against a National Gallery (NG) curator on BBC's Today programme, and suggested that some of the "retentionist" rhetoric did not bear scrutiny. But your columnist's comments go too far.
Heywood wonders how many Britons will see the Titians if they are acquired by the NG/National Galleries of Scotland, and asks if these galleries reach out to marginalised groups. VisitBritain's annual report for 2007 notes that the NG's 4.1m visitors made it the country's sixth most popular free attraction.
Tony Travers' 2006 LSE report on museums found that annual attendances at national and several regional museums exceeded those for many premiership football teams.
As for outreach, the NG's education department has a record it can be proud of, especially in south London. The NG regularly loans works to Bristol's City Museum and Art Gallery and Newcastle's Laing Gallery as part of its Touring Exhibitions Partnership. We can be confident that many, many people will see the Titians if they are acquired.
In going on to argue that the £50m asking price "could help right a lot of social ills", Heywood makes an interesting point. But why stop there? Quite apart from their Grant-in-Aid, museums up and down the country are sitting on artefacts that, if sold, would make life a lot easier for the "struggling and coping classes" to which she refers.
Happily, most of us recognise that it is simplistic to suggest that £50m spent on a Titian would be diverted from social welfare. Rather than a luxury we can put off until that happy day when all problems are solved, we recognise that contact with beautiful and historic artefacts forms an indispensable part of human life - and that such a life is more desirable than anything else, even than an existence without "struggle" (were that even possible).
Let's have an informed debate on the Titians, not the old bedtime story about how the wily national museum grinds the poor to feed the greedy duke.
Jonathan Conlin, school of humanities (history), University of Southampton
Acting out
Maev Kennedy's point of re-enactors being kerbed by Health and Safety (Museums Journal August 2008, p17) is a real one. However, I would like to set the record straight about re-enactors, of which there are two types - those who principally fight battles, and costumed interpreters who conduct living history.
Admittedly there is some crossover, and they both strive to be as accurate as possible to the period being represented. Most re-enactors pay for their own replica clothing and objects as well as undertake their own research out of strong personal interest - many use museums as their historical starting point.
There are strong links often made between original objects on display in museums or heritage sites and those used by costumed interpreters. They are directly copied for the interpreter to use in context, thus bringing objects to life rather than allowing them to sit in isolation.
Costumed interpreters allow access to learning through objects in a different medium to text panels, multimedia or display cases. People learn in many different ways and living history is one tool that can be used.
Being dyslexic I find living history a positive way of interacting and engaging with visitors who may not otherwise gain much from a museum visit. I am however biased, being a multi-period costumed interpreter.
We utilise replica clothing (costume is for fancy-dress parties) for visitors to try on to participate in activities with us. Using such well-informed individuals as a resource has been recognised for a long time by many professional organisations as a way of increasing visitor numbers.
Large numbers of living history events are held across the country all year round and attract many visitors to museums, archaeological and heritage sites. Rather than decry their use, surely we should judge these events in a positive light as an effective learning tool, enabling access for all.
Paul Thompson, museum archaeology officer, The Herbert, Coventry, and co-founder, Guarderobe Living History
Teaching slavery
I was interested to read Felicity Heywood's article on the issue of transatlantic slavery being taught on the national curriculum (Museums Journal September 2008, p19). Northampton Museums Service has just participated in the Shaping the Future project, led by Northamptonshire Black History Association and funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund.
This project has taken proactive measures to challenge racism through education and learning, and to integrate black British history into the interpretation of museum ethnographic collections.
The strength of this community-driven project has been that the contribution of members of BME communities in Northampton has enriched and informed our understanding of the human qualities of these objects and has portrayed the more positive and hidden histories of black communities globally.
Three object-handling resources and an educational resource pack on the theme of representations of empire have been produced for schools to teach children studying at Key Stages 2 and 3.
The diversity of the objects used within the handling resources reflect many cross-cultural themes, including missionaries, the opium wars, Benin, slavery, the scramble for Africa, life in the empire, trade and tourism, craft and collectors.
In addition to the representations of empire resource pack, the Shaping the Future project has produced other educational packs, giving teachers the resources to include diversity in their curriculum teaching.
Nikki Taylor, director, Shaping the Future project - Northamptonshire Black History Association; and Rachel Silverson, community history officer, Northampton Museums Service
Evolutionary statement
Following last month's editorial (Museums Journal October 2008, p4), Ecsite-uk, which represents more than 50 of the UK's science and discovery centres, is more than happy to share its position statement on science and evolution, which can be found at www.ecsite-uk.net/about/position-evolution.html. The statement was prepared in collaboration with Ecsite Europe, representing over 450 European science centres.
Penny Fidler, director, Ecsite-uk
Goodbye, Lenin
The review of the new Islington Museum, contained a number of errors (Museums Journal August 2008, p50). For a start, Islington was described as "a large London borough", when it's actually one of the smallest in the city.
The review criticises the fact that "most of the new space seems to be for storage", when the opposite is true. Your reviewer then criticises the museum for omitting subjects that are included in the displays. He says the museum "ignored" the story of Islington's role in campaigning for gay rights, when there is a panel and timeline on the subject.
Also, he says the stories of Islington residents Lenin and Tony Blair are "brushed over", when there are panels dedicated to both. Perhaps he missed them; other visitors have commended all three.
Then there are some contradictions. For example, in one breath, the review praises the museum for having themes that are "well-chosen and manage to differentiate the exhibition from other local history museums".
But then in literally the next paragraph, your reviewer criticises it for "lack(ing) the confidence to break away from the norm". We seem to be praised for being different - and then criticised for not being different enough!
Cheryl Smith, heritage manager, Islington council, London
