Report on the November 2021 Lecture ‘Museums as Spaces of Social Care’ by Nuala Morse, Lecturer in Museum Studies at the University of Leicester.
For many, to talk of a ‘new normal’, either in the museum sector, or society at large, is almost now at the point of cliché. But it is undeniable that the COVID pandemic has irrevocably shifted the longstanding practices of every institution within the UK. And this is something that is particularly evident in the community outreach programmes of museums.
Such changes were a key focus of the lecture given by Nuala Morse. Her recent book, Museums as a Space of Social Care formed the core of this lecture. [1] This is an exploration of how museums can rethink their community programming in terms of its impact on the health and wellbeing of communities, rather than simply on social inclusion.
Morse’s work was published shortly before the first UK lockdown of the COVID pandemic, and she used the webinar, held on Wednesday 24th November, to discuss how the responses of museums to lockdown have interacted with her model for social care.
Social Care in Museums
Morse’s research into this topic has mainly been approached through a case study of Tyne and Wear Museums. This institution reflects a broader change in the sector. The language in these museums has shifted from one of social inclusion to discourses around the wellbeing of communities. As a result, museums are rethinking their programming in terms of its impact, and articulating this in terms of its health and wellbeing outcomes.
For Morse, community engagement itself has been vaguely described, and she thinks that there is a space for the concept to be defined in terms of care. But how can care itself be defined? Morse tackles this in a broad way, drawing from feminist and geographic literature. But in a simple sense, care is interest in the welfare of another, in both emotional and practical ways. In the museum context, this is about collaboration with communities, often underserved ones, that provide support, often through cultural work.
Such care can take place both within and outside the museum walls. For the former, this could be about ‘creating spaces that feel warm, comfortable and safe, supporting individuals emotionally and using museum materialities to create connections’.
Yet the social care of museums can take the museum outside of its own space and into the lives of its local communities and organisations. For Morse: ‘It is about actively searching for links and opportunities to include the museum in the lives of communities and, in particular, linking into a wider system of community support organisations and the different spaces in which care takes place. It makes the museum “bigger” by locating it outside its walls and into the community, as a link in a chain of community organisations that are enjoyed by communities in all their diversity, and which supports mutuality and wellbeing.’
Although this could be a promising development for the sector, Morse noted that there remain institutional barriers in progress towards community development. Despite some commitment, community development can become a more peripheral concern in the day-to-day operations of the museum in comparison to other matters.
Responses to Lockdown
Shortly after the publication of Morse’s book, the first UK lockdown of the pandemic came into action. Unsurprisingly, this had a large impact on the ways in which museums could interact with their communities, and in particular how they could act as spaces for social care.
Through conversations with her colleagues in various institutions, Morse noted how quickly various museums across the sector adapted their caring models. Like all sectors, much work moved to Zoom, but other technologies were also used. In one example that Morse provided, workshops for those with dementia were continued over the phone.
Elsewhere, creative activities were also sent to people’s homes, with the Museum of London sending 2,000 packs to the homes of vulnerable people. Meanwhile the National Justice Museum both wrote and received letters from convicts in prison. This work also stretched into partnerships with various community programs and organisations.
Morse was keen to stress that much of these efforts were tenuous in nature, with no overarching plan from the institutions that professionals were representing. Despite the lack of sector-wide planning, these efforts still gave museum practitioners a chance to reflect on the values of their institution, and what their place should be in the communities they represent.
Where Next for the Sector?
In terms of the future of social care in museums, Morse draws from the work of Steven Jackson and his concept of ‘Broken World Thinking’. This approach takes as its premise that ‘breakdown, and decay, rather than novelty, growth, and progress’ are the trajectory of society. For Morse, such a world can be repaired through subtle acts of care, and museums can play a key role in this process. In practice, ‘Broken World Thinking’ could mean raising the profile of caring work, embedding cultures of care further into institutions as well as many other initiatives.
But further, one thing that was striking about Morse’s responses to questions was her quiet optimism for the future of museums as spaces for social care. It would be a positive end to a turbulent and uncertain period for the sector if the lessons learned from the pandemic could be used to create a caring and truly collaborative relationship between museums and their communities.
[1] Nuala Morse, The Museum as a Space of Social Care, London: Routledge, 2020.
Joshua Mackarell is currently studying on the MA Art Gallery and Museum Studies course at the University of Manchester. His current research interest is the use of emotion in museum spaces.
Dispatches in Art History 