国际博物馆理事会与关于博物馆新定义的争论——与Lauran Bonilla-Merchav、Bruno brunon Soares、Lonnie G. Bunch III、Bernice Murphy和mich Rivet的对话

IF 0.3 Q2 HISTORY
A. Etges, David Dean
{"title":"国际博物馆理事会与关于博物馆新定义的争论——与Lauran Bonilla-Merchav、Bruno brunon Soares、Lonnie G. Bunch III、Bernice Murphy和mich<e:1> Rivet的对话","authors":"A. Etges, David Dean","doi":"10.1515/iph-2022-2039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 2019, an Extraordinary General Assembly International Council of Museums (ICOM) met in Kyoto, Japan to vote on a new museum definition. Among other things, the controversial proposal described museums as “democratising, inclusive and polyphonic spaces for critical dialogue about the pasts and the futures” that should also aim “to contribute to human dignity and social justice, global equality and planetary wellbeing.” The motion to postpone the vote, which was supported by a large majority in Kyoto, caused a crisis in the most important international organization for museums and museum professionals. In the years since, ICOM Define led an elaborate consultation process resulting in a newly revised museum definition to be voted on at ICOM’s Extraordinary General Assembly in Prague in August 2022. In this conversation, several prominent members of ICOM who have been deeply involved in the debates about a new museum definition take a critical look at the consultation process before Kyoto, the reasons for postponing the vote, the work of ICOM Define, and also share their expectations for Prague.","PeriodicalId":52352,"journal":{"name":"International Public History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The International Council of Museums and the Controversy about a New Museum Definition – A Conversation with Lauran Bonilla-Merchav, Bruno Brulon Soares, Lonnie G. Bunch III, Bernice Murphy, and Michèle Rivet\",\"authors\":\"A. Etges, David Dean\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/iph-2022-2039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In 2019, an Extraordinary General Assembly International Council of Museums (ICOM) met in Kyoto, Japan to vote on a new museum definition. Among other things, the controversial proposal described museums as “democratising, inclusive and polyphonic spaces for critical dialogue about the pasts and the futures” that should also aim “to contribute to human dignity and social justice, global equality and planetary wellbeing.” The motion to postpone the vote, which was supported by a large majority in Kyoto, caused a crisis in the most important international organization for museums and museum professionals. In the years since, ICOM Define led an elaborate consultation process resulting in a newly revised museum definition to be voted on at ICOM’s Extraordinary General Assembly in Prague in August 2022. In this conversation, several prominent members of ICOM who have been deeply involved in the debates about a new museum definition take a critical look at the consultation process before Kyoto, the reasons for postponing the vote, the work of ICOM Define, and also share their expectations for Prague.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52352,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Public History\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Public History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/iph-2022-2039\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Public History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/iph-2022-2039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

2019年,国际博物馆理事会(ICOM)在日本京都召开特别大会,就新的博物馆定义进行投票。除其他事项外,该有争议的提案将博物馆描述为“民主化,包容性和多音空间,用于对过去和未来进行批判性对话”,还应旨在“为人类尊严和社会正义,全球平等和地球福祉做出贡献”。推迟投票的动议在京都得到了绝大多数人的支持,这在博物馆和博物馆专业人士最重要的国际组织中引发了一场危机。此后的几年里,国际博协定义领导了一个详尽的咨询过程,最终产生了一个新修订的博物馆定义,并将于2022年8月在布拉格举行的国际博协特别大会上进行投票表决。在这次对话中,几位深入参与新博物馆定义辩论的国际博协知名成员对京都会议之前的磋商过程、推迟投票的原因、国际博协定义的工作进行了批判性的审视,并分享了他们对布拉格会议的期望。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The International Council of Museums and the Controversy about a New Museum Definition – A Conversation with Lauran Bonilla-Merchav, Bruno Brulon Soares, Lonnie G. Bunch III, Bernice Murphy, and Michèle Rivet
Abstract In 2019, an Extraordinary General Assembly International Council of Museums (ICOM) met in Kyoto, Japan to vote on a new museum definition. Among other things, the controversial proposal described museums as “democratising, inclusive and polyphonic spaces for critical dialogue about the pasts and the futures” that should also aim “to contribute to human dignity and social justice, global equality and planetary wellbeing.” The motion to postpone the vote, which was supported by a large majority in Kyoto, caused a crisis in the most important international organization for museums and museum professionals. In the years since, ICOM Define led an elaborate consultation process resulting in a newly revised museum definition to be voted on at ICOM’s Extraordinary General Assembly in Prague in August 2022. In this conversation, several prominent members of ICOM who have been deeply involved in the debates about a new museum definition take a critical look at the consultation process before Kyoto, the reasons for postponing the vote, the work of ICOM Define, and also share their expectations for Prague.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Public History
International Public History Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信