This spring/summer ANSM partnered with Saint Mary's University to teach a course on museum fundamentals and decolonizing collections. As part of the course, students were invited to read and review a related book from ANSM's reference library. Here is Claire Mercer's book review.
image from amazon.ca |
Each of the authors bounce their
ideas off of one another and build onto the previous essay, and the stories
introduced. Importantly, the stories being relayed encourage you, as the
reader, to ponder your own emotional and physical experiences at art museums,
and museums in general. Whose Muse? is therefore a worthwhile book to
read if you are interested in museums as
a whole, not only art museums or galleries. With that said, there were both
highlights and shortcomings within Cuno’s book that can be further explored.
A few elements of Whose Muse? encourage
positive assessment of the authors’ thoughts and contributions. One of these assessments’
centres on one of the themes that carries through the book, which is the
emphasis on the importance of the layperson’s relationship with art and art
museums. True consideration of the public, not only the population who were
previously well versed in art, strengthened the book’s topic of public trust. By
placing weight on the critical contribution of many visitors to museums,
it allows you to continue reading Whose Muse? with confidence some
confidence that the authors are looking at the larger museum landscape, and not
solely from a top down approach.
Public trust in art museums is best explored in Lowry’s essay, “A Deontological Approach to Art Museums and the Public Trust.” Museums in American are considered and perceived to be non-profits, but Lowry thoughtfully breaks down how certain institutions have challenged this mandate. Lowry’s essay is arguably the most impactful in the book and enables the reader to understand the consequences of museums becoming performative institutions in attempt to increase their profits. This deontological discussion situates itself nicely among the book’s explanations of museum politics, like how they are funded and what relationship they have with government in both the United States and France, for example. Wood’s essay, “The Authorities of the American Art Museum” expands on the politics of American art museums and discusses government the most. Wood’s essay is informative on a number of matters, including the ties between democracy and the risk of tyranny among the authorities of art museums in America.
In considering the highlights of the book, Wood makes
an assertion that is seemingly relevant to the current situation with museums:
the two main challenges facing museum “authority” are strong intellectual
theory and extreme commercialization. According to Wood,
intellectual theory can cause stagnation in a museum’s goals and their ability
to enhance the visitor’s experience. Commercialization on the other hand can be
dangerous for public trust in several fashions, but one of the main ones that
Wood introduces is the situation when replicas are put on display to attract
visitors. When scandalous situations like this come out, it erodes
the public’s trust in art museums, and the institution of museums as a whole.
Each of the highlights in Whose Muse? are worth pondering, and for every
reader there would be undoubtedly different highlights, depending on their interests. However as previously mentioned, there are problematic elements of
the work which could deserve critiquing.
Two main issues presented themselves when reading Whose
Muse? and both relate to the book’s ignorance of colonial legacy within art
museums. To preface, this book was written in 2004, and so I write this with some hope that terminology and ideas would have adapted based
on social differences now in 2022. Whose Muse? reflects colonial museum
discourse that current museum “authorities” are hopefully all striving
to move away from. Some problematic terminology within this discourse includes
“authorities” and “mission,” among a variety of other colonial terms. This
terminology was likely amplified by the first larger problem of the book, which
is its focus on Western art museums and an almost unjustified emphasis on
American institutions. The title doesn’t indicate the exclusivity that would
carry through the theme of the essays. In one sense, it’s understandable that
the authors were explicitly aiming to write on the scope of their knowledge.
But in another sense, there were generalizations made about art museums as a
whole that are simply not applicable to what every individual would understand and
experience as an art museum. Therefore, what the authors of Whose Muse? perceive
to be elements of public trust toward art museums may fall out of line with
what the public believes to be indicators of trust.
The other major critique applicable to Whose Muse? is
the authors’ suggestion, or unwritten assumption that all are welcome into art
museums, regardless of their status in society. Although the authors consider
all visitors to museums, Whose Muse? doesn’t discuss the
experiences of marginalized communities with art museums, and the possibility
that they don’t even feel welcome to visit in the first place. In failing to
address this exclusivity, Cuno and his co-authors don’t assess the ways in
which marginalized communities have been potentially misrepresented by curators
and directors alike, particularly in Western institutions. What does this
demonstrate about Whose Muse?’s discussion of public trust? Well,
without addressing the unique experiences of marginalized communities and
public trust in their representation, Whose Muse? has fallen short of relaying
an accurate depiction of the very topic it wished to claim expertise.
This brief review of Whose Muse? is intended to
encourage my peers to read the book, however with skepticism. The social and
political climate in Western society, and across the world has certainly
shifted since 2004. This means that it could be time to revamp Cuno and his
colleagues work and intentions, with a fresh perspective and a more informed
sense of the relationship between public trust and art museums.
Click here to request this book from ANSM's reference library.