The Canadian War Museum Controversy - Maybe Not Such a Bad Thing?

When I think of controversy, some popular names come to mind: Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, Nicole Ritchie among other celebrities who are continually in the media stirring up scandal with their drug abuse, jail time and naughty photos.

At the Canadian War Museum, obviously quite a different type of controversy regarding the content of a World War II panel has been a hot topic of debate. To me it has further demonstrated that people are genuinely interested in challenging ideas. What is right and wrong, whether it is what celebrities are up to or their own history as displayed in a museum has a great interest to people.

After reading The Making and Unmaking of a University Museum: The McCord 1921-1976, I got thinking more about the "anti-intellectual" period which has plagued museums. According to the author Brian Young, this was defined by cutbacks of museum staff, especially curators in the late 70s which led to a lack of scholarly research within the museum. Researchers were left relying on machines to research collections and lacking the insightful connections that curators who are specially trained and knowledgeable of collections can provide. There was a new pressure to make money by replacing curators with those who could market the museum to the public. This "anti-intellectual" movement is arguably still happening today. With museums no longer eligible for Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council funding and last years cutbacks to the Museums Assistance Program there continues to be a bleak outlook for museum research. After working at a small local museum in Halifax, I have experienced this serious problem. With only two permanent staff at this particular museum, there was more of a focus on the custodial duties than research. Treasured artifacts being housed within the museum were not fully understood.

So, how does this all tie in with what is going on with the War Museum? Well, it is clear that the public are interested in museum research. The attendance at the War Museum has increased with people interested in seeing what this whole controversy is all about. They are thinking about the role of museums within the community, what history is being preserved and how. In-house exhibitions (like those at the Canadian Was Museum) give the opportunity to museum curators with the help of local interest groups to research their past on a different level. It is much different than the pre-packaged travelling exhibitions that many museums have to resort to due to the lack of support for research.*

Although academics have shown concern of special interest groups, like the veterans wanting to have the representation of their history in the museum re-evaluated, is that such a bad thing? Afterall, aren't museums places for discussion and debate? I once heard the museum compared to an agora, an ancient Greek marketplace where the public, philosophers and scholars meet. Questioning a museum exhibition can get us all thinking about our own history and how others view it. It's a very exciting thing for the historian and one that has sparked the interest of the public on what is going on at museums.

* I would like to note, I don't think there is anything wrong with travelling exhibitions - it's just that they should not deter museums from exploring their own collections! One of my favorite travelling exhibitions for example is The Da Vinci Machines exhibition which has travelled the world. I unfortunately do not know where it is headed next. For info on that show a review has been posted online: http://www.theage.com.au/news/arts-reviews/the-leonardo-da-vinci-machines/2006/09/18/1158431618346.html