The sheer volume of artifacts, the weight of history, the pressure to represent the world’s diverse cultures, and the constant threat of political and social upheaval – it’s a recipe for disaster. But, for some, it’s a calling. The British Museum’s director, Hartwig Fischer, has been in the role since 2017, and he’s facing a unique set of challenges.
He has outlined a plan to revitalize the British Museum, focusing on three key areas: accessibility, engagement, and relevance. Dr. Cullinan’s vision for the British Museum is not just about attracting visitors, but about creating a truly inclusive and engaging experience for everyone. He believes that the museum should be a place where people from all backgrounds can connect with the past, present, and future.
This partnership, however, has been met with criticism from various stakeholders, including environmental activists, academics, and even some members of the British Museum’s own staff. The museum’s decision to partner with BP has been widely criticized for its environmental impact. BP is a major fossil fuel company, and its operations contribute significantly to climate change.
The museum community has been grappling with how to engage younger generations in a meaningful and engaging way. How can museums become more relevant to younger audiences, especially those who are highly critical of traditional art forms and institutions? How can museums address issues such as social justice, environmentalism, and climate change in a way that resonates with younger generations?
Who wants to be alerted to the “colonial links” in everything they’re about to see, informed that a puppet show recreation of the Crusades at Tate Modern contains “violence and dead bodies” or indeed find themselves scouring the galleries of Tate Britain for prized national artworks – only to find that they have been replaced with paintings “linked to slavery and colonialism” as part of a rehang that’s a “more inclusive narration of British art and history”? Sorry, but who are you to narrate this country’s history? And you can forget about losing yourself in a bucolic Constable. Earlier this year visitors at the Fitzwilliam Museum were warned that those rolling English hills may awaken “dark nationalist feelings”, possibly even make us believe that “only those with a historical tie to the land have a right to belong”. Sorry? I didn’t come here to be called a racist xenophobe. Also, isn’t that quite a leap? Why not squeeze in a “caution: these Hampstead Heath depictions may make you a Farage fan” while they’re at it?
They assume that visitors have no prior knowledge of the subject matter, and they present the evidence in a way that is so simplistic and straightforward that it feels like a kindergarten lesson. This approach, while seemingly harmless, can be detrimental to the apologetics movement. It can create a sense of intellectual superiority and alienate potential converts. It can also lead to a misunderstanding of the evidence and the complexities of the faith.
