Bridging the Boundaries between Museum and Heritage Studies

Abstract

The past few decades have seen an emergent and growing interest in the phenomenon of heritage. While 's own definition for museum has long centred on institutions and their existing functions, the version adopted at 's General Conference in Vienna in 2007 has moved towards considering the social function of museums by defining heritage as a core business. While this development is certainly welcome, it raises questions as to how well developed and established the field of museum studies is in relation to the more emergent one of heritage studies. Is the latter gaining dominance as a topic in museum studies and museology, and if so, how, and to what degree? Do museum studies and museology prove limited or redundant when one takes into account the importance of heritage as a specific phenomenon? Do museum studies continue to address relevant topics, and how might the field remain pertinent, or indeed crucial, in its analysis of the ongoing development of relations between humanity and heritage, which occurs largely within museums?

This article offers a mediating perspective that envisages how we might bring together these seemingly divergent fields in productive ways. On the one hand, heritage studies present an attractive way to move forward, provided that it draws from knowledge and practices already prevalent in museum studies; unfortunately, this is not always the case. On the other hand, museum studies remains a relevant and necessary field in its own right, since heritage studies do not—nor will they in the future—cover all issues or perspectives relevant to museum work. All current indicators show that the sector is in the midst of a crucial transition period in which existing paradigms are being challenged; but they also point to a promising future wherein museum studies and heritage studies work together in complementary ways. Hence, a mediating approach is and will remain essential. One crucial concept emphasised here among several others is that of heritage literacy, which embraces a participative, inclusive, and multicultural approach to heritage and museums. This article suggests how such salutary outcomes might be reached by pointing towards a case study from the University of Zagreb (Croatia) and examples drawn from its taught programme in Museology and Heritage Management.

Notes

1. The cited text is the final part of an introductory speech delivered by Prof. Ivo Maroević at the joint meeting between ICOFOM, ICTOP and INTERCOM at the General Conference of ICOM, held in Barcelona in 2001. Translated by the author.

2. In 1967, Wilcomb E. Washburn dismissively compared museology with ‘grandmotherology’. See Wilcomb E. Washburn (1967), pp. 43–48.

3. Translated by the author.

4. In van Mensch (1995). Paper presented at the joint meeting of ICOFOM and MINOM at Stavanger, 4 July, 1995.

5. It should be mentioned that this moment coincided with the early stages of informatisation in museums, and with a pronounced trend toward standardisation in museum documentation departments.

6. Maroević's theories and observations have appeared widely in an international corpus of museological knowledge, notably through his active participation in ICOFOM and ICTOP activities.

7. Maroević's contribution to museology, translated into English, is summarised in the 1998 monograph entitled Introduction to Museology‐The European Approach.

8. In 1970, his theory of museology was presented to Croatian in the article entitled. The Concept of Museology. Museologija, No. 8, 2–73.

9. The PRC system was introduced to the field of museology by Peter van Mensch, a former doctoral student of Professor I. Maroević', in his Ph.D. thesis entitled Towards a Methodology of Museology, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1992.

10. ‘Dissonance is a condition that refers to the discordance or lack of agreement and consistency as to the meaning of heritage […] since […] heritage is seen here as a diverse cultural knowledge in the sense that there are many heritages, the contents and meanings of which change through time and across space and are shaped and managed for a range of purposes defined by the needs and demands of our present societies’ (Ashworth et al. 2007, pp. 36–37).

11. Concerning scientific revolutions and progress, see Khun, Thomas S. (2002), Struktura znanstvenih revolucija. Zagreb: Jesenski i Turk. Translated by the author.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Darko Babić

Darko Babić is Assistant Professor at the University of Zagreb, Croatia. He is Chair of the Sub‐Department of Museology (part of the Department of Information and Communication Science), which was established in 1984. He is also the national coordinator for several European Union research‐development projects in museum studies and heritage management. He was recently elected Chair of the ICOM International Committee for the Training of Personnel (ICTOP), is acting Chairman of ICOM Croatia, and a Supervisory Committee Board member of the European Association for Heritage Interpretation.