- Email: [email protected]
On the role of museums in history of science, technology and medicine
On the role of museums in history of science, technology and medicine Today, the role of museums is being actively reconsidered and deliberately redefined, by a variety of interests which are not always readily compatible. To some extent, museums are being reinvented; the ‘virtual’ museums which can be visited at any time, in theory, on the Internet are only one example. Products of science and technology are increasingly used to enhance and reshape visitors’ experiences in all sorts of museums, even those primarily concerned with art. Museum-goers now expect some sort of computerized or hands-on interactive exhibits; such tools are promoted as adding to the educational experience. Models for such experiences have often come from hands-on science centres, such as the Exploratorium in San Francisco’. While often rewarding in many ways, such devices may diminish the visitors’ involvement with ‘real’ artefacts on display. Ironically, the increased reliance on technological wizardry has, in some cases, been paralleled by diminished space being provided for the exhibition of historical material relating to science, technology and medicine (STM). While historical artefacts relating to STM may, in the first instance, appeal primarily to specialists, collections of such artefacts provide numerous opportunities to gain understanding of the various roles and places of STM in our, and other, cultures. The educational value of such collections may be enhanced by utilizing the expertise of specialist historians from outside the museum world.
The changing roles of museums In the United Kingdom, debates concerning free entry to national museums, which have featured on the front pages of newspapers and on television and radio talk shows, have brought attention to the changing roles of museums. Are museums meant to collect and display real things, provide public education, offer a good day out? Two issues are central to current discussions: the role of collections within museums and the question of how museums function. These issues were addressed in two recent and important publications, which have been linked to wider initiatives, and so serve to set the stage for discussiot@. Remarks made by Sir Nicholas Goodison, Chairman of the National Art Collections Fund, in his First Annual (1997) A.W. Franks Lecture, ‘A New Era for Museums’, given at the British Museum in May 1997, alerted the Forum for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine to the timeliness of such issues. Goodison emphasized the many traditional and unifying
Copyright
0 1998
Elsevier
Science
Ltd. All right
reserved.
roles which museums serve, including engaging in maintaining collections, research and scholarship, extending knowledge and understanding, and serving as a source of inspiration2. Sir Nicholas referred to another recent publicationa, the January 1997 report for the Department of National Heritage by David Anderson, head of Education at the Victoria and Albert Museum, entitled ‘A Common Wealth: Museums and Learning in the United Kingdom’. Both publications have focused attention on the role of collections and museum education. Both authors come from an art museum perspective: this is the case for much of what is written about museums, and has important consequences for how attitudes to museums are shaped. These consequences have special meaning for museums and collections dealing with the history of STM.
Collections and/or Education and HSTM In many cases artefacts relating to STM did not enter museums because of a primary interest in these fields; objects we acknowledge as part of the material culture of STM were often acquired to fulfil other collecting aims. So, while in some instances scientific instruments (including clocks and celestial globes) were included in the early cabinets of curiosities (or Wunderkammem), they were generally acquired for their aesthetic appeal and symbolic value. It is possible to wander through museums whose reputations are founded on their artistic and cultural collections and see exquisitely fashioned and produced objects, without recognizing their scientific and technological character. How the artefacts of STM are studied and interpreted within such museums varies, depending upon institutional ambitions and staff expertise. It may not be surprising that historians of STM are seldom employed by museums devoted to artistic and cultural objects and activities. Professional academic historians in many areas of specialism have been on the sidelines of the museum world; usually historians operate within universities. Art historians form an exceptional group, for they tend to have closer relationships with museums and galleries than do their counterparts in other historical fields. This difference may seem natural or inevitable, because the primary sources which art historians study are often in museums. However, with the current wave of professional historical interest in material culture, increasing numbers of historians are talking and writing about actual objects and collec-
0160-9327/98/$19.00.
PII: SO1 60-9327(96)01121-i
tions. Some study scientific instruments as a field in itself; others use material artefacts (in some cases originals, in other instances reconstructions) to help analyse the process of scientific experimentation. Until recently, few of the collections of artefacts relating to STM have been deliberately built up as historical collections. In the late eighteenth century, Teylers Museum in Haarlem and the Conservatoire des Arts et Metiers in Paris acquired scientific instruments for educational purposes. These museums did not dispose of instruments once they were outdated and both museums are now major collections of historical scientific material. During the nineteenth century, as part of the South Kensington Museum (from which the Science Museum later emerged), the science (or non-art) collections included the Educational Collection, displaying books, demonstration apparatus and school fittings supplied by the manufacturers and publishers. While the pedagogical function was emphasized, the displays also promoted commercial interest+. Currently, the ‘educational’ function of museums is emphasized. The value of museums for school-age children is cited; many attempts are made to regularize and prescribe students’ encounters with museum objects. Some children’s museum education programmes are remarkably effective; the National Gallery’s recent and well-coordinated efforts relating to Hans Holbein’s portrait of The Ambassadors is a fine exampleh. Special educational materials were developed and made available to coincide with the exhibition. The exhibition highlighted, incidentally, the role of scientific instruments, and some historians of science have argued that more should have been done regarding the interpretation and understanding of the scientific instruments depicted in the painting (see for example, Ref. 7). But children are not the only target of those promoting the educational role of museums; ‘life-long learning’ and continuing (or adult) education are also emphasized. This latter focus may be due to growing recognition of the economic and political power of the ‘ageing population’, as life-expectancy increases. An interest in promoting tourism may also be at work. For it seems, increasingly, museums are not meant to be simply pedagogical experiences, they must also and provide recreation, entertainment income generation.
The challenge to collections The role of the museum is being challenged and changed. Many regard the museums’ traditional role as the collection and preservation
Endeavour Vol. 22(2) 1998
41
of culturally-significant objects, but most only display and interpret a small fraction of their holdings. In some museums, objects and collections play a minimal role; rather, education and recreation are the proclaimed aims. Yet, walking through many museums and speaking with visitors, it quickly becomes clear that neither institutions nor individuals agree on what is educational and what is recreational. The place of museums within the heritage sector has been under review; some have argued that ‘heritage’ concerns ideally encompass the values of preservation of and education about the past, along with providing recreational opportunities. But some detractors claim that entertainment is emphasized, pedagogical value limited, and collections undervalued. However, now that broader cultural concerns (including media and sport) have eclipsed the priority of heritage, money is being funnelled to create ‘experiences’ which require no real artefacts or collections at all; the Millennium Dome is an example.
Collections and HSTM What relevance does this have for the history of STM? Are collections of historical artefacts related to STM part of our cultural heritage and experience? Is there anything to be learnt from collections and exhibitions of such artefacts? If these questions were posed to professionals interested in such issues, including, for example, museum curators, educators, practitioners of and historians of STM, their answers would likely reflect very different perspectives and ambitions&la. Some would suggest that historical collections of STM best serve as indicators of progress and models of inspiration, being of little value on their own. Artefacts may be exhibited as awe-inspiring relics, contrasting modern advances with earlier, and presumably, less satisfactory approaches. Objects associated with heroic figures are also regarded as worthy of display; of course, heroes may fall out of favour and fashion. But, when historical artefacts are used in heroic contexts they often operate as icons; in such settings one or two are sufficient, and are perhaps more powerful than a larger number would be. When artefacts are icons, collections are superfluous and can, if they exist, be safely retired to out-of-the way reserve stores. There, out of the public eye, reserve collections can be pointed to as fulfilling the obligation to preserve our past, while not taking up valuable space required for other purposes. For science centres aiming to teach current scientific concepts and to inculcate respect for the modern scientific enterprise, historical artefacts and collections are unnecessary and may even be in the way, distracting from the main message. Indeed, it is rare for science centres to display any historical artefacts at all, leading some critics to note that human agency seems to have been entirely removed from the development of science. When historical artefacts are displayed in such settings, it is often with the suggestion that history of
42
Endeavour Vol. 22(2) 1998
STM serves as a handmaiden to the public understanding of science. In fact, STM is seldom treated in traditional museums. Perhaps we should ask whether history of STM is a valid topic for museums in and of itself? Can history of STM be useful not just to help teach modem science but to teach about the place of STM within our culture? The question of the role of HSTM with regard to promoting the public understanding of science is too large to be properly addressed here. Nevertheless, it is important to recognize that some museums with significant collections have redefined themselves as science centres, downplaying the relevance of artefacts; the Natural History Museum and the Science Museum in London are often cited examples. But we would be naive to think that the challenge of defining and establishing the role of museums is new. In 1897, just over one hundred years ago, a Parliamentary Committee recommended that the Science Museum ‘should be primarily educational and discretion should be exercised to prevent an undue proportion of historical over effective exhibits’td. In the early 1930s the Adler Planetarium in Chicago faced rather different criticism. The Adler was founded to provide astronomy education, using the newly-available Zeiss projector to give public ‘sky shows’. The fledgling institution fended off critics who called the shows ‘canned astronomy’, by purchasing in bulk an important collection of historical scientific instruments. This instantly-acquired collection was thought to add cultural credibility and demonstrate that the Adler was not merely offering entertainment. The institution went so far as to add the words ‘Astronomical Museum’ to the original name ‘Adler Planetarium’. That this shift in purpose and presentation came so late in the day indicates some possible confusion regarding the roles of such public institutions. The name change signalled that the institution should be regarded not only as offering educational and recreational opportunities, but as having cultural and aesthetic significance as we1115.
HSTM and other expressions of culture Most historians of STM recognize their subject as being connected to broader cultural history, and hold that the neglect of the study of HSTM by others leads to the ignorance of an important aspect of culture. According to such an understanding, science is not separate from the rest of human experience, but is intimately, and inevitably, intertwined in other cultural expressions, including the social, political, religious and aesthetic. But it is not always clear how to present HSTM in museums, where the latter-named cultural forms are often segregated and highlighted. The physical remains of our scientific past reside, for the most part, within museum collections. In some cases, the material culture of STM, which includes scientific,
technological, and medical instruments and illustrations, is treated purely as art. The artistic value alone of some scientific artefacts and instruments merits their inclusion in some museums. However, finely-made objects, rather than crude prototypes, tend to be those that are displayed even in those institutions primarily committed to science or history of science. This suggests that the objects of STM are always beautiful and appealing, and may, however unintentionally, communicate a parallel message about the practice of earlier STM as well, leading visitors to the belief that the past pursuit of STM was always elegant and refined. As part of the effort to provide an appealing experience for visitors, some collections and objects which are seen as communicating the ‘wrong’ message may be removed from public view; this appears to be the case, for example, with some specimen collections of stuffed animals, or ethnographic objects of particular kinds, which are no longer regarded as politically correct. There are issues of how artefacts related to the history of STM should be handled, studied and interpreted, not only by museum curators and education officers, but also by historians. The opportunities are not only museological, but are historiographical as well. Most historians would recognize that HSTM is part of culture and should not be relegated only to those science museums and to those few university museums which hold significant collections. Collectionsbased teaching plays an important role within several university museums, including the Collection of Historical Scientific Instruments at Harvard, the Museum of the History of Science at Oxford and the Whipple Museum of the History of Science at Cambridget6J7. Many other museums hold material which can and should be interpreted in ways which indicate that science and technology are part of the fabric of our culture. One recent excellent example in which science and history of science were neither relegated to an out-of-the-way corner nor completely ignored was the William Hamilton exhibition at the British Museum, Vases and Vblcanoesl8. Here the history of science was treated, quite properly and naturally, as an important part of culture; artefacts demonstrating Hamilton’s involvement in science, especially geology, were displayed within the broader context of his other collecting and research interests, which included archaeology. Nevertheless, the treatment of our scientific past continues to provide major challenges for many museums. Of course, the distinction between art museums and history museums is not always clear, but science should have more of a place within history museums; this would avoid the separation of science from other manifestations of culture. If there is to be increased inclusion of HSTM in museums, historians of these subjects must make the benefits clear. As members of the public, historians could, and
should, utilize museum resources more. Museums are rich storehouses of scientific material, including instruments, apparatus, models and specimens. Ephemeral material, including instruction manuals, trade catalogues, trade cards and bills of sale, are also in museum collections. Many galleries and museums have collections of images relating to STM, including prints, drawing, paintings and photographs. The recent catalogue of material with scientific themes in the National Gallery, by Frank A.J.L. James and J.V. Field, is an excellent example of how such resources may be studiedr9. While in the case of the National Gallery the STM content is incidental, it is still worthy of study. In the case of HSTM, as in many other areas, a commitment to the value and use of collections reinforces, and is reciprocated by, a commitment to the museum’s role in education. However, it is not always clear what the phrase ‘museum education’ is meant to convey. There is a good deal of rhetoric devoted to ‘life-long learning’ and the need to provide educational programmes for adults, but most of the emphasis in practice is on school-aged children. In the language of the modern museum professional, museums have many audiences and special interest groups, which they seek to satisfy. In terms of education, museums must address the needs not only of children, but of adult learners as well. Increasingly, it seems, museums have taken into account their sponsors, who often have their own agenda, preferred interpretation and storyline. The Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago was at the forefront of this trend, relying on industry sponsorship; the Science Museum exhibition Food for Thought is another example which has gained a good deal of attention2”.
Opportunities for collaboration between historians of STM and museums Traditionally, the provision of museum interpretation and education has been the job of specialists, usually curators. Oddly, such specialists seem to be playing ever smaller roles in determining the allocation of resources, as museums move towards a managerial focus. Some of this shift is due to answering calls for efficiency, but it is not always clear what this alleged efficiency produces. On the one hand, historians of STM could and should do more to develop symbiotic relationships with museums,
playing a greater and more vocal role, as members of the public, in demanding the collection, preservation, display and interpretation of those materials which are important historical resources. Further, historians of STM may be able to contribute to some of the traditional activities of the specialist curator, offering advice and expertise regarding collecting policy, collecting work and documentation, as well as in areas of interpretation and education. This could be of benefit to museums in several ways, especially as more museums are eliminating their curators. The side-lining of the traditional curator is a false economy which will only lead to the grossest inefficiency and loss of knowledge of collections; nevertheless this is occurring and must be acknowledged. By encouraging partnerships between museums and academic historians of STM, museums, historians and the wider public could all benefit. Historians could gain much by working more closely with collections; museums could utilize specialist knowledge of historians, who have their own vested professional interest to produce and present historically valid and coherent interpretations. Both sides would be able to offer detailed technical information and wider contextual knowledge which would enhance the study and understanding of history of STM. Through exhibitions and publications, such collaborations would increase public access to historical material of an important area of our shared culture.
Acknowledgements The Forum for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine, a group of representatives of about twenty British learned societies, recently invited me to speak to them about the place of history of science, technology and medicine (HSTM) in museums today; the Forum is particularly interested in those museums which collect, display and interpret historical material relating to science, technology and medicine. I would like to thank Dr Robert Anderson, Professor John Brooke, Dr Frank James, as well as the editors, for their helpful comments to an earlier draft.
References 1
2
3
7 8
9
10 11
12
13 14
15 16 17
18
19
Liba Taub Curator, Whipple Museum of the History of Science, Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, UK.
20
Hein, H. (1990) The Exploratc~ium:the Museum as Laboratory, The Smithsonian Institution Goodison, N. (1997) A New Eru for Museums? The first annual A.W. Franks Lecture, The British Museum Anderson, D. (1997) A Common Wealth: Museums and Learning in the United Department of National Kingdom, Heritage Anderson, R.G.W. (1995) .I. Hist. Collect. 7,21 l-225 Anderson, R.G.W. (1992) &it. J. Hiss. Sci. 25,169-184 Foister, S., Roy, A.. and Wyld, M. (1997) Meaning: Holbein 15 und Making Ambussadors, National Gallery Publications. The exhibition was held from 5 November 1997 to 1 February 1998. Field, J.V. (1998) Brit. Sot. Hist. Sci. Newsleft. 55, 25-27 S.V.F. (1992) Science und Butler, Technology Museums. Leicester University Press Durant, _I. (ed.) (1992) Museums and the Public Understanding of Science Science Museum in association with the Committee on the Public Understanding of Science Pearce, S. (ed.) (1996) Exploring Science in Museums, Athlone Farmelo, G. and Carding, J. (eds) (1997) Here and Now: Contemporary Science ond Technology in Museums and Science Centres. Proceedings of u conference held at the Science Museum, London, 21-23 November 1996, Science Museum with the support of the European Commission Directorate General Xl1 Macdonald, S. (ed.) (1998) The Politics of Display: Museums, Science, Culture, Routledge Bud, R. (1997) BK J. Hist. Sci. 30, 47-X) Proceedings of the Select Committee on Museums o/ the Science and Art Depurtment (1897) p. lxviii, para. 23 Taub, L. (1995)5. Hist. Collect. 7,243-250 Bennett, J. (1997) BK J. Hist. Sci. 30, 2946 Bennett, J. (1998) in The Politics of Science, Culture, Disphzy: Museums, (Macdonald, S., ed.), pp. 173-182, Routledge. Jenkins, 1. and Sloan, K. (1996) Vuses and Volcunoes: Sir William Humilton and his Collection, British Museum. The exhibition was held from 13 March to 14 July 1996. Field, J.V. and James, F.A.J.L. (1997) Science in Art: Works m the Nationul Gullery that Illustrate the History of Science and Technology. British Society for the History of Science Macdonald, S. (1998) in The Politics of Displuy: Museums. Science, Culture (Macdonald. S.. ed.). pp.llS138, Routledgc
Endeavour
Vol. 22(2)
1998
43
The changing roles of museums In the United Kingdom, debates concerning free entry to national museums, which have featured on the front pages of newspapers and on television and radio talk shows, have brought attention to the changing roles of museums. Are museums meant to collect and display real things, provide public education, offer a good day out? Two issues are central to current discussions: the role of collections within museums and the question of how museums function. These issues were addressed in two recent and important publications, which have been linked to wider initiatives, and so serve to set the stage for discussiot@. Remarks made by Sir Nicholas Goodison, Chairman of the National Art Collections Fund, in his First Annual (1997) A.W. Franks Lecture, ‘A New Era for Museums’, given at the British Museum in May 1997, alerted the Forum for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine to the timeliness of such issues. Goodison emphasized the many traditional and unifying
Copyright
0 1998
Elsevier
Science
Ltd. All right
reserved.
roles which museums serve, including engaging in maintaining collections, research and scholarship, extending knowledge and understanding, and serving as a source of inspiration2. Sir Nicholas referred to another recent publicationa, the January 1997 report for the Department of National Heritage by David Anderson, head of Education at the Victoria and Albert Museum, entitled ‘A Common Wealth: Museums and Learning in the United Kingdom’. Both publications have focused attention on the role of collections and museum education. Both authors come from an art museum perspective: this is the case for much of what is written about museums, and has important consequences for how attitudes to museums are shaped. These consequences have special meaning for museums and collections dealing with the history of STM.
Collections and/or Education and HSTM In many cases artefacts relating to STM did not enter museums because of a primary interest in these fields; objects we acknowledge as part of the material culture of STM were often acquired to fulfil other collecting aims. So, while in some instances scientific instruments (including clocks and celestial globes) were included in the early cabinets of curiosities (or Wunderkammem), they were generally acquired for their aesthetic appeal and symbolic value. It is possible to wander through museums whose reputations are founded on their artistic and cultural collections and see exquisitely fashioned and produced objects, without recognizing their scientific and technological character. How the artefacts of STM are studied and interpreted within such museums varies, depending upon institutional ambitions and staff expertise. It may not be surprising that historians of STM are seldom employed by museums devoted to artistic and cultural objects and activities. Professional academic historians in many areas of specialism have been on the sidelines of the museum world; usually historians operate within universities. Art historians form an exceptional group, for they tend to have closer relationships with museums and galleries than do their counterparts in other historical fields. This difference may seem natural or inevitable, because the primary sources which art historians study are often in museums. However, with the current wave of professional historical interest in material culture, increasing numbers of historians are talking and writing about actual objects and collec-
0160-9327/98/$19.00.
PII: SO1 60-9327(96)01121-i
tions. Some study scientific instruments as a field in itself; others use material artefacts (in some cases originals, in other instances reconstructions) to help analyse the process of scientific experimentation. Until recently, few of the collections of artefacts relating to STM have been deliberately built up as historical collections. In the late eighteenth century, Teylers Museum in Haarlem and the Conservatoire des Arts et Metiers in Paris acquired scientific instruments for educational purposes. These museums did not dispose of instruments once they were outdated and both museums are now major collections of historical scientific material. During the nineteenth century, as part of the South Kensington Museum (from which the Science Museum later emerged), the science (or non-art) collections included the Educational Collection, displaying books, demonstration apparatus and school fittings supplied by the manufacturers and publishers. While the pedagogical function was emphasized, the displays also promoted commercial interest+. Currently, the ‘educational’ function of museums is emphasized. The value of museums for school-age children is cited; many attempts are made to regularize and prescribe students’ encounters with museum objects. Some children’s museum education programmes are remarkably effective; the National Gallery’s recent and well-coordinated efforts relating to Hans Holbein’s portrait of The Ambassadors is a fine exampleh. Special educational materials were developed and made available to coincide with the exhibition. The exhibition highlighted, incidentally, the role of scientific instruments, and some historians of science have argued that more should have been done regarding the interpretation and understanding of the scientific instruments depicted in the painting (see for example, Ref. 7). But children are not the only target of those promoting the educational role of museums; ‘life-long learning’ and continuing (or adult) education are also emphasized. This latter focus may be due to growing recognition of the economic and political power of the ‘ageing population’, as life-expectancy increases. An interest in promoting tourism may also be at work. For it seems, increasingly, museums are not meant to be simply pedagogical experiences, they must also and provide recreation, entertainment income generation.
The challenge to collections The role of the museum is being challenged and changed. Many regard the museums’ traditional role as the collection and preservation
Endeavour Vol. 22(2) 1998
41
of culturally-significant objects, but most only display and interpret a small fraction of their holdings. In some museums, objects and collections play a minimal role; rather, education and recreation are the proclaimed aims. Yet, walking through many museums and speaking with visitors, it quickly becomes clear that neither institutions nor individuals agree on what is educational and what is recreational. The place of museums within the heritage sector has been under review; some have argued that ‘heritage’ concerns ideally encompass the values of preservation of and education about the past, along with providing recreational opportunities. But some detractors claim that entertainment is emphasized, pedagogical value limited, and collections undervalued. However, now that broader cultural concerns (including media and sport) have eclipsed the priority of heritage, money is being funnelled to create ‘experiences’ which require no real artefacts or collections at all; the Millennium Dome is an example.
Collections and HSTM What relevance does this have for the history of STM? Are collections of historical artefacts related to STM part of our cultural heritage and experience? Is there anything to be learnt from collections and exhibitions of such artefacts? If these questions were posed to professionals interested in such issues, including, for example, museum curators, educators, practitioners of and historians of STM, their answers would likely reflect very different perspectives and ambitions&la. Some would suggest that historical collections of STM best serve as indicators of progress and models of inspiration, being of little value on their own. Artefacts may be exhibited as awe-inspiring relics, contrasting modern advances with earlier, and presumably, less satisfactory approaches. Objects associated with heroic figures are also regarded as worthy of display; of course, heroes may fall out of favour and fashion. But, when historical artefacts are used in heroic contexts they often operate as icons; in such settings one or two are sufficient, and are perhaps more powerful than a larger number would be. When artefacts are icons, collections are superfluous and can, if they exist, be safely retired to out-of-the way reserve stores. There, out of the public eye, reserve collections can be pointed to as fulfilling the obligation to preserve our past, while not taking up valuable space required for other purposes. For science centres aiming to teach current scientific concepts and to inculcate respect for the modern scientific enterprise, historical artefacts and collections are unnecessary and may even be in the way, distracting from the main message. Indeed, it is rare for science centres to display any historical artefacts at all, leading some critics to note that human agency seems to have been entirely removed from the development of science. When historical artefacts are displayed in such settings, it is often with the suggestion that history of
42
Endeavour Vol. 22(2) 1998
STM serves as a handmaiden to the public understanding of science. In fact, STM is seldom treated in traditional museums. Perhaps we should ask whether history of STM is a valid topic for museums in and of itself? Can history of STM be useful not just to help teach modem science but to teach about the place of STM within our culture? The question of the role of HSTM with regard to promoting the public understanding of science is too large to be properly addressed here. Nevertheless, it is important to recognize that some museums with significant collections have redefined themselves as science centres, downplaying the relevance of artefacts; the Natural History Museum and the Science Museum in London are often cited examples. But we would be naive to think that the challenge of defining and establishing the role of museums is new. In 1897, just over one hundred years ago, a Parliamentary Committee recommended that the Science Museum ‘should be primarily educational and discretion should be exercised to prevent an undue proportion of historical over effective exhibits’td. In the early 1930s the Adler Planetarium in Chicago faced rather different criticism. The Adler was founded to provide astronomy education, using the newly-available Zeiss projector to give public ‘sky shows’. The fledgling institution fended off critics who called the shows ‘canned astronomy’, by purchasing in bulk an important collection of historical scientific instruments. This instantly-acquired collection was thought to add cultural credibility and demonstrate that the Adler was not merely offering entertainment. The institution went so far as to add the words ‘Astronomical Museum’ to the original name ‘Adler Planetarium’. That this shift in purpose and presentation came so late in the day indicates some possible confusion regarding the roles of such public institutions. The name change signalled that the institution should be regarded not only as offering educational and recreational opportunities, but as having cultural and aesthetic significance as we1115.
HSTM and other expressions of culture Most historians of STM recognize their subject as being connected to broader cultural history, and hold that the neglect of the study of HSTM by others leads to the ignorance of an important aspect of culture. According to such an understanding, science is not separate from the rest of human experience, but is intimately, and inevitably, intertwined in other cultural expressions, including the social, political, religious and aesthetic. But it is not always clear how to present HSTM in museums, where the latter-named cultural forms are often segregated and highlighted. The physical remains of our scientific past reside, for the most part, within museum collections. In some cases, the material culture of STM, which includes scientific,
technological, and medical instruments and illustrations, is treated purely as art. The artistic value alone of some scientific artefacts and instruments merits their inclusion in some museums. However, finely-made objects, rather than crude prototypes, tend to be those that are displayed even in those institutions primarily committed to science or history of science. This suggests that the objects of STM are always beautiful and appealing, and may, however unintentionally, communicate a parallel message about the practice of earlier STM as well, leading visitors to the belief that the past pursuit of STM was always elegant and refined. As part of the effort to provide an appealing experience for visitors, some collections and objects which are seen as communicating the ‘wrong’ message may be removed from public view; this appears to be the case, for example, with some specimen collections of stuffed animals, or ethnographic objects of particular kinds, which are no longer regarded as politically correct. There are issues of how artefacts related to the history of STM should be handled, studied and interpreted, not only by museum curators and education officers, but also by historians. The opportunities are not only museological, but are historiographical as well. Most historians would recognize that HSTM is part of culture and should not be relegated only to those science museums and to those few university museums which hold significant collections. Collectionsbased teaching plays an important role within several university museums, including the Collection of Historical Scientific Instruments at Harvard, the Museum of the History of Science at Oxford and the Whipple Museum of the History of Science at Cambridget6J7. Many other museums hold material which can and should be interpreted in ways which indicate that science and technology are part of the fabric of our culture. One recent excellent example in which science and history of science were neither relegated to an out-of-the-way corner nor completely ignored was the William Hamilton exhibition at the British Museum, Vases and Vblcanoesl8. Here the history of science was treated, quite properly and naturally, as an important part of culture; artefacts demonstrating Hamilton’s involvement in science, especially geology, were displayed within the broader context of his other collecting and research interests, which included archaeology. Nevertheless, the treatment of our scientific past continues to provide major challenges for many museums. Of course, the distinction between art museums and history museums is not always clear, but science should have more of a place within history museums; this would avoid the separation of science from other manifestations of culture. If there is to be increased inclusion of HSTM in museums, historians of these subjects must make the benefits clear. As members of the public, historians could, and
should, utilize museum resources more. Museums are rich storehouses of scientific material, including instruments, apparatus, models and specimens. Ephemeral material, including instruction manuals, trade catalogues, trade cards and bills of sale, are also in museum collections. Many galleries and museums have collections of images relating to STM, including prints, drawing, paintings and photographs. The recent catalogue of material with scientific themes in the National Gallery, by Frank A.J.L. James and J.V. Field, is an excellent example of how such resources may be studiedr9. While in the case of the National Gallery the STM content is incidental, it is still worthy of study. In the case of HSTM, as in many other areas, a commitment to the value and use of collections reinforces, and is reciprocated by, a commitment to the museum’s role in education. However, it is not always clear what the phrase ‘museum education’ is meant to convey. There is a good deal of rhetoric devoted to ‘life-long learning’ and the need to provide educational programmes for adults, but most of the emphasis in practice is on school-aged children. In the language of the modern museum professional, museums have many audiences and special interest groups, which they seek to satisfy. In terms of education, museums must address the needs not only of children, but of adult learners as well. Increasingly, it seems, museums have taken into account their sponsors, who often have their own agenda, preferred interpretation and storyline. The Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago was at the forefront of this trend, relying on industry sponsorship; the Science Museum exhibition Food for Thought is another example which has gained a good deal of attention2”.
Opportunities for collaboration between historians of STM and museums Traditionally, the provision of museum interpretation and education has been the job of specialists, usually curators. Oddly, such specialists seem to be playing ever smaller roles in determining the allocation of resources, as museums move towards a managerial focus. Some of this shift is due to answering calls for efficiency, but it is not always clear what this alleged efficiency produces. On the one hand, historians of STM could and should do more to develop symbiotic relationships with museums,
playing a greater and more vocal role, as members of the public, in demanding the collection, preservation, display and interpretation of those materials which are important historical resources. Further, historians of STM may be able to contribute to some of the traditional activities of the specialist curator, offering advice and expertise regarding collecting policy, collecting work and documentation, as well as in areas of interpretation and education. This could be of benefit to museums in several ways, especially as more museums are eliminating their curators. The side-lining of the traditional curator is a false economy which will only lead to the grossest inefficiency and loss of knowledge of collections; nevertheless this is occurring and must be acknowledged. By encouraging partnerships between museums and academic historians of STM, museums, historians and the wider public could all benefit. Historians could gain much by working more closely with collections; museums could utilize specialist knowledge of historians, who have their own vested professional interest to produce and present historically valid and coherent interpretations. Both sides would be able to offer detailed technical information and wider contextual knowledge which would enhance the study and understanding of history of STM. Through exhibitions and publications, such collaborations would increase public access to historical material of an important area of our shared culture.
Acknowledgements The Forum for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine, a group of representatives of about twenty British learned societies, recently invited me to speak to them about the place of history of science, technology and medicine (HSTM) in museums today; the Forum is particularly interested in those museums which collect, display and interpret historical material relating to science, technology and medicine. I would like to thank Dr Robert Anderson, Professor John Brooke, Dr Frank James, as well as the editors, for their helpful comments to an earlier draft.
References 1
2
3
7 8
9
10 11
12
13 14
15 16 17
18
19
Liba Taub Curator, Whipple Museum of the History of Science, Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, UK.
20
Hein, H. (1990) The Exploratc~ium:the Museum as Laboratory, The Smithsonian Institution Goodison, N. (1997) A New Eru for Museums? The first annual A.W. Franks Lecture, The British Museum Anderson, D. (1997) A Common Wealth: Museums and Learning in the United Department of National Kingdom, Heritage Anderson, R.G.W. (1995) .I. Hist. Collect. 7,21 l-225 Anderson, R.G.W. (1992) &it. J. Hiss. Sci. 25,169-184 Foister, S., Roy, A.. and Wyld, M. (1997) Meaning: Holbein 15 und Making Ambussadors, National Gallery Publications. The exhibition was held from 5 November 1997 to 1 February 1998. Field, J.V. (1998) Brit. Sot. Hist. Sci. Newsleft. 55, 25-27 S.V.F. (1992) Science und Butler, Technology Museums. Leicester University Press Durant, _I. (ed.) (1992) Museums and the Public Understanding of Science Science Museum in association with the Committee on the Public Understanding of Science Pearce, S. (ed.) (1996) Exploring Science in Museums, Athlone Farmelo, G. and Carding, J. (eds) (1997) Here and Now: Contemporary Science ond Technology in Museums and Science Centres. Proceedings of u conference held at the Science Museum, London, 21-23 November 1996, Science Museum with the support of the European Commission Directorate General Xl1 Macdonald, S. (ed.) (1998) The Politics of Display: Museums, Science, Culture, Routledge Bud, R. (1997) BK J. Hist. Sci. 30, 47-X) Proceedings of the Select Committee on Museums o/ the Science and Art Depurtment (1897) p. lxviii, para. 23 Taub, L. (1995)5. Hist. Collect. 7,243-250 Bennett, J. (1997) BK J. Hist. Sci. 30, 2946 Bennett, J. (1998) in The Politics of Science, Culture, Disphzy: Museums, (Macdonald, S., ed.), pp. 173-182, Routledge. Jenkins, 1. and Sloan, K. (1996) Vuses and Volcunoes: Sir William Humilton and his Collection, British Museum. The exhibition was held from 13 March to 14 July 1996. Field, J.V. and James, F.A.J.L. (1997) Science in Art: Works m the Nationul Gullery that Illustrate the History of Science and Technology. British Society for the History of Science Macdonald, S. (1998) in The Politics of Displuy: Museums. Science, Culture (Macdonald. S.. ed.). pp.llS138, Routledgc
Endeavour
Vol. 22(2)
1998
43