Didar: Activating Exhibition Spaces With Diaspora Communities In Melbourne

References

• Alhagh, L 2021, Interdisciplinary approaches to the study of distanciated Islamic manuscripts: ‘Sad Kalamih [Kalima] Shah Vilayat (One Hundred Sayings by Ali): Manzumih [Manzuma] dar Hajj (Futuh al-Haramayn)’ - a case study, viewed 18 September 2022, <http://hdl.handle.net/11343/274385>.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Institute for the Conservation of Cultural Material 2002, AICCM Code of Ethics and Code of Practice, viewed 15 June 2022, <https://aiccm.org.au/about/code-ethics-and-practice/>.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Institute for the Conservation of Cultural Material 2020, AICCM Strategic Plan 2020–2025, viewed 10 June 2022, <https://aiccm.org.au/about/aiccm-strategic-plan/>.
   Google Scholar
• Blake J 2019, ‘Further reflections on community involvement in safeguarding intangible cultural heritage’, in N Akagawa & L Smith (eds.), Safeguarding intangible heritage: practices and politics, Routledge, Oxon, pp. 17–35.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks MM 2013, ‘“Culture and Anarchy”, Considering Conservation’, in E Williams (ed.) The Public Face of Conservation, Archetype Publications, London, pp. 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne D, Brayshaw H & Ireland T 2003, Social significance: a discussion paper, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville, New South Wales.
   Google Scholar
• Chatterjee HJ & Noble G 2013, Museums, health and well-being, Ashgate, Farnham.
   Google Scholar
• Chitty G 2017, ‘Introduction: engaging conservation—practising heritage conservation in communities’, in G Chitty (ed.) Heritage, conservation and community: engagement, participation and capacity building, heritage, culture and identity series, Routledge, London & New York, pp. 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Clavir M 2002, Preserving what is valued: museums, conservation, and First Nations, University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver.
   Google Scholar
• Clifford J 1997, Routes: travel and translation in the late twentieth century, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp. 188–219.
   Google Scholar
• Crang M & Tolia-Kelly DP 2010, ‘Nation, race and affect: senses and sensibilities at National Heritage sites’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 2315–2331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doubt D, Sun W & Yeh S 2019, ‘Museums as points of connection: how institutions in North America and Europe engage with diaspora communities’, The Museum Scholar, vol. 3, pp. 1.
   Google Scholar
• Edmonds P & Wild E 2000, ‘New obligations: conservation policy and treatment approaches for Aboriginal Collections in Bunjilaka, The Aboriginal Cultural Centre, Melbourne Museum’, in A Roy & P Smith (eds.) Tradition and innovation: advances in conservation, International Institute for Conservation, London, pp 60–64.
   Google Scholar
• Fekrsanati F & Marçal H 2022, ‘Affirming Change in Participatory Practices of Cultural Conservation’, in C Rausch, R Benschop, E Sitzia & V van Saaze (eds.) Participatory Practices in Art and Cultural Heritage, Springer, Cham, vol 5, pp. 127–144. <doi:10.1007/978-3-031-05694-9_10>.
   Google Scholar
• Fienup-Riordan A 1998, ‘‘Yup’ik elders in museums: fieldwork turned on its head’’, Arctic Anthropology, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 49–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Froggett L & Trustram M 2014, ‘Object relations in the museum: a psycho-social perspective’, Museum Management and Curatorship, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 482–497.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, J & Nakamoto, T 2016, ‘Dialogue in conservation decision-making’, Studies in Conservation, vol. 61, no. sup2, pp. 67–78. <doi: 10.1080/00393630.2016.1183106>.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewincamp, S 2022, ‘Tiered contact zones: a new engagement model for cultural materials conservation’, Grimwade Centre PhD thesis, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, <http://hdl.handle.net/11343/307531>.
   Google Scholar
• Lewincamp S & Sloggett R 2016, ‘Connecting objects, communities and cultural knowledge’, AICCM Bulletin, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 3–13.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch BT 2011, ‘Collaboration, contestation and creative conflict: on the efficacy of museum/community partnerships’, in J Marstine (ed.) The Routledge companion to museum ethics: Redefining ethics for the twenty-first century museum, Routledge, London, pp. 146–164.
   Google Scholar
• Moorkens J, Verreyke H & Ortega Saez H 2022, ‘‘Hertiage and dementia: two complementary worlds’, The International Journal of the Inclusive Museum, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 39–40.
   Google Scholar
• Morse N 2021, The museum as a space for social care, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, Oxon and New York.
   Google Scholar
• Morse N & Munro E 2015, ‘Museums’ community engagement schemes, austerity and practices of care in two local museum services’, Social & Cultural Geography, Online First, pp. 357–378, doi: 10.1080/14649365.2015.1089583.
   Google Scholar
• O’Donnell, E & Tse, N 2018, ‘Making and Meaning: Building the Artist Record through Conservation in Indonesia’, International Journal of Creative and Arts Studies, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 11–25.
   Google Scholar
• Pearlstein E & Lohnas D 2013, ‘Conservation outreach materials for a tribal museum without conservators’, in E Williams (ed.) The public face of conservation, Archetype Publications Ltd, London, pp. 222–231.
   Google Scholar
• Pryde, P 2008, ‘John Bowman and the University of Melbourne’s Middle Eastern manuscript collection’, in Contributions to the Symposium on the Care and Conservation of Middle Eastern Manuscripts, 26–28 November 2007, Melbourne, Centre for Cultural Materials Conservation, Melbourne pp. 1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Richmond A & Bracker A (eds) 2009, Conservation principles, dilemmas and uncomfortable truths, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. xvi–xiv.
   Google Scholar
• Sapu S n.d., Conserving heritage In East Asian cities: planning for continuity and change, Getty Conservation Center Technical Note, pp. 1-10.
   Google Scholar
• Schank RC & Abelson RP 1995, ‘Knowledge and memory: the real story’, in RS Wyer Jr (ed.) Knowledge and memory: the real story, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp: 1–85.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, M 2016, ‘Tradition and innovation: building the conservation discipline in Australia’ doctoral thesis, University of Melbourne, Melbourne <http://hdl.handle.net/11343/91087>.
   Google Scholar
• Sheard L & Marsh C 2019, ‘How to analyse longitudinal data from multiple sources in qualitative health research: the pen portrait analytic technique’, BMC Medical Research Methodology, vol. 19, no. 169, pp. 1–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sloggett, R 2008, ‘Raman analysis of pigments found in Middle Eastern manuscripts in the University of Melbourne Collection’, in Contributions to the Symposium on the Care and Conservation of Middle Eastern Manuscripts, 26–28 November 2007, Melbourne, Centre for Cultural Materials Conservation, Melbourne, pp. 89–99.
   Google Scholar
• Sloggett R & Wain A 2020, ‘Cultural materials conservation in Australia: critical reflections and key issues in the twenty-first century’, AICCM Bulletin, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 1–2, doi:10.1080/10344233.2020.1831826.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, L. & Campbell, G. 2016, ‘The elephant in the room: Heritage, affect and emotion’ in W Logan, M Nic Craith & U Kockel (eds.), A Companion to Heritage Studies, Wiley Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 443–460.
   Google Scholar
• Smith L, Wetherell M & Campbell G 2018, Emotion, affective practices, and the past in the present, Routledge, London.
   Google Scholar
• Stroja J 2018, ‘My history, your history, our history: developing meaningful community engagement within historic sites and museums’, Queensland Review, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 300–321.
   Google Scholar
• Sully D 2007, ‘Colonising and conservation’, in D Sully (ed.) Decolonising conservation: caring for Māori meeting houses outside New Zealand, Left Coast Press Inc., Walnut Creek, California, pp. 27–44.
   Google Scholar
• Sully, D & Pombo Cardoso, I 2014, ‘Painting Hinemihi by numbers: Peoples-based conservation and the paint analysis of Hinemihi's carvings’, Studies in Conservation, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 180–193. <doi: 10.1179/2047058413Y.0000000102>.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomson LJ, Morse N & Elsden E 2020, ‘Art, nature and mental health: assessing the biopsychosocial effects of a ‘creative green prescription’ museum programme involving horticulture, artmaking and collections’, Perspectives in Public Health, vol. 10, no. 11, pp. 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Victorian Multicultural Commission, 2022, ‘Commission Victorian Multicultural Annual Report 2021–22’, pp.1–48, <https://www.multiculturalcommission.vic.gov.au/victorian-multicultural-commission-annual-reports>.
   Google Scholar
• Victorian State Government, 2023, ‘Toolkit for practitioners—Engaging culturally and linguistically diverse communities on the Waterways of the West’, pp. 1–43, <https://www.water.vic.gov.au/waterways-and-catchments/wow/waterways-of-the-west-toolkit-for-practitioners>.
   Google Scholar
• Wallen L & Docherty-Hughes JR 2022, ‘Caring spaces: individual and social wellbeing in museum community engagement experiences’, Journal of Museum Education, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 93–102, DOI: 10.1080/10598650.2021.2021490.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waterton E 2014, ‘A more-than-representational understanding of heritage? The ‘past’ and the politics of affect’, Geography Compass, vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 823–833.
   Google Scholar
• Wetherall, M, Smith, L & Campbell, G 2018, Emotion, affective practices, and thepast in the present, pp. 1. 23.
   Google Scholar