Hello All,
the textile thread (now that's a real pun!) has generated really interesting debate, and much of it remains hidden in the 'comments' section for the Textile Fragments posts...and in the interest of continuing this important discussion I've cut-and-pasted the comments into a main post here....
Here's Polly's post...
'Speaking as someone who is right in the thick of redisplaying a collection of Textile fragments I think it is important if not essential to both place them within some form of narrative context and display them as objects in their own right. I also think that this is entirely possible. On a very practical level, I have to cater for the casual visitor who needs immediate colorful impact to spark their interest. I need to support existing schools workshops which cover both style and design and history. I have to support the needs of design students who come for immediate inspiration. I also have to cater to the textile enthusiasts who are the biggest advocates of the collection. I am also duty bound to tell something of the collectors who generously gave these objects. Although telling the story of collectors can be considered a bit outdated, I do believe that the public should be aware that the availability of these objects is often due to the extroidinary generosity of others."Am I trying to do too much?" I sometimes wonder. What I am sure of is that textiles have the capacity to tell many stories. They are complete objects in themselves whose individual stories need telling. They are also parts of whole objects, tangible traces of people or places. If we wish to seek a theoretical framework for the display of textiles I would consider them as relics. Powerful in themselves and pointing outwards to the otherness of the past.'
And 'Leeds Tapestry'....response...
'In an ideal world I'm sure we would all want to see every single object in museums placed in context, each with the narrative of how it was made, used and by whom and why it has survived to the twenty-first century. I, too, can't resist the story and the context which is why I'm spending more time than I should justifying each piece on Leeds Tapestry.
If the Timorous Beasties quilt in the V&A exhibition is accessioned by the museum then this is exactly what can be done, though it won't exactly be a riveting story, missing the almost essential ingredient of previous ownership (OK, that's an entirely different discussion). The joy of many fragments is speculation and discussion between scholars. If curators decide that only textiles which can tell the story are to be displayed then surely museums would suffer.
The Textile Study Room at the V&A provides as many examples as possible in a small space. Maybe not riveting viewing for the general public but the place to go as a textile historian. Fortunately that particular museum is large enough to cater both for tourists and scholars. The new Medieval and Renaissance Gallery puts its textile examples in context and who knows it may be just the place to encourage further study of the subject.
From experience, I find textile scholarship very poorly served by country houses open to the public, in particular National Trust properties. Few of the guide books make much reference to the textiles or the wallpapers, concentrating largely on the reason the house was accepted by the Trust (vast collection of Chippendale, home of Churchill etc). I acknowledge we're a minority sport so perhaps it's time that museums and galleries came up with a plan to serve both scholars and 'the majority'. Some of the major art galleries have a printing machine where a visitor can put money in the slot and request a particular print. Wouldn't it be wonderful to be able to request a picture and the full details (if any known) of particular textiles, wallpapers, or any other individual item (presumably people researching other subjects have the same problem)?
Who knows, when fewer and fewer curators have time to spend on scholarship, perhaps the transfer of knowledge could be a two-way process.'
And Sally Tatters...
'Hi Mark, and thanks for the namecheck. Sorry to be a long time responding, but I've been a long time thinking. I find I am better at asking questions than at answering them. My concern, after reading your first post, was the same as that expressed by the Leeds Tapestry writer, that while the drive to 'tell a story' may improve the visitor experience for some, it may downgrade it for others. I think sadly of a favourite museum with a huge collection of costume and quilts, where the already small costume gallery has shrunk even further to make way for an 'interpretation room' in which a video (telling a story) plays on a loop and there are occasional practical demonstrations. A video, however interesting, is not something you can pause in front of and study in detail, the way you can the weave of a stunning brocade or the embroidery on a cuff. Live interpretation is dependent on willing volunteers, and on the visitor being there on the right day at the right time. Otherwise their experience is just of an empty room. In many museums now, staffing cuts, pressure on space, and even health and safety issues reduce access to items in store, so they are available only to the few who are groups or researchers. It is the interested amateur, neither new to the subject nor an accredited researcher, who I fear will fall between the two stools. And in the ageing population we are constantly reminded we are, there are a lot of us interested amateurs about.
The current Quilts exhibition at the V&A is a case in point. Titled 'Hidden Histories, Untold Stories', it is entirely designed around the context of the pieces. Arts correspondents from Radio 4 who readily admitted sinking hearts at the assignment went on to deliver rave reviews. However, some quilt historians (you may say obsessives) who found the presentation didn't always allow them to see and learn what they hoped for, in the way they hoped for, have been criticised for being 'picky and complaining', and by implication 'ungrateful'. Years from now the art correspondents will probably never have had another thought about the quilts, but the quilt historians may still be feeling shortchanged. So there were winners and losers. I'm sure the exhibition will have been a financial success, but is that the most important thing? As with my previous comment, I hasten to add that is a serious question, as I know we have to live in the real world. Is the financial imperative, the bums on seats, the most important consideration now in the museum world? Without it do we risk losing collections altogether through lack of financial support? Putting readers on the spot, I have another question. If you ran your own museum, had nobody to answer to, no political masters, no financial constraints, no visitor numbers to meet, what would your choice of display style be?'
And finally, Arwa's post.....
'Hi Mark and sally
My name is Arwa , I am from Suadi Arabia and I am here in Leeds university doing post doctoral.
My PhD was : Consolidation, Implementation & Documentation of some Saudi Arabian's Traditional Cloths.
Actually, I like your work and ideas about textiles and I think that we share the same interest. I would like to contact with you so we could discuss some relevant issues (the cultural values of traditional costume and textile)
My email is:
arwadk@gmail.com '
Whilst textiles are the focus of these debates it seems, to me anyway, that the 'problems' (if indeed they are problems?) remain central to the role and purpose of the museum itself. More discussion on this would be welcome....maybe even some kind of 'discussion group', conference, or other kind of 'space' would be useful?
Mark
Some of the MA Museum Studies Postgrads, relaxing in the University
