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.

Efficiency and social inclusion: implications for the museum profession

In the late 1980s Stephen Weil (1990) raised the question of the extent to which museum work could be considered a profession, the extent to which it had been professionalized, and in what ways this professionalization was facilitated or impeded by the changing circumstances of museum work, its organizational and governance context and its already multiplying roles vis-à-vis public culture and society at large. Although Weil‘s thoughts were situated in the American museum context of the mid-1980s, many of his thoughts apply to contexts beyond the US, and some of the questions he raised about the potential for professionalising museum work still resonate with the current situation of museum work. This paper tries to pose and approach a host of questions that, whilst in the main echoing Stephen Weil‘s mid-1980s reflections, are reconfigured in light of some sweeping changes in the nature of museum work, its mode of governance and its governing norms and values.

Training for museums and the National Charter for museum professions in Italy: a new prospective for development

Traditionally Italian universities have trained researchers and professionals in conservation: archaeologists, art historians and architects. It is only with the reform of the universities, from 1999, that the teaching of museology and museography have also been expanded.Italian museums are for the most part public museums, depending on local bodies or the national ministry; they lack autonomy and do not possess specific professional figures. The task of conservation has predominated over the other roles of museums, but with the reform of the conservation law in 2004 the definition of „museum‟ has been introduced in Italy as well, and regulations regarding the development of heritage have been issued; in addition the Regions have also taken on a more active role for museums belonging to local bodies and for the development of their territory.Museum professions are not officially recognised, but the museum community, through the various associations and ICOM Italia, has put together a document to act as a general reference, the National Charter of Museum Professions, which has been followed by the Manual of Museum Professions in Europe. Now there is a need to plan the content and outlines ofvocational training courses for museum professionals, together withthe universities, the regions and the museums themselves, alongwith the associations and ICOM – ICTOP, utilising the mostinnovative Master‟s courses which offer an interdisciplinaryapproach, a methodology which combines theory and practice, andan element of hands-on experimentation in museums, or withmuseums.