Functions of a modern museum: an experience of a historical and cultural analysis

In connection with the development of science and culture, as well as the growth of educational, cognitive and cultural demands of society to the museum, its goals and objectives are changing, new areas of activity are being formed, thereby expanding the horizons and scope of the work of the modern museum, which in turn causes the problem of studying the role and significance of its sociocultural functions.

Having appeared in a form close to the modern one in the 19th century, developing throughout the 20th century, the museum has now become an integral part of the modern world. Despite the fact that the question of defining a museum as a phenomenon, its functions and goals has been considered by a number of researchers, it is worth noting that at the beginning of the 21st century the museum continues to develop, acquires new forms, which actualizes the problem presented in the title of this article.

Attempts to formulate a definition of the term “museum” were made at the dawn of the formation of museology as a science. Back in 1751, in Volume 10 of Diderot’s Encyclopedia, the following definition is given: “The word ‘museum’ today applies to any place where things directly related to art and muses are stored” [22, p. 893–894]. This definition, given by the author of the article Louis de Jacourt, is quite relevant for the era of “cabi- nets”, but it loses relevance due to its narrowness already in the 19th century. In particular, in 1817 Friedrich von Adelung, proposing to create the Russian National Museum, suggests dividing the exhibits into the following classes:

• 1)    literature and art;

• 2)    monuments;

• 3)    folk studies (ethnography);

• 4)    works of nature and goods [3, p. 5].

As we can see from this example, already at the beginning of the 19th century there existed concepts of museums close to modern local history museums by the composition of exhibits.

Returning to the question of the scientific definition of the museum’s functions, I note that by the end of the 19th century there appeared a number of works discussing this problem. I refer, in particular, to the article “Museums and Their Purposes” (1891) by Newton Horace Winchell, in which its author identified the criteria of an “ideal museum”. In particular, an ideal museum should have a permanent, purpose-built building with rooms for exhibitions, storage facilities, laboratories, classrooms. Also, the museum should be able to constantly expand its collections, ways to exchange materials, an extensive library, a corps of well-paid researchers, the opportunity to publish research results and lecture activities [33, p. 45]. The functions of the museum, according to

Winchell, are reduced to the collection and representation of material, scientific and teaching activities.

To the same time belongs the work The Principles of Museum Administration by George Brown Goode, which gives the following definition of a museum: “h. an institution for the preservation of those objects that best illustrate the phenomena of nature and the works of man, and the utilization of these for the increase of knowledge and for the culture and enlightenment of the people “ [11, p. 196]. Developing the topic of museum interaction, Goode believes that museums should actively cooperate with universities, colleges, the scientific community and libraries. At the same time, he emphasizes: “The care and utilization of material objects being the peculiar duty of the museum, it should not enter the field of other institutions of learning, except to such a degree as may be found absolutely necessary in connection with its own work” [11, p. 197].

In the 20th century, research on the functions of the museum and attempts to define its phenomenon continue. In 1911, the American George Byron Gordon notes the importance of the museum as an educational institution [12, p. 5]. In 1914, the Belgian museologist Gustave Gilson gives the following definition of a museum: “A modern museum is an institution that is engaged in the search, research and exposition of material objects” [10, p. 9].

Thus, in Europe and the USA at the turn of the 20th century, the scientific concept of the museum as an institution for storing and displaying material, a cultural, scientific center and an educational center was formed. For several decades, this concept did not practically undergo major changes.

In particular, Douglas Allan’s definition of 1960, although formulated somewhat extravagantly: “A museum in its simplest form is a building for collections of objects for inspiration, study and enjoyment”, in fact also speaks about a museum as a center for the preservation of art and scientific materials (cit. ex [26, p. 141]).

George Osborne focuses on the aesthetic function of the museum and talks about the potential ability of museums to influence contemporary art [24, p. 47].

If to speak about the works of the beginning of the 21st century, I can state that many research- ers note a certain shift in the functions of museums. In particular, Elena N. Mastenitsa says that the modern museum has ceased to be an institution that only records the achieved level of public consciousness, but becomes an actor contributing to its dynamics, an educational, communicative, cultural center [19, p. 139].

Marianne Achiam and Jan Sølberg, based on the materials of the 2013 Ecsite Conference, identify nine metafunctions of the modern museum:

• 1)    scientific function;

• 2)    cultural function; like Mastenitsa, the authors emphasize that the museum can act as a cultural resource for society and as an independent actor;

• 3)    educational function;

• 4)    social function;

• 5)    network function;

• 6)    political function;

• 7)    economic function;

• 8)    conservative function;

• 9)    symbolic function [2, p. 8–18].

Nikolay A. Tomilov highlights even more functions of the museum [31, p. 141].

Most researchers of recent years, as a rule, concentrate on some particular function of the museum, and, when considering it comprehensively, they do not focus on the historical prerequisites and factors of the formation of a particular function.

The aim of this article is to conduct a historical and cultural analysis of the functions of a modern museum. In particular, I must identify and generalize the sociocultural functions of the museum, I must answer the questions of what a museum is as a socio-cultural phenomenon, what role it plays in modern culture, what its social significance is, what factors influenced its formation at different stages.

The sources used during the implementation of the work can be divided into the following groups:

• 1)    scientific works of foreign and Russian researchers who have studied this problem before;

• 2)    documents of international organizations, in particular, the Charter of the International Council of Museums;

• 3)    reports of organizations, for example, the 2015 Tax Report of the Metropolitan Museum

  of Art, the annual report of the British Museum for 2016;

• 4)    laws, for example, the law of the Republic of Kazakhstan On Culture.

Among the general scientific methods I used are analysis, the use of which is determined directly by the aim formulated above. The museum is an integral phenomenon; however, in order to study the sociocultural functions of this phenomenon, it seems necessary to identify and consider each function and aspect of activity separately. Considering the trends and functions of the museum as a phenomenon also implies the use of methods such as synthesis, generalization and a systematic approach. Of great importance was the problem-chronological method, which was actively used in the framework of the diachronic description of the development of the phenomenon of the museum.

I have divided this study into the following sections:

• 1)    study of the generally accepted official formulations of the term “museum”;

• 2)    consideration of museum functions accepted in historiography as seen by various researchers;

• 3)    determination of the historical stages of the development of the museum phenomenon and the factors that influenced this process;

• 4)    summarizing of the results and conclusions.

I hope that the provisions and conclusions of this article will contribute to the scientific understanding of the functions of the modern museum and the role it plays in modern society.

During historical development, the museum as a sociocultural phenomenon has undergone significant changes. The functions of museums, their number, the target audience changed depending on the sociocultural environment and the needs of society. The semantic content of the very concept “museum” was transformed, various forms of museum collections appeared and disappeared, the ways of data representation changed.

The definition formulated in the Charter of the International Council of Museums (ICOM) (1989) reads: “The Museum is a permanent non-profit institution serving the cause of society and its development, accessible to the general public, engaged in the acquisition, storage, research, popularization and display of material evidence of a person and his environment for the purpose of study, education, as well as for the satisfaction of spiritual needs.” Further in the text of the Charter it is noted that this definition also includes “natural, archaeological and ethnographic monuments and attractions, historical monuments”, “botanical, zoological gardens, aquariums, vivariums”, “scientific centers and planetariums”, “non-commercial art galleries”, “nature reserves”, etc. [7, pp. 3–4].

Article 25 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan On Culture provides the following definition of a museum: “Museums are cultural organizations created for the storage, study and public representation of museum items and museum collections, designed to carry out cultural, educational, research functions and to ensure the popularization of historical and cultural heritage of the Republic of Kazakhstan” [23].

Several functions and properties of a museum can be derived from this definition. Among the functions, one can name research, educational functions, as well as the function of ensuring the safety of “material evidence of a person” (conservative). Among the properties are the availability and non-commercial nature of the museum’s activities. Regarding the latter, it can be assumed that the activities of the museum may well have a partly commercial nature without prejudice to the main functions.

Various researchers often identify a significantly larger number of functions. One of the most complete formulations of the functions of museums was given by Tomilov, who speaks about 15 functions of the museum, which include: documentation (proves the existence of phenomena and processes in the past and present); protection and storage (ensures the safety of museum funds); cognitive or research (makes it possible to simulate historical and historical cultural processes, the ability to reproduce past reality in people’s thinking); educational (delivers knowledge to people about the historical and cultural past through the informative significance of museum items); ideological (forms the attitudes of people towards the community of humanity and its diversity); political (allows the use of historical and sociocultural heritage to prove certain political processes in the past and present, for the formation of state actions, etc.); economic (increases the values of humanity, including in the financial situation); creative (increases the volume of participation of historical, cultural and natural resources of museums in the development of society); integration (provides links between the sociocultural realities of the present and the past); identification (makes people aware of the similarities and differences between modern and past sociocultural systems); communication (promotes mutual understanding and interaction between people within the depth of the history of humankind and its culture); consolidation (contributes to an increase in the volume of common cultural phenomena in the communities of humanity); differentiation (divides humanity along sociocultural boundaries); educational (evokes respect for the past of humanity and its peoples, develops patriotic attitudes and feelings, directs the spiritual development of the individual); aesthetic (forms tastes in the field of beauty and value assessments of artistic activities of people)” [31, p. 141].

Vladimir M. Grusman identifies five functions of the museum: information-integrative, storage, educational-developmental, transformative-constructive, and entertainment-cognitive [15, p. 26].

Ivan Gaskell speaks about the variability of the functions of various museums, but identifies six interrelated functions: collection, preservation, display, publication, education, and scientific research [8, p. 86].

The functions of a modern museum are the object of research not only by museum scholars, but also by sociologists and anthropologists. For example, Volker Kirchberg examines the functions of the museum in a post-industrial city. He divides the functions of the city museum into two categories: manifest and latent. Thus, in the matter of structuring the urban landscape, a manifest function is the ability to “streamline the urban chaos”, to become the “face” of the localization area. A latent function is gentrification, expulsion of the population with a low social status out of the localization area. Another example of a manifest function, according to Kirchberg, is that a museum should serve as a platform for communication between the intellectual elite and the “democratic” strata of the population, and encourage contacts between different lifestyles. However, in reality, this function is not realized and the city museum in a post-industrial city is a platform for dialogue only for a very specific group of people [16, p. 66].

Richard Sandell views museums in the UK as a means that can be used to both disunite and unite different social groups. This is done through such a function of the museum as broadcasting public values, creating and representing the image of society. By encouraging certain values, paying attention to certain facts and “ignoring” others, the museum, as a sociocultural phenomenon, can thus be part of the mechanisms of reintegration [27, p. 407]. Within the framework of his constructivist approach, Sandell argues that the museum can act as a “vehicle of broad social change”, contributing to social integration. As one example, he cites the Museum of Migration in Adelaide (Australia), which covers the history of immigration and seeks to destroy the residents’ fear of the “other” (representative of a different culture) [27, p. 414].

All of the functions listed above by various researchers can be conditionally divided into direct and mediated. The direct functions of the museum include:

• 1)    collection and storage of material;

• 2)    representation of material;

• 3)    scientific-research activities.

All others should be classified as mediated functions. This does not mean that they are less important than the direct ones. It only means that practically all of them, whether it is an educational, political or integrative function, fit into the framework of the primary direct function designated here as “representation of material”. In this case, it should rather be argued that the primary function of representing the material is only a means to achieve some higher goal, didactic, political, or some other.

In fact, we can imagine a modern museum as a conceptual message aimed at the target audience, or a set of messages that together form a specific text. Unlike collections, of which it is to some extent a descendant, the museum is always directed outward, towards the visitor, towards the recipient, who must perceive the message hidden in the representation of the museum material.

The modern complex of functions is the result of a relatively long evolution of the museum as a sociocultural phenomenon. Let uss take a closer look at some of them.

The collection and storage of material is undoubtedly one of the primary functions of the museum, and this function, in fact, gave rise to the museum as a phenomenon. However, since the time of the first proto-museum collections, this function has acquired some new meanings, which became actualized during the evolution of society, technological and economic development. If, initially, in the collections of the Renaissance, the aesthetic side of collecting dominated, later, if it did not recede into the background, then, at least, stood in a row with other functions, no less important.

So, at the dawn of the New Age, natural science collections appear and, later, natural science museums. Between 1620–1654 the Danish scientist Ole Worm creates the natural science Museum Wormianum, whose collections after his death in 1654 were included in the Danish Royal Kunstkamera [28, p. 81–82]. In 1683, the Ashmole Museum was founded in Oxford, the oldest of the university and, apparently, of the public museums [1, p. 115].

The 19th century was a time of irreversible changes, rapidly developing technologies and the final collapse of traditional society. It was at this time that the need to preserve the historical memory and the appearance of traditional cultures and artifacts, and to take on the irrevocably passing time was actualized. The 19th century accounts for the design of such scientific disciplines as archeology and ethnography, which from that time to the present day regularly supply the museum with the necessary material. The development of archeology and ethnology also determined the development of the museum as a scientific organization and largely determined some of the directions of its activities. The converse statement is also true, the development of the museum as a sociocultural institution had a significant impact on the development of such humanitarian disciplines as archeology, ethnography, and art history.

From that time on the museum has acquired the function of preserving purely scientific material not intended for display. Since representativeness is one of the main requirements for a museum exhibition, many artifacts of scientific interest are not of interest to visitors.

The educational function of the museum is indisputable and, with certain reservations, its beginning can be traced back to ancient times. Ancient museums, whose development peak was the Alexandrian mouseion, were, of course, not museums in the modern sense. Thus, the Encyclopaedia Britannica defines the Mouseion of Alexandria as a “center of classical learning” and a “research institute” [4]. Valentin P. Gritskevich also speaks about the scientific and pedagogical function of museums, noting, however, the “proto-museum” nature of their meetings [13, p. 65].

At the same time, Valeriy Porshnev, examining the functions of ancient museums, distinguishes two of them, which are in direct agreement with the modern definition of a museum given by ICOM. This is “the preservation of historical memory”, which led to the formation of the objective environment, as well as, indirectly, “the transfer of accumulated experience” [25, p. 280]. The degree of continuity between ancient museums and modern museums is a rather controversial issue, and its identification is not among the tasks of this work.

Educational functions at an embryonic level can also be distinguished in the proto-museum collections of the Renaissance, which is expressed, in particular, in the term “studiolo” (from studiare – to study), which has survived to this day.

At the end of the 18th century systemic changes of a socioeconomic and cultural nature took place in Europe, which was reflected in the development of museums. In particular, the revolution in France and the accompanying nationalization of royal and church property led to the emergence of public museums accessible to representatives of different segments of the population [14]. At the same time, an important role is played by the fact that the end of the 18th – beginning of the 19th century was the time of the formation of a common French identity, which to some extent actualized the museum. Overall, similar processes were characteristic of Europe at that time. In addition, the end of the 18th – the beginning of the 19th century was the beginning of significant advances in the development of the economy, industry, science and technology.

The number of museums was increasing, a division by specialization appeared, the concept of the role of the museum in educating people was developing. During this period, many museum forms habitual for the 20th–21st centuries, such as dioramas and panoramas, were formed. Nevertheless, according to Gritskevich, during this period museums, despite their rapid growth, continued to remain inaccessible to a wide audience.

The design of the educational function of the museum should be dated to the 19th century, and its final consolidation took place in the 20th century. I should note that, in different countries, the evolution of the museum was uneven and depended on the social environment. The most important factors that contributed to the development of the museum as an educational institution were the spread of literacy among the population and the actual number of museums. These two factors, in the context of considering the educational function of the museum, depend on each other. The more people in the country with at least a primary education, the more urgent is the social demand for museums. The more museums there are, the more relevant is their educational function. It is no coincidence that the flagship of Europe in terms of the development of the museum as an educational institution in Europe was and still is Germany.

Since the end of the 18th century, an increase in literacy has been recorded in Germany. Already in the 1830s in Prussia, the proportion of children attending school was close to 100% [9, p. 45]. In other states of Germany, the figures were, although not always so high, but comparable. Circulation of printed editions also speaks about it. In 1803, Hamburgische Correspondent had a circulation of 50,000 copies. Another example is Rudolph Zacharias Becker’s peasant almanac. If in 1798 150,000 copies of the almanac were sold, in 1811 their number was already 1,000,000 [9, p. 47]. It can be assumed that it was the high level of literacy of the population that became one of the cornerstones of the development of the museum in Germany in the 19th century. Thus, speaking about the rapid growth of the number of museums in Germany in the 19th century, Geoffrey Lewis cites the fact that in only five years, from 1876 to 1880, 50 museums appeared in this country [17]; while Hildegard Vieregg gives the following figures: 15 museums in 1835, about 179 in 1900, about 2000 in 1982 [32, p. 136]. In the 20th century, the number of museums in Germany continued to grow. According to Neal Asherson, only in Germany there were 2076 museums in 1981, and by 1995 their number grew to 3923 [6, p. 59].

In 2008, according to Vieregg, the number of museums in Germany was 6190 [32, p. 151].

Germany is also a European leader in the development of school museums. In 2004, according to Pablo Alvarez, Pauli Davila and Luis M Nighy, Europe had at least 442 school museums used in the educational process, of which 103 were located in Germany [5, p. 3].

According to the research of Elena B. Medvedeva, museum pedagogy in Germany originated in the late 19th – early 20th centuries, more precisely, at the end of the 19th century preconditions and ideas appeared, which were implemented in the first third of the 20th century [20, p. 55].

Close to the educational function is the idea of a children’s museum, which appeared in the United States and Russia at the turn of the 20th century [18, p. 23; 29, p. 344].

Even though the official definition of ICOM emphasizes the non-commercial nature of the museum’s activities, its economic function should also be touched upon, which, as I see it, can be divided into several diverse elements:

• 1.    Museum as a place of employment. It is the simplest element of the economic function. Museums of different sizes and importance are places of work for different numbers of people. The largest museums provide a relatively large number of jobs. Thus, the number of employees of the British Museum in 2016 was 1064 [30, p. 50]. Another example is the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, which has more than 2,000 employees and in 2015 spent more than $ 125 million on salaries alone, not counting other payments and compensation [21].

• 2.    Museum as a tourist attraction. It is no secret that museums are a means of attracting tourists, and the most famous museums occupy key places in tourists’ plans. For example, opinion polls have shown that visits to museums, primarily the State Hermitage, are planned by most of the tourists arriving in St. Petersburg. The most famous museums in this case participate in the formation of the cultural image of the tourist destination. In general, museums, even in the absence of admission fees, but with a competent strategy, are able to provide an economic effect for the tourist destination as a whole.

• 3.    The third aspect of the economic function of the museum is difficult to express in objective

economic indicators, and, in general, its formulation seems somewhat debatable. It is associated with the educational and consolidating role of the museum, the formation of a person and a citizen. If to remember that, from an economic perspective, a person is the same resource of the country as other resources, the participation of the museum in the educational and ideological processes also gives a certain economic effect.

Thus, having considered the sociocultural functions of the museum, I can come to drawing the following conclusions. The museum is a complex multifunctional sociocultural institution. Various functions of the museum are the result of a fairly long evolution, they appeared at different times and are a response to the social needs of a changing society. The modern museum took shape in the 20th century, although many of its functions and forms appeared much earlier. To put it more precisely, all the basic principles of the 20th century museum were formed in the 19th century, but it was in the 20th century that the museum’s potential was revealed. Among the factors that determined the design of the modern museum system, are: an increase in the level of education of the population, widespread literacy, state control (in some countries), the design of national identity, a significantly increased degree of human influence on the environment, an increase in the role of tourism and the overall economic development of society, the rapidly accelerated social development of society, which threatened the preservation of the values and realities of traditional culture.

Applying the cultural-semiotic approach, we will see in the museum a collection of subject-specific texts addressed to the visitor. Combining the cultural-semiotic approach with the constructivist one, we also see that the content of the transmitted message can be constructed depending on the goals of the author. Thus, the museum is a potentially flexible and powerful tool for informational, pedagogical, educational, and ideological impact. In this case, the impact can be both positive and negative; for example, it can serve for the integration or reintegration of society, impose certain cultural norms and rules, aesthetic ideas.

The museum is not an isolated phenomenon; it is incuded in the environment at different levels, being part of a system, or more precisely, several systems.

At the first level, the museum is physically inscribed in the landscape, often being not just a part of it, but having structure-forming functions. At the same time, often the location of the museum, the shape of the building, its architectural features, represent a message. An example is the building of the National Museum of the Republic of Kazakhstan, opened in 2014. The largest museum in Central Asia (which, of course, is communicated to visitors), located at the main square of the country around buildings with similar statuses (Palace of Peace and Reconciliation, Khazret Sultan Mosque), represents a kind of “claim for leadership” not only in the country, but also in the region. Here are some other examples: Titanic Belfast, built on the site of the docks, where the ship of the same name was created; Azerbaijan Carpet Museum, built in the form of a rolled carpet; Museum of the Soviet-Polish Military Commonwealth, built in the form of a helmet, etc.

At the second level, the museum is part of the system of museums within the city, region, country and, as a result, the whole world. Here it would be useful to remember that the motive force of the museum, its foundation, which fulfills public requests and ensures the functioning of the entire mechanism, are people. Museum workers, like representatives of other professions, are a kind of subculture, a community of people, within which a certain conceptual apparatus is formed, a system of connections, exchange of information and experience is established.

At the third level, the museum is part of the cultural environment and interacts with other sociocultural actors. The complex system of relations here includes interactions of the “museum – visitor”, “museum – state” (government regulators, various control services), “museum – educational institutions”, “museum – religious organizations” and other types.

Summing up, I should note that the above three levels, separated for convenience, are not actually separated from each other, and represent a single system, all the elements of which, in one way or another, are directly or indirectly related to each other.

An important factor in the development of museums was the development of science in the

19th and 20th centuries, in particular, of historical disciplines such as ethnography and archeology, natural sciences, and art history. An equally important factor was the increase in the level of literacy of the population, which to some extent determined the growth in the number of museums, ensuring the demand for them. The third factor was the industrial and technical revolution of the 19th century, accompanied by rapid changes in living conditions and the irreversible transformation of traditional culture, which necessitated its conservation and study. This trend in the 20th century increased by many times.

Thus, the accumulation and systematization of information, the need for its visual representation, as well as the increase in the number of potential recipients caused by the development of society are the main factors that contributed to the spread of the museum, the fact of its expansion from the academic and elite environment to the public. This can also include the development of tourism, economic and ideological factors.

The main functions of a modern museum are collection, storage, study, and presentation of material. The first three of them, as a rule, relate to the activities of narrow specialists, scientists, museologists, restorers, etc. The function of representing the material is the point of contact of the museum with the “outside world”, visitors, recipients of the information that the museum can provide. It is this function that turns the museum into a potentially powerful didactic, educating, and ideological tool – an instrument of integration (reintegration), adaptation, upbringing, education.

Thus, based on the study of various sources, I have considered and summarized the functions of the modern museum in the historical and cultural aspect, and determined its role in the sociocultural space.

Speaking about the direction of future research on the functions of the modern museum, I should note that it is necessary to focus on the individual functions of the museum. In particular, the pedagogical function of the museum is important. Despite the fact that this function has not been ignored by researchers, the potential of the museum in this area is still high and, with the development of society and technology, the pedagogical function of the museum as an area of research is gaining relevance. As a perspective research direction, I see the function of the museum as a center for working with socially vulnerable segments of the population, a platform for dialogue.

In my opinion, the study of the museum’s capabilities in cyberspace, the mechanisms for implementing its functions through the Internet, the impact on the audience and interaction with it through computers and mobile devices has a potentially high applied value.

Abay K. SATUBALDIN

Functions of a Modern Museum:

An Experience of a Historical and Cultural Analysis