Museums are not the ideal public
servants that they proclaim to be. More so, I believe that their idea of what
constitutes an ideal public servant is faulty or incomplete; even if operating
under their parameters of defined success in public servitude. I believe one
better proponent and institutional role model of public service is the Rochester
Public Market.
In my thesis, I would like to delineate
the parallels between museums (that operate alongside AAM guidelines) and the
Rochester Public Market (a cultural institution with a high level of public
appeal and influence; through analyzing current and past histories and
regulations of both. In addition I would identify and synthesize the major
reasons and methods of operation that garner the Rochester Public Markets success
in revitalization and propagation of diverse economies and public congregation.
The Rochester Public Market, for example, has a large amount of teens and
culturally diverse audiences flowing through their gates every week; categories
of audiences that museums often have trouble reaching. The Public Market also
implements many public events/programs to foster a broad community engagement; something
that I haven’t seen in many other museums.
Ultimately, working off of
accumulated research and conclusions, create a proposal for techniques and other
operations that museums could implement to achieve higher success in audience
engagement, visitation, and learning; creating a memorable experience.
It is my understanding that the public market is a largely commercial venue... this leads me to question how it can also be a "public servant," as commercial venues are inherently self-serving (profit over public good, both in the extreme and not). How are you defining a "public servant"? Also, you seem to be stating that you're comparing the Public Market, the purpose of which is to sell things, to museums, the purpose of which is to usually identified as educating the public (an apples to oranges comparison). How are they similar enough that techniques used to draw people to the market (and educate them? I guess I fail to see how the market is educational) would also draw people to museums and accomplish the goals you outline in your final paragraph.
ReplyDeleteHi Jess,
ReplyDeleteA clarification: The public market is owned and operated by the City of Rochester. It's recent improvements were financed by state and local taxpayer funds:
http://www.cityofrochester.gov/marketimprovements/
While the individual vendors are operating commercial enterprises, the city very much sees its role in operating the market as a public good. And there are many educational programs at the Public Market. For example, I was part of a research team that was awarded a New York Humanities Grant to present the history of family farms in Monroe County at the Public Market, among other venues. Some of our research can be found at: http://www.rit.edu/cla/monroecountyfamilyfarms/ I'd be happy to discuss this more in person, but wanted to note that the public market is indeed a public entity.
I think looking at the public market as an example to better serve the museum world is a phenomenal idea. It will be interesting to see the parallels and differences between both these entities and how the Public Market's strategies can help foster more interest in the museum world.
ReplyDeleteKayla, this approach of borrowing from another entity - in this case the market—and applying its methods and approaches is what we call a crossover for museums (like project 2 in digital age). So which museum function does the market speak to, in your reading of it? Looking forward to learning more about your topic!
ReplyDelete