Abstracts
Abstract
Ontario has more than 500 museums, varying in type, size, and expressed need. They have different relationships to both government policy and the associations that represent them. Yet, research on museum governance often focuses on provincial or national organizations, neglecting community museums (i.e., smaller institutions with local or regional roots). Due to their limited resources, community museums rely on the work of spokespeople to advocate for their interests. Within Ontario museum governance, these spokespeople use the term “museum community” to indicate consensus on a course of action. According to a sociology of translation perspective, when a spokesperson speaks for others, they must first silence those in whose name they speak. As such, this paper considers how those governing the sector construct the “museum community” as actors in support of particular action. It asks who and what forms the museum community? Which voices are given a platform as museum advisors and which associations represent the so-called community? The paper concludes that municipal museums have historically had a privileged position within museum associations’ articulation of community, while provincial museum advisors have more successfully included the voices of small historical society museums. As the museum advisor’s resources have become more limited, the Ontario Museum Association (OMA) has taken a more active role in assembling those voices. However, the association has limited financial resources. As such, there continues to be a stratification of museums in museum governance.
Keywords:
- community museums,
- sociology of translation,
- cultural policy
Résumé
L’Ontario compte plus de 500 musées de types, de tailles et de besoins différents. Ils ont des relations différentes à la fois avec les politiques gouvernementales et avec les associations qui les représentent. Cependant, la recherche sur la gouvernance des musées se concentre souvent sur les problèmes des organisations provinciales ou nationales, en négligeant les musées communautaires, c’est-à-dire les petites institutions ayant des racines locales ou régionales. En raison de leurs ressources limitées, les musées communautaires comptent sur le travail des porte-parole pour défendre leurs intérêts. Dans la gouvernance des musées de l’Ontario, ces porte-parole utilisent le terme « communauté muséale » pour indiquer un consensus sur une ligne de conduite. Selon une perspective sociologique de la traduction, lorsqu’un porte-parole parle au nom des autres, il doit d’abord faire taire ceux au nom desquels il parle. Cette recherche examine la manière dont les dirigeants du secteur construisent la « communauté muséale » en tant qu’acteur en soutien d’une action particulière, en s’intéressant à qui et quoi forme la communauté muséale et quelles voix ont une tribune en tant que conseillers de musée et associations représentant la soi-disant communauté. L’article conclut que les musées municipaux ont toujours occupé une place privilégiée dans l’articulation de la communauté par les associations de musées, tandis que les conseillers des musées provinciaux ont mieux réussi à faire entendre la voix des petits musées consacrés à la société historique. Alors que les ressources du conseiller en musée sont de plus en plus limitées, l’Association des musées de l’Ontario (OMA) joue un rôle plus actif dans la formation de ces voix. Cependant, l’association dispose de ressources financières limitées. À ce titre, il existe toujours une stratification des musées dans la gouvernance des musées.
Mots-clés :
- musées communautaires,
- sociologie de la traduction,
- politique Culturelle
Appendices
Bibliography
- Aronzyk, M., & Brady, M. (2015). Branding history at the Canadian Museum of Civilization. Canadian Journal of Communication, 40(2), 165–184.
- Ashley, S. L. T. (2014). Engage the world: Examining conflicts of engagement in public museums. Internation Journal of Cultural Policy, 20(3), 261–280.
- Baeker, G., May, M., & Tivy, M. (1992). Ontario museums in the 1990s. Muse,10(2–3), 120–123.
- Baetz, R. (1980). Baetz announces future direction. Currently, 3(6), 1–2.
- Bandelli, A., & Konijn, E. A. (2015). Public participation and scientific citizenship in the science museum in London: Visitors’ perceptions of the museum as a broker. Visitor Studies, 18(2), 131–149.
- Bassett, I. (1998). [Letter]. Operating grants case files for community museums. (RG47-41 B932597 CMOG 1999-00). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- Blackbourn, C. (2007). Landscapes. Currently, Special 35th anniversary print edition, 5.
- Brent, M. (1984). An introduction to the standards for community museums in Ontario. Museum Quarterly, 13(3), 7–8.
- Callon, M. (1986a). Some elements of a sociology of translation. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, action and belief. A new sociology of knowledge? (pp. 196-223). London: Routledge.
- Callon, M. (1986b). The sociology of an actor-network: The case of the electric vehicle. In M. Callon, J. Law, & A. Rip (Eds.), Mapping the dynamics of science and technology (pp. 19-34). London: Palgrave MacMillan.
- Callon, M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In J. Law (Ed.), A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination (pp. 132–61). New York: Routledge.
- Callon, M., & Latour, B. (1981). Unscrewing the big leviathan: How actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In K. Knorr Cetina & A.V. Cicourel (Eds.), Advances in social theory and methodology: Toward an integration of micro and macro-sociologies (pp. 277–303). New York: Routledge.
- Canadian Museum Association. (2016). The state of museums in Canada: Brief to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. Ottawa: Canadian Museum Association.
- Citizenship and Culture, Government of Ontario. (1985). Ontario museum notes: Practical information on operating a community museum. Museum Notes, 1.
- Heritage Branch, Ministry of Culture and Communications, Government of Ontario. (1984). Standards for Community Museums in Ontario. Operating grants case files for community museums. (RG47-41 B412703 operating grants 1989 procedures). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- Clarke, J. (2012). The work of governing. In K. Coulter & W. R. Schumann (Eds.), Governing cultures: Anthropological perspectives on political labor, power, and Government (pp. 209-231). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Community Museum. (1991). CMOG application form. Operating grants case files for community museums. (RG47-41 B340871). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- Dorais, L. A. (1987). Musées nationaux du Canada: Une politique concrète. Loisir et Société,10(1), 69–82.
- Duncan, D. (1981, October 17). Presentation at the annual workshop. Museum Section Correspondence. (RG47-51 B101695). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- Gattinger, M., & Saint-Pierre, D. (2011). Les politiques culturelles provinciales et territoriales du Canada. Origines, évolutions et mises en oeuvre. Québec: PUL.
- Gilbank, R. (1973). Newsletter, 143.
- Gooding, S. J. (1959). The work of provincial museum advisors. In Ontario Historical Society Museums Section Workshop Report (pp.7–10). Toronto: Ontario Historical Society.
- Gray, C. (2015). The politics of museums. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
- Greffe, X. (2011). The economic impact of the Louvre. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 41(2), 121–137.
- Havelka, M. (2000–2001). Currently,23(4), 5–7.
- Historical and Museums Branch, Government of Ontario. (1973). Suggested programme for the development of local Museums in Ontario. Museum Policy Development Reports. (RG47-79). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- Jaffry, S., & Apostolakis, A. (2011). Evaluating individual preferences for the British Museum. Journal of Cultural Economics, 35(1), 49–75.
- Jenkins, B. (2005). Toronto’s cultural renaissance. Canadian Journal of Communication,30(2): 169–86.
- Jung, Y. (2015). Diversity matters: Theoretical understanding of and suggestions for the current fundraising practices of nonprofit art museums. Journal of Arts Management Law and Society, 45(4), 255–268.
- Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown.
- Lalonde, M. (2005, June 9). Letter to Ms. Oxley. Operating grants case files for community museums. (RG47-41 B931430 grants 2005-1DBC-2921 OMA). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379–393.
- Leigh Star, S. (1990). Power, technology, and the phenomenology of conventions: On being allergic to onions. The Sociological Review, 38(S1), 26–56.
- Looking Ahead Task Force. (2016). Ontario’s museums 2025: Strategic vision & action plan. Toronto: Ontario Museum Association.
- McCall, V. (2009). Social policy and cultural services: A study of Scottish border museums as implementers of social inclusion. Social Policy & Society, 8(3), 319–331.
- McCann, E., & Ward, K. (2013). A multi-disciplinary approach to policy transfer research: Geographies, assemblages, mobilities and mutations. Policy Studies, 34(1), 2–18.
- McLauchlan, G. (1972, April 18). Letter to colleagues. Ontario Museum Association general correspondence files. (F2091 6 B253002 correspondence – council – president July 13,1971 – Aug 26, 1975). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- Miers, S. H., & Markham, S. F. (1932). A report on the museums of Canada. Edinburgh: T. and A. Constable.
- Museum Advisors. (1980). Ontario’s community museum programme directions for the 1980’s: A discussion paper. Museum section correspondence. (RG47-51 B101712 policy papers I). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- Nimmo, R. (2011). Actor-network theory and methodology: Social research in a more-than-human world. Methodological Innovations Online, 6(3), 108–119.
- Nisbett, M. (2013). New perspectives on instrumentalism: an empirical study of cultural diplomacy. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 19(5), 557–575.
- OHS Museum Section. (1953–1981). Newsletter.
- OMA. (n.d.). [Flyer]. Museum section correspondence. (RG47-51 B929760 CSW05A-1 [OMA]). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- OMA. (1972). Application for membership in the Ontario Museum Association: Explanatory notes. Museum section correspondence. (RG47-51 B328435). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- OMA. (1977). Province to eliminate museum grants. Currently, 1(2), 1–2.
- OMA. (1984). Community museum standards confirmed. Currently, 7(5), 1.
- OMA. (1984). New wintario program grants. Currently, 7(6), 1.
- OMA. 1993. Ontario Museum Association 1992-1993 Annual Report. Ontario Museum Association: Toronto.
- OMA. (2000). OMA/AMO Annual Report 1999-2000. Ontario Museum Association: Toronto.
- OMA. (2008). Research into the sustainability of Ontario’s community museums: CMOG snapshot 2000–2004. Retrieved April 21, 2020 from https://members.museumsontario.ca/sites/default/files/members/CMOGsnapshot20002004.pdf
- OMA. (2015, November 17). [Open Letter]. Retrieved April 21, 2020 from https://gallery.mailchimp.com/9a74d213d7e397025fc8b7b8e/files/11_17_15_OMA_Cult_consultation_submission_FINAL_1_.pdf
- Ontario Museums Association and Hill Strategies Research Inc. (2016). Ontario’s museums 2014 profile highlights. Retrieved April 21, 2020 from https://members.museumsontario.ca/sites/default/files/members/publications/ProfileHighlights_OnlineView2.pdf
- Paquette, J. (2010). La réforme des musées nationaux du Canada: Défis professionnels et managériaux de la recherche. Canadian Public Administration, 53(3), 375–394.
- Paquette, J., & Redaelli, E. (2015). Arts management and cultural policy research. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
- Parsons, M. D. (1999). The problem of power: Seeking a methodological solution. Policy Studies Review, 16(3), 279–310.
- Poulard, F. (2012). Curators and the state, a question of interdependencies: The case of France. In J. Paquette (Ed.), Cultural Policy, Work and Identity. The Creation, Renewal and Negotiation of Professional Subjectivities (pp. 77-90). London: Routledge.
- Rice, L. (2011). Black-boxing sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Development, 4(4), 32–36.
- Stylianou-Lambert, T., Boukas, N., & Christodoulou-Yerali, M. (2014). Museums and cultural sustainability: Stakeholders, forces, and cultural policies. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 20(5), 179–185.
- Styrmo, V. (1978). [Memo]. Museum section correspondence. (RG47-51 B101712 unlabeled). Archives of Ontario, Toronto.
- Taylor, A. W., & Taylor, V. B. (1968). Our aim and basis. Newsletter, 118, 3.
- Tivy, M. (2006). The local history museum in Ontario: An intellectual history. Waterloo, ON: University of Waterloo.
- Weil, S. E. (1997). Museums in the United States: The paradox of privately governed public institutions. Museum Management and Curatorship, 15(3), 249–257.
- Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: The case of usability trails. The Sociological Review, 38(S1), 58–99.
- Zapata Campos, M. J., & Zapata, P. (2013). Translating development aid into city management: The barrio acahualinca integrated development programme in Managua, Nicaragua. Public Administration and Development, 33(2), 101–112.