Save Newport Museum and Art Gallery Here we are again. A flurry of proposed council cuts, and the culture sector finds itself on the chopping block. Not for the first time, a museum is the subject of rumours regarding its long term viability, with ‘closure’ a word being bandied around. This time, it’s a museum close to my heart, as Newport Museum and Art Gallery is being considered by the city council for, what might diplomatically be described as, a ‘reduction’. ‘Reductions’ of cultural institutions can, of course, present themselves in a variety of ways. A cut back in staffing provision is often the easiest and quickest route toward budget realignments. Newport Museum, however, has played that card more than once already in recent years, and functions with the absolute bear minimum when it comes to curatorial and education based employees. The next step, once you’ve got rid of your staff, is to start eyeing up a reduction of the collections, and then the museum building itself. On the table at the moment, are proposals to shut down the main museum site, and relocate the entire collection into some manner of warehouse, where objects would be distributed, on occasion, to select venues. This, of course, is not a museum. The loss of a permanent site is the death sentence for a museum, and does little good for the collections as well. Conservation standards only suffer with a non-permanent location, as environmental conditions become unpredictable, and the lack of regular expert inspections on the collection mean decay and deterioration is either not spotted early enough, or the deterioration cannot be countered for the lack of full time conservation staff to attend to the problem. Put simply, the loss of a permanent home for Newport Museum and its holdings, would place the entire collection in a seriously precarious position. This all being said, it cannot be denied that the current Newport Museum and Art Gallery building is no longer fit for purpose. Having worked in the building for several years, I can comfortably attest to the unstable nature of the structure. It has had its day, and its day was probably a couple of decades ago. In many respects I am in full support of the closure of Newport Museum and Art Gallery, so long as it is replaced with a new institution as soon as possible. Looking across the landscape of Newport city centre, there is at least one very obvious location in which the museum could be relocated to. The old Marks and Spencer building, in the heart of the city, is a huge building specifically designed for the display of objects. It currently sits redundant. The scale of this building is such that were the money to be found, it would not be inconceivable to display the Newport medieval ship, in addition to the core collections currently on display in the existing museum. Imagine that possibility of having a major international archaeological attraction on display in the very heart of the city. Linking the train station, Newport market, and moving through to the new shopping centre development, a museum located in the M&S building would be the perfect connection, allowing Commercial Road to be an active part of the new Newport landscape. There can be no doubt that the high street in Newport has been completely overlooked in the city council’s grand plan. Relocation for the museum, allowing for display of the ship, would be the ideal addition to stimulate footfall into what currently looks like a shopping wasteland, a situation which will only be worsened when the new shopping developments are officially opened. Time is almost up on Newport Museum and Art Gallery as we know it, and it would be counterproductive to argue otherwise. The council wants rid of a dilapidated building overlooking its brand new multi-million pound investment, and it seems only a matter of time until they get their way. But this should not be the end of the Newport Museum story. Relocation has happened before in the life of Newport Museum, and it can, and should, happen again. The campaign now should focus on the next stage of the museum’s life. That stage however, must not be mothballing into a warehouse with the occasional display of artefacts. What Newport must retain, if it takes its city status seriously, is a fresh commitment to the museum programme in the city, with a new building in which the collections can call home. Anything less would and should paint the city council as what they claim not to be, philistines of the very worst order. After their callous behaviour in relation to the Chartist mural, this same council cannot be allowed to close the museum, directly or by stealth – make no mistake about it, efforts to close the central library would be a death sentence on the museum as well. Only a new commitment to a new museum in the city centre should satisfy. Newport Museum and Art Gallery is almost at an end. We must now ensure that Newport Museum and Art Gallery is born anew, and continues to act as the cultural custodians for Newport and the surrounds, as it has done for the past 126 years. If Newport Museum and Art Gallery does not exist in some form, come the year 2140, we will have collectively failed, and future generations will have been seriously let down. Don’t let it happen, save Newport Museum and Art Gallery.
0 Comments
In Caerleon, as part of the History department at the University of South Wales, I host an annual seminar debate, exploring the issue of ownership and repatriation of the Elgin / Parthenon Marbles. It tends to be an entertainingly divisive discussion, with the class split between Greek and British interest groups. Rarely is there a definitive conclusion on the debate either, with the class frequently remaining divided on the crucial issue of whether or not the marbles should make their way back to Greece. In the last 36 hours, the British Museum have themselves, invited the entire world to re-enter this debate. In an act that really beggars belief, what had been a highly covert loan agreement between the British Museum and the Hermitage Museum, suddenly exploded across newspaper headlines and television broadcasts. What remains of the sculpture of Ilissos has left its permanent home in London, to be displayed in Russia. Thinking over the hostile debate that has raged over the treatment of the marbles, this can only be considered as a giant, if you excuse the language, ‘f*ck you’ to the Greek community. The controversial circumstances through which the British Museum obtained the marbles are generally well known, and don’t need to be repeated here. However, those circumstances are now set to be rooted through and recycled repeatedly throughout the duration of this loan. It’s going to be an incredibly awkward period for the institution, and one which will probably be as controversial at the end of the loan agreement, when the material returns to London, as its departure has been. Media commentators have already been spewing cack handed summaries of the ‘saving’ or ‘stealing’ of the marbles, which provide only the most ephemeral understanding of the circumstance of the marbles extraction. It is these poorly developed viewpoints which will, sadly, direct public debate on this topic. Whatever is said of the loan though, in relation to a potential repatriation to Greece, it is really the loan itself which is the most interesting move. The British Museum has been pretty clear on its position regarding a return to Greece. They are the legal owners of the collection, it would take an act of Parliament to allow for a change of ownership and, should the Greeks acknowledge the museum’s ownership of the marbles, then a loan to Greece would be considered. Of course, the Greek authorities will never acknowledge British Museum ownership, and so the debate reaches an impasse. Historically, it is an impasse that usually leads to the whole argument going away for a time. Whatever public pressure the museum has been put under in the past, tends to lose momentum relatively quickly, and the status quo of display in London continues. This loan though, is certain to change all of that. In loaning part of the marbles collections, not just to anyone, but to one of the most dubious political nations on the planet today, the British Museum has painted a giant bulls eye on its glass dome. Yes, controversial loans have taken place in the past, with material being briefly returned to Iran. But there was no real controversy over the objects being loaned to Iran. Here we have both contentious partners and contentious objects. It is the perfect media storm, which can only serve to undermine the position of the museum. The British Museum has an obligation to develop international partnerships. It is an essential part of its wider activities, which in turn help to secure loan agreements for the internationally regarded quality temporary exhibitions for which the museum has become famous. However, could there have been a more misjudged move than this one? I cannot see how. This loan agreement will, I anticipate, place the greatest amount of pressure the British Museum has ever had to endure in regard to the ultimate resting place for the wider marbles collections. I equally have no doubt that the museum will not budge one inch on ownership, certainly not while Neil Macgregor remains at the helm. Yet the negative publicity which will come flocking in his, and the museums direction, will be unparalleled. For students of repatriation debates, this will be a fascinating time. For the British Museum, this will surely be a tremendously uncomfortable time. |
Archives
January 2018
Categories
All
|