home | news l

Cradle of culture but stories boring: museum review

Helen Musa

16 July 2003 - The National Museum of Australia had a firm grip on our indigenous history and culture, but when it came to story-telling, particularly of post-European settlement, the new institution was often just plain boring.

That was the conclusion of the long-awaited review of the museum carried out by Melbourne academic John Carroll and a team of three other experts from around the country.

Contrary to predictions, the 71-page report gave the thumbs up to the controversial First Australians gallery, considering its approach to the dark side of Australia history to be "a model for approaching such controversies", atmospheric, imaginative, and showing a "firm curatorial hand" and solid research.

The report exonerated the museum of charges that it presented a "black armband" approach to our history, describing its approach to "darker historical episodes" as balanced.

The report also praised the museum and its director Dawn Casey for achieving so much in its foundation period and for becoming a significant attraction in the nation's capital.

The museum was depicted as an attractive place with appealing spaces, with dynamism and high staff morale which generated "a warmly propitious aura".

At the same time, the report pulled no punches in its criticisms, making nine short-term and six long-term recommendations.

The museum's chief failing, it said, was in the area of story-telling.

There were too few objects to "generate memorable vignettes", and too few "paradigmatic moments".

The density of exhibitions was bewildering and eroded interest. This was probably the result of a problem, the report suggested, in "translation of narrative into museum practice".

The worst-hit areas were those dealing with post-European settlement, dealt with in the Horizons and Nation galleries which failed to single out exemplary Australian individuals, groups, or institutional achievements, or even the "fundamental themes and narratives" of Australian history.

Captain Cook was neglected or at most presented negatively. Anzac references were tokenistic.

Comparing the museum's approach to fellow institutions, the report commended the National Library's Burke and Wills exhibition and the Australian War Memorial's use of the Lancaster bomber as showing how to entrance the general public by objects linked to stories.

The report hit out an almost total neglect of science and an under-representation of sport in the museum.

Far from being hard to dramatise, its suggested, these fields were full of incident. The Joe Solomon cap incident in the Australia versus West Indies match at the MCG during the 1960-61 tour would, the report said, make a good story.

Other suggestions included using a voice-over from Patrick White's novel Voss, or showing people three different slants on the arrival of Europeans.

Underpinning the problem of story-telling, it said, was confusing signage, poor exhibition lighting and a "cacophony" in public spaces caused by poor design and inferior audio equipment.

The committee was made up of Dr Carroll, who is a reader in sociology at La Trobe university, chairman of the General Property Trust Richard Longes, a paleontologist from Monash University, Professor Patricia Vickers-Rich and a senior curator at the South Australian Museum, Dr Philip Jones.

While the first three preferred a tighter designation of Nation under the heading "Peopling Australia", Dr Jones prefered the current themes of land, nation, and people.

Dr Carroll said yesterday that he saw it as a "mixed report". The deficiencies in the museum were mostly attributable to "the speed at which the museum had to get off the ground".

Ms Casey said the review made some pertinent points.

The committee's six-month period of investigation has now finished and the report will go to the council for consideration.

Source: The Canberra Times

related links :

• The National Museum of Australia
• National Museum of Australia Review of Exhibitions and Programs
  
• Look back in anger
  4 January 2003 - Faced with a government review, the National Museum of Australia may be forced to reinterpret its controversial portrayal of the nation's colonial history, writes Joyce Morgan. The federal Arts Minister, Richard Alston, made a curious qualification when he referred to the National Museum of Australia last month. He told Parliament the establishment of the museum had been a good outcome, "certainly in terms of the structure of the building".

Further information: history issues page - includes news index and external links