A formação do museólogo e o seu campo de atuação

Foi com prazer que recebi o convite para participar do XV Congresso Nacional de Museus, promovido pela Associação Brasileira de Museologia, para apresentar as minhas reflexões sobre um tema que considero da maior relevância, qual seja “A Formação do Museólogo e o seu Campo de Atuação”, inserindo-o no tema geral proposto para este evento, “Museu & Museologia para o Século XXI – perspectivas para Países Periféricos”. Agradeço, pois, aos colegas organizadores do evento, pela possibilidade de troca, de avaliação da formação dos profissionais, para a qual estamos contribuindo, ao tempo em que, estamos, também, tendo a oportunidade de avaliar a nossa atuação.

Museu, literatura e emoção de lidar

O presente texto resulta de um trabalho de investigação que buscou compreender como os temas museu, memória, coleção e bem cultural estão representados no campo da literatura, de modo particular no fazer poético. A ênfase na poesia não deve precipitar a idéia de que as relações entre museu e literatura estejam confinadas neste campo literário, por mais que os museus sejam espaços poéticos. Como afirma Tomislav Sola (1989: p.49): “La auténtica comunicación através de los museos ha engendrado siempre una forma de experiencia poética que es al mismo tiempo el único fundamento de todas las consecuencias esperadas de esta comunicación”. É importante explicitar à partida o caráter exploratório desta investigação e o exercício de uma linguagem de fronteira, que quer se movimentar entre o acadêmico e a poético, independente da rima.

Memória e poder : dois movimentos

As instituições que tratam da preservação e difusão do patrimônio cultural, sejam elas arquivos, bibliotecas, museus, galerias de arte ou centros culturais, apresentam um determinado discurso sobre a realidade. Compreender esse discurso, composto de som e silêncio, de cheio e vazio, de presença e ausência, de lembrança e esquecimento, implica a operação não apenas com o enunciado da fala e suas lacunas, mas também a compreensão daquilo que faz falar, de quem fala e do lugar de onde se fala.

As megaexposições no Brasil : democratização ou banalização da arte?

Convivemos atualmente no Brasil, país em que os museus são pouco freqüentados, com filas enormes e um comparecimento maciço a exposições promovidas pelos museus de arte das grandes metrópoles. Eles respondem às demandas sociais de educação e lazer e atraem um número cada vez maior de visitantes, tornando-se uma das práticas culturais mais populares desta virada de milênio. Qual o significado destas novas exposições? Elas têm sido consideradas tanto parte de um processo de democratização do acesso à arte, quanto responsáveis pela banalização da arte em sociedades cada vez mais voltadas para o consumo. Este artigo se propõe a analisar a produção, difusão e recepção destas novas exposições, considerando a hierarquia de normas, valores e práticas presentes na sociedade brasileira.

Qu’est-ce que la qualité au juste?

Qu’est-ce que la qualité au juste ? • Une catégorie esthétique qui relève du goût, toujours relatif ? • Une marque de commerce certifiant la fiabilité du produit, exposé à la contrefaçon ? • Une règle de déontologie appliquée à toute production humaine s’évaluant , aujourd’hui, par le service rendu, par la satisfaction du client, par la fidélisation de celui-ci ? • Le degré d’habilité technique ou professionnelle de l’artisan ? • Un jugement de valeur partagé entre l’objectivité et la subjectivité ? • Une mise en boîte brevetée ?

A colecção do IPQ e o público

1 – O Instituto Português da Qualidade Criado em 1986, pela Lei Orgânica, através da Lei Orgânica, na dependência do Ministério da Indústria e Energia, com a missão de desenvolver a politica da qualidade para a sociedade em Portugal, para a qual se apoiou nos subsistemas da metrologia e da normalização.

A QUALIDADE EM ORGANIZAÇÕES DE SERVIÇOS NA ÁREA SOCIAL – EXPERIÊNCIAS E REFLEXÕES

As experiências apresentadas constituem exemplos de aplicação de metodologias da qualidade a sectores de actividade com pouco histórico. Em termos mais particulares, estas experiências podem ajudar a encontrar formas similares de aplicação em sectores com poucos recursos, como são os museus, nomeadamente através da formação conjunta e da implementação colaborativa.

The Creation Process of a Local Museum

The present text holds as its main goal the advance of a number of reflections around the potentialities and problems of local museums taken as development instruments. Secondarily, it also intends to provide support to all those who, in one way or another, have faced the issue of creating a local museum. This support is intended not as a manual of the “the museum made easy” kind, but, instead, as the pointing to some pertinent issues and unavoidable options that, if not taken into account, will come to challenge the form and substance of the future organisation.

On the concept of the public: the local museums’ case

Globally, the public is understood as the whole of a service’s users. In the specific case of the museums, the users are all those who make use of the service offered by the museum institution. Thus, the museum’s public corresponds not only to the visitors (people who enter or have entered the museum), but also to the part of those who, in some way, with no relationship of presence within the museum, have enjoyed the services or property made available by it (for instance the ordering of books or other material by catalogue, visit to travelling exhibitions, end users of pedagogical actions carried out in schools…) On the other hand, when we refer to the public, it is necessary to make another distinction: between the real or effective public and the potential public. The former is the group of individuals who have visited or have used the museum, while in the second case are included all the people who, due to their specific characteristics, are susceptible to become the real or effective public.

Museums and quality, from the concept of the museum that carries out functions to the museum that provides services

Quality management Self-evaluation of the organisation Citizens/customers satisfaction Impact on society evaluation Key performance evaluation Good practices comparison (Benchmarking) Continuous improvement In professional environments, when quality assessment of museums is discussed, one immediately thinks of the honourableness of the directors and curators, the erudition and specialisation of knowledge, the diversity of the gathered material and study of the collections, the collections conservation methods and environmental control, the regularity and notoriety of the exhibitions and artists, the building’s architecture and site, the recreation of environments, the museographic equipment design. We admit that the roles and attributes listed above can contribute to the definition of a specificity of museological good practice within a hierarchised functional perspective (the museum functions) and for the classification of museums according to a scale, validated between peers, based on “installed” appreciation criteria, enforced from above downwards, according to the “prestige” of the products and of those who conceive them, but that say nothing about the effective satisfaction of the citizen/customers and the real impact on society. There is a lack of evaluation instruments that would give us a return of all that the museum is and represents in contemporary society, focused on being and on the relation with the other, in detriment of the ostentatious possession and of the doing in order to meet one’s duties. But it is only possible to evaluate something by measurement and comparison, on the basis of well defined criteria, from a common grid, implicating all of the actors in the self-evaluation, in the definition of the aims to fulfil and in the obtaining of results.

To think museology today

In the present text we intend to analyse 5 basic documents that translate the Museological Thinking in our century and that, chiefly, have led professionals of the area to apply this “science” in a less hermetic way and to understand its practice. The option to study and analyse the documents results from the fact that they influence present day museological practice and thinking. It is impossible to speak of museology nowadays without referring to one of these documents, not to mention a few nations that have even modified and/or created specific laws for the management of their preservationist cultural policy. Anyway, we are aware that this text intends only to carry out a preliminary approach to the documents, in the sense that the wealth of its content would allow us to slowx over an infinity of issues that they raise. I specifically refer to the documents produced at UNESCO Regional Seminar on the Role of Museums in Education, which took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1958; at the Santiago Round Table in 1972, in Chile; at the 1rst New Museology International Workshop, in Quebec, Canada, 1984; at the Oaxtepec Meeting, in Mexico 1984; and at the Caracas Meeting in 1992. These are documents elaborated within the ICOM –International Council of Museums. These documents are the result of a joint reflection by professionals who seek the evolution of ideas within their areas of action, recognising that in order to do so it is necessary to leave the cocoon of the museological institutions and try to discuss their conceptual advances with professionals of related areas. It is important to be capacitated to reuse these advances in their areas of action. This is the recognition of the importance of interdisciplinarity for the museological context.

The importance of local museums in Portugal

The widening of the notion of heritage and the consequent redefinition of the “museological object”, the idea of community participation in the definition and management of the museological practice, museology as a development factor, the issues of interdisciplinarity, the use of “new technologies” of information and museography as an autonomous communications means, are examples of issues resulting from contemporary museological practices. If indeed museology in Portugal intends to continue to participate in international museology’s renovation process, it is evident that it must adequately (re)think theoretical and practical museology so as to meet the new demands…

Museologial process : exclusion criteria

In the last few years, reflections around knowledge building in the museology area have increased considerably, allowing us to cast many gazes over our actions, and, consequently, enabling us to a wider debate around our professional action field, decreasing our exclusion from the academic environment – museologists reproducing the knowledge produced in other areas. In the present work, we shall approach some issues related to the museological process, taking as a reference several studies about the subject, which, due to the time given to us in this round table, could not be re-presented here for discussion. Besides, we have dedicated a chapter to such approach in our publication titled “Museological Process and Education: building a didactic-community museum”. So we have opted instead to carry out a reflection about exclusion, looking into the museum institution and into the application of museological processes; in other words, we shall carry out a self-criticism, in which I include myself, affecting an analysis that will be debated here, considering, additionally, that the museums and museological practices are in relation to the other social global practices, therefore, they are the result of human relations at each historical moment. Finally, based on our lived experience, we shall give continuity to our reflection process, highlighting the importance of knowledge production for the area of museology and the relevance of the theory-practice relation, punctuating some aspects we think that may contribute to the construction of a museological action that may serve as a historical elaboration in securing a space for self- determination.

Museology as a pedagogy for heritage

This essay presents some parameters for the study of Museology and its respective contribution for the constitution of preservationist processes, biased towards heritage education. From the decoding of some parameters that delimit this applied discipline’s action and reflection field, the text presents some paradigms, which have stimulated its epistemological construction and have guided its social functions. These paradigms are considered responsible for a new methodological order within the scope of the museum and, further, for the new commitments that these institutions have taken up.