Museums are a tiny part of a small sector. If you take culture as a whole – dance, the arts, theatre, music and literature – museums and galleries are a slender slice of a rich cultural cake.
And yet there are many different organisations that represent museums and attempt to speak on their behalf at a national, regional and local level. Subject specialist groups and organisations that represent different sizes and types of institutions proliferate.
A diversity of voices and views is generally a good thing except, perhaps, when it comes to getting a message across – we all know that politicians have limited time (and possibly attention spans) and clear direct messages from one source can be better than a lot of different calls for attention from many.
In the current political climate, collaboration between the main organisations in the sector would be valuable, as would coordination to ensure that we aren’t reinventing the wheel or duplicating each other’s work.
But this kind of partnership is effective only if it is done on the basis of principle rather than expediency.
For example, an alliance of the Museums Association (MA), Arts Council England, the Heritage Lottery Fund and funding bodies throughout the UK to deal with cases such as the sale of the Egyptian statue by Northampton Borough Council would be more effective than single voices.
Several organisations have recently debated the social value of museums. This chimes well with the MA’s Museums Change Lives vision for the impact that museums can have on society and could be another area for joint work.
We might not always agree on every dot and comma of policy, but cooperation on specific issues, such as ethics and the value of museums to society, could enable a small sector to punch well above its weight.
Sharon Heal, editor, Museums Journal
sharon@museumsassociation.org
www.twitter.com/sharonheal
www.museumsassociation.org/conference
And yet there are many different organisations that represent museums and attempt to speak on their behalf at a national, regional and local level. Subject specialist groups and organisations that represent different sizes and types of institutions proliferate.
A diversity of voices and views is generally a good thing except, perhaps, when it comes to getting a message across – we all know that politicians have limited time (and possibly attention spans) and clear direct messages from one source can be better than a lot of different calls for attention from many.
In the current political climate, collaboration between the main organisations in the sector would be valuable, as would coordination to ensure that we aren’t reinventing the wheel or duplicating each other’s work.
But this kind of partnership is effective only if it is done on the basis of principle rather than expediency.
For example, an alliance of the Museums Association (MA), Arts Council England, the Heritage Lottery Fund and funding bodies throughout the UK to deal with cases such as the sale of the Egyptian statue by Northampton Borough Council would be more effective than single voices.
Several organisations have recently debated the social value of museums. This chimes well with the MA’s Museums Change Lives vision for the impact that museums can have on society and could be another area for joint work.
We might not always agree on every dot and comma of policy, but cooperation on specific issues, such as ethics and the value of museums to society, could enable a small sector to punch well above its weight.
Sharon Heal, editor, Museums Journal
sharon@museumsassociation.org
www.twitter.com/sharonheal
www.museumsassociation.org/conference