Overall, the opinions of the bloggers, museum presidents, and associations that we read for this week were in favor of museum involvement in current issues. From mission statements that called for diverse and inclusive staff and exhibits, to increasing opportunities for engagement with the community, every reading reflected the need for museums to be involved in civic engagement; particularly in regards to the most difficult and polarizing topics. I did appreciate the realistic honesty promoted by Trivedi in “Museums and #BlackLivesMatter”. I never participate in social media campaigns (such as #BringBackOurGirls or #ALSIceBucketChallenge) because I am not convinced that they are super effective or done for the right reasons. Many of my friends on social media get swept up in hash tags and trends, but there is no action to back it up. I agree with Trivedi that, “Making statements in support of the current movements won’t fundamentally change the ways in which we relate to black people in our communities… If our actions don’t match our words, do they hold any meaning?”
Should museums be involved in social and political issues? It seems that for public institutions the answer is absolutely, yes. As public education institutions, museums have the obligation to use public funds to engage their audience in relevant discussions about issues that matter. Museums should be an open space that provide an opportunity for the public to get information, have conversations, and then form educated opinions.
Yet, what is the answer for private museums? I would argue that as places of learning, they should participate in the same way that public museums do. However, private funds can do as private funds want. Although the public uses these facilities, private museums are not beholden to the public in the same way that public museums are.
After an hour of trying to complete the assignment to find an example of a museum who had stayed neutral on a current event, I began to suspect that we had been set up! Not only was I at a loss for how to find an example that fit that bill, but I also came across many editorials that insisted on the impossibility of museum neutrality (e.g Museums Are Neutral Public Institutions…I Don’t Think So! and The Political Museum). It seems that museums fall in two camps; actively engaged in issues by fostering discussions or passively quiet on current events. If a museum falls into the “quiet” category, I would argue that they have in fact chosen a side. I agree with Desmond Tutu who said, “If you are neutral on situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”
I thought of our conversation a few weeks ago about if a climate change exhibit or discussion could ever come to the Idaho State Historical Museum. We decided probably not. That omission does not mean that the museum is neutral; in fact, it means the opposite. Choices are calculated. The decision NOT to discuss something is as telling as the decision to include it.