Golovnev A.V. Museum Thinking: The Temptation of Discovery and Storage Instinct

ANDREI V. GOLOVNEV — Member of the RAS, Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Kunstkamera) of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Russia, Saint Petersburg)
E-mail: Andrei_golovnev@bk.ru

 

 Download  |  Go to Issue #3. 2019

 

ABSTRACT. Museum workers not only deal with object conservation and exposition creation, but grow into the museum so that become its faces and voices. The reverse side of museum thinking — involvement in the «cult of authenticity» and reverence for rarities — is typical of museum visitors. Observations of museum everyday life revealed the pronounced «storage instinct,» and for good reason one of the key positions in museum staff was called the “conservative.” The roots of museality could be discerned in the depths of archeology (cave paintings), rites and sanctuaries of different peoples. Its incarnation was the ancient Greek mouseions — fora of muses and their servants, including priests, sages, poets, rhetoricians. The composition of the famous Mouseion at Alexandria, destroyed by Christians, was revived in the Renaissance museums after a millennium, and then in the wundercameras and kunstkameras. Museum tradition of the Modern era came from this theater­museum with biases of imperialism, colonialism, nation­building, and ethnicity.

KEYWORDS: Museum thinking, mouseion, museality, Kunstkamera

 

УДК 069.1
DOI 10.31250/2618-8619-2019-3(5)-9-18

 

REFERENCES

  • Ананьев в. Г. история зарубежной музеологии: идеи, люди, институты. М.: Памятники исто- рической мысли, 2018.
  • Богораз в. Г. л. я. Штернберг как человек и ученый // Этнография. 1927. № 2 (кн. IV). с. 269– 282.
  • ван Менш П. К методологии музеологии. М.: «Перспектива», 2018.
  • Головнёв А. в. Антропология движения (древности северной евразии). екатеринбург: Уро РАн; волот, 2009.
  • Головнёв А. в. Этнография в российской академической традиции // Этнография. № 1. 2018. с. 6–39.
  • Конт Ф. от этнографических музеев к музеям общества. Размышления по поводу французско- го опыта // Антропологический форум. 2007. № 6. с. 41–47.
  • наварро о. история и память в современном музее: несколько замечаний с точки зрения критической музеологии // вопросы музеологии. 2010. № 2. с. 3–11.
  • Плутарх. сравнительные жизнеописания. т. 1. М.: наука, 1994.
  • Поршнев в. П. Мусей в культурном наследии античности. М.: новый Акрополь, 2012. Шастель А. искусство и гуманизм во Флоренции времен лоренцо великолепного. М., сПб.:
  • Университетская книга, 2001.
  • Шнирельман в. А. Музей и конструирование социальной памяти: культурологический под- ход // Этнографическое обозрение. 2010. № 4. с. 8–26.
  • Alexander E. P. & Alexander M. Museums in Motion: An Introduction to the History and Functions of Museums. 2nd ed. Lanham; NY; Toronto. AltaMira Press, 2008.
  • Gosden Ch. & Larson F. Knowing things: exploring the collections at the Pitt Rivers Museum, 1884– 1945. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 2007. 261 p.
  • Hooper­Greenhill E. Museums and the Interpretation of Visual Culture (Museum Meanings). London; NY: Routledge, 2000.
  • Shaw W. M. K. Possessors and Possessed. Museums, Archaeology, and the Visualization of History in the Late Ottoman Empire. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press. 2003.
  • Stránský Z. Z. Archeologie a muzeologie. Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2005. Washburn W. E. Grandmotherology and museology // Curator. 1967. № 10(1). P. 43–48.
  • Willett F. Museums: two case studies of reaction to colonialism // The politics of the past. Eds.
  • P. Gathercole, D. Lowenthal. L.: Unwin Hyman, 1990. P. 172–188.