Are you in a curatorial role and responsible for the interpretation of subjects concerning disability or the display of collections relating to disability? Would you mind sharing your thoughts on the following topics;
How do you decide on the way in which disability related artefacts are interpreted in your organisation?
Who do you consult as part of this decision making process?
What, in your opinion and experience, works and what is inappropriate?
Your comments will be greatly appreciated and will help to open discussion and to inform others.
Wednesday, 5 May 2010
Douglas Bader - RAF Hendon's online exhibition
Douglas Bader was a British fighter pilot during World War Two. A post-war book on his achievements called ‘Reach for the Sky’ was written by Paul Brickhill and was followed by a film with the same name. Whilst an inspirational leader, and undoubtedly a hero, one of the reasons he was internationally famous was that he achieved so much in his life even though he lost both of his legs in an accident in 1931. The Royal Air Force Museum in Hendon, England, is currently running an online exhibition on the life of Sir Douglas Bader (http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/online-exhibitions/douglas-bader/).
The details of this exhibition and the fact that Bader’s prosthetic limbs are not on display in the museum (although they are held in the collection), appear to interpret the subject from the viewpoint of the social model of disability: it is about the man not the disability. This is obviously the most appropriate and considerate way to approach the topic but for me it raises the following questions:
- Is this move from the medical to the social model of disability a recognised shift in museum policy generally? Will there be fewer exhibitions on the artefacts associated directly with disability, such as prosthetics, and more about the individuals that used them?
- How are the curatorial decisions made on such a delicate subject? What factors are considered and is there consultation with disability awareness groups and individuals living with disability? This includes decisions made on the terminology used in the displays.
- Regarding Douglas Bader specifically; was his status as an amputee the major factor that made him so famous? He was one of a number of fighter pilots who were heroes in their own right but he is the most widely known. By being more ‘reserved’ in the interpretation of his disability is the visitor able to fully appreciate how exceptional his achievements were?
The details of this exhibition and the fact that Bader’s prosthetic limbs are not on display in the museum (although they are held in the collection), appear to interpret the subject from the viewpoint of the social model of disability: it is about the man not the disability. This is obviously the most appropriate and considerate way to approach the topic but for me it raises the following questions:
- Is this move from the medical to the social model of disability a recognised shift in museum policy generally? Will there be fewer exhibitions on the artefacts associated directly with disability, such as prosthetics, and more about the individuals that used them?
- How are the curatorial decisions made on such a delicate subject? What factors are considered and is there consultation with disability awareness groups and individuals living with disability? This includes decisions made on the terminology used in the displays.
- Regarding Douglas Bader specifically; was his status as an amputee the major factor that made him so famous? He was one of a number of fighter pilots who were heroes in their own right but he is the most widely known. By being more ‘reserved’ in the interpretation of his disability is the visitor able to fully appreciate how exceptional his achievements were?
Tuesday, 4 May 2010
Soldiers and Sailors National Military Museum: Beyond the Battlefield Exhibition 2006
In September 2006 the Soldiers and Sailors National Military Museum, in Pittsburgh USA, opened their exhibition: Beyond the Battlefield. This exhibition displayed prosthetic limbs from the late nineteenth century and facts on how prosthetic technology has developed since this time. Also included were surgical tools used to remove body parts.
This poster formed part of the exhibition and depicts a man who had lost a limb during the Civil War. 'The Empty Sleeve' was a symbol of sacrifice and was regarded as 'a badge of honour'.
This poster formed part of the exhibition and depicts a man who had lost a limb during the Civil War. 'The Empty Sleeve' was a symbol of sacrifice and was regarded as 'a badge of honour'.
Monday, 3 May 2010
The reason for this blog.
As part of a BA (Hons) in Heritage Studies I am considering the interpretation of conflict related disability in museums globally. As an ex-member of the armed forces, and a volunteer for Soldiers, Sailors and Air Force Families Association (SSAFA) Forces Help in the UK, I am only too aware of the number of military personnel returning from overseas operations having sustained injuries leading to permanent disability. The reason I have chosen this potentially sensitive topic for discussion is that I am interested in the role that museums could have in supporting people, such as these troops, in the following ways;
• By educating visitors and raising awareness of the challenges faced by individuals who have been injured in war and the impact that living with disability has on their lives.
• By providing inspiration and defining role models, both historical and contemporary, through the appropriate communication of stories and biographies.
• By showcasing technological developments in medical science and the field of prosthetics.
I would also hope that interpreting the topic would lead to the development of associated projects which would inform national and international policy on disability awareness and legislation. This may also provide a focal point for support groups and an advertising platform for campaigns such as the International Campaign to Ban Landmines.
The challenge is to how to interpret this subject in a way which respects the individual and takes into account any cultural differences between nations and ethnic groups. Who decides what is appropriate and how it is to be presented? Would the interpretation meet its aims and how would that be evaluated? Should this topic be the subject of heritage interpretation at all?
• By educating visitors and raising awareness of the challenges faced by individuals who have been injured in war and the impact that living with disability has on their lives.
• By providing inspiration and defining role models, both historical and contemporary, through the appropriate communication of stories and biographies.
• By showcasing technological developments in medical science and the field of prosthetics.
I would also hope that interpreting the topic would lead to the development of associated projects which would inform national and international policy on disability awareness and legislation. This may also provide a focal point for support groups and an advertising platform for campaigns such as the International Campaign to Ban Landmines.
The challenge is to how to interpret this subject in a way which respects the individual and takes into account any cultural differences between nations and ethnic groups. Who decides what is appropriate and how it is to be presented? Would the interpretation meet its aims and how would that be evaluated? Should this topic be the subject of heritage interpretation at all?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)