from KCRW
Politics of Culture
go to audio programme

The recent resignation of the director of the Getty Museum has caught the attention of the museum profession, especially in America. Observers ponder and speculate on the reasons behind the sudden announcement of departure (see links to related stories below). However, one common thread which cuts across these stories is the struggle over the vision of what a museum should be. Although, the context is specific to the Getty, it has very real implications for museums in general.

At the risk of being simplistic, it would appear that at the core of the dispute is a gap between the necessary vision of a museum which focuses on collections and scholarship as its primary function; and the equally compelling vision of a larger social organisation which encompasses other non-traditional functions of a museum, such as education, preservation, and in the unique case of the Getty, grant-making.

It is also a search for a basic and essential identity - "What is it that a museum must absolutely do?" - in the present climate of even rising pressures on resources. Although the Getty might be immune somewhat to such financial uncertainty (due to the sheer size of its endowment), it must nevertheless face the issue of prioroitisation of programmes, just as every other museum must. And when a museum pays lesser attention to its collection and museological functions, can it still be a "museum" even if its other programmes are producing tremendous social good?


Related news items:

"Will Barry Munitz find the courage to listen to his critics?"
KCRW, Art Talk (26 October)

"Director of Getty Museum Steps Down"
Los Angeles Times (19 October)

"Citing Conflicts, Getty Museum Director Quits"
New York Times (20 October)

"Getty's Director Is Latest to Leave"
NPR, All Things Considered (21 October)