Reflection on Hyperlinked Environments: Hyperlinked Museums, Galleries, and Archives

WE’VE ALWAYS DONE IT THIS WAY

✿

“I urged readers to explore alternatives and new ways of working to make sure efficiencies couldn’t be improved. I cautioned: if librarians are hiding behind that phrase because they’ve had enough new things or just want to keep things the same, it might be time to move on” (Stephens, 2019).

This week, for my reflection on Hyperlinked Environments, I chose to engage with the section on hyperlinked Museums, Galleries, and Archives. I was initially excited to learn about new innovative technologies being used in museums and galleries, like those mentioned in the Museum Next and the Museums and the Web articles. Although I enjoyed reading about the different AR and VR implementations, I quickly found myself frustrated at the language used in some of the other articles. Instead of discussing the ongoing technological endeavors in museum, gallery, and archival spaces, I wanted to instead address the harmful biases I saw laden throughout.

“Being a good, innovative librarian means taking a humanistic stance toward policy, decision-making, and experimentation. It means focusing on the heart” (Stephens, 2019).

Here are some of the offending statements and my immediate thoughts on them.

“The Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam has discouraged the use of photography and taking selfies in front of pieces to protect the art pieces, as well as to create an encounter with art rather than a “passive and superficial experience” driven by social media” (Daily Bruin Staff, 2016).

“Visitors are easily distracted and do not truly experience beauty, magic, and wonder” (Wanshel, 2015).

What do they truly intend to say by utilizing this type of passive-aggressive language? The second quote is presented as an objective reality but is actually subjectively biased and prescriptive. Although encouraging attendees to draw is a fantastic idea to encourage creativity and engagement, is the condescension and dismissiveness necessary or helpful to achieving that goal?

“It’s understandable that the use of technology will get people through the door and create more exposure for the artists. I just hope that I can stop seeing photos of people pretending to lift Michael Heizer’s “Levitated Mass” sculpture at LACMA on my news feed.” (Daily Bruin Staff, 2016).

Do the selfie-taking people damage the sculpture in any way? If not, why does it matter, and why does the author care? If these people aren’t being destructive or causing harm, then why are we policing how they interact with art?

“They were worried: If you show the art online, then why would people come to the museum?” says Sreenivasan. The new site lets people download high-resolution images and use them for free in non-commercial work. “Shouldn’t they be crappy pictures?” (Titlow, 2016).

I guess we should remove accessibility to those not privileged enough to physically visit a museum, for whatever reason that may be. Making pictures from a free resource, crappy on purpose, is a form of gatekeeping that perpetuates classism.

“Two groups emerged from our analyses: one had higher scores than the other in all goals and in their initial interest – this is the ‘highly engaged’ group” (Oliveira & de Barba, 2018).

“The highly engaged group were more likely to adopt deeper levels of cognitive processing about exhibition content, like trying to tie learned information back to their own experiences, seeking out connections between exhibition content, and searching out further information on their own” (Oliveira & de Barba, 2018).

“The less engaged group, on the other hand, were more inclined to read exhibition titles and seek out interactive exhibits, rather than trying to cognitively process and reflect deeply on exhibition information” (Oliveira & de Barba, 2018).

How do you determine engagement when everyone’s baseline is completely different? Did this research take into consideration those with disabilities or those who are neurodivergent? How do you know the “less engaged” group didn’t cognitively process and reflect deeply after they left the museum? Why does this have to happen only at the museum? Why even have interactive exhibits if engaging with them makes a person less engaged? Galleries, museums, and archives aren’t only for the “elite”; they are for everyone, and not everyone comes in with the same level of knowledge, interest, or ability. We should avoid judging and instead focus on helping others learn, grow, and feel excitement about new information.

How would you feel reading this article, and knowing you were labeled as a member of the less engaged group?

These articles, although well-meaning, reinforce Western Eurocentric standards of “proper” engagement. Although they want to increase museum visitation, attendance, and retention, their language, which reflects their poor perceptions of others, gatekeeps culture and perpetuates ableism. Labeling not just smartphone use, but also individuals, as “passive,” disregards technology’s ability to facilitate personalized and equitable access and unfairly judges and excludes disabled and neurodivergent participants. If the goal is to focus on the heart and practice “heretical thinking”, then a lot of these authors and people who hold power in these spaces need to make a concerted effort to acknowledge, engage with, and dismantle their biases through targeted reflexive practice.

“Visitors come to museums with varied backgrounds, motivations, interests, and prior knowledge, which influence what, when, and where they visit and engage” (Oliveira & de Barba, 2018).

“So while people of all ages are increasingly glued to their devices, that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re less engaged with their surroundings” (Titlow, 2016).

✿

Something Interesting: A fun intersection of art, technology, and libraries

@malindipress

More than a century later, W.E.B. Du Bois’s data portraits still feel ahead of their time. At Brooklyn Public Library, Printing Black America revisits the intersection of Black life, design, research, and resistance. #fyp #art #history #design #brooklynpubliclibrary

♬ Red Room – Hiatus Kaiyote

 

References

Daily Bruin Staff. (2016, January 20). The impact of social media on museums, art – Daily Bruin. Daily Bruin; Daily Bruin. http://dailybruin.com/2016/01/20/the-impact-of-social-media-on-museums-ar

Oliveira, E. A., & de Barba, P. (2018, December 11). How does learning happen in museums? Pursuit; University of Melbourne. https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/how-does-learning-happen-in-museums

Stephens, M. T. (2019). Wholehearted librarianship : finding hope, inspiration, and balance. Ala Editions.

Titlow, J. P. (2016, February 29). How a 145-year-old art museum stays relevant in the smartphone age. Fast Company; Mansueto Ventures, LLC. https://www.fastcompany.com/3057236/how-a-145-year-old-art-museum-stays-relevant-in-the-smartphone-age

Wanshel, E. (2015, November 23). Museum “bans” cameras and asks guests to sketch art instead. HuffPost; BuzzFeed, Inc. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/rijksmuseum-museum-bans-cameras-cell-phones-startdrawing_n_56532ff6e4b0d4093a585383