Keyhole Views
Museum publics from the living rooms
Grounded in our living room as never before, having to learn to live much more within confined spaces and nowhere close to an end in sight, we are now becoming more and more conversant with keyhole views. I choose to desribe the relative subjective views that camera and screen are exposing us to by comparing them to the view from an old key hole — restricted by shape and view point.
The metaphor is not to be understood in the strict sense of the word. Interacative platforms and virtual tours have gone a long way to empower greater and better access to online publics and audiences. My comment refers to what has been so admirably made available online at such short notice, irrespective of whether it had been there and simply rehashed or rebranded, or the bespoke content increasingly being produced in reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic. Much of all this might be just about the relocation of a physical experience to an online platform in the hope that museum netizens would just need to cross the bridge from the physical to the virtual made necessary by circumstances.
I choose to share Seph Rodney’s article on hyperallgeric.com to explain my point. Seph describes the experience of navigating museums online as
‘…lonely and oddly limiting, even under the most technologically sophisticated terms… I do feel like a curious explorer who’s now been marooned on a far-flung outpost, where I can survive for the foreseeable future. I won’t starve to death, but I am still eager to find my way back to the companionship of flesh-and-bone civilization.’
Technology does present new ways of engagement nonetheless, and Seph also shares his choice of preferred experiences.
There are, indeed, perks to consider and tangible advantages to exploit too. This is, for example, the case of close observation of objects and works on display via high-resolution images. In this case, technology completely overrides the physical or visual distancing enforced within the physical museum space. Information too, and the sheer concentration or potential amount of that for that matter, can be made accessible in ways not physically possible unless otherwise supported by technology via hand held devices. The latest interactive experience launched a few weeks ago by the Rijksmuseum for Rembrandt’s Night Watch is very telling in this respect.
The potential to reach out with the technology available or within reach is certainly there but the risk and pitfalls of transposing a physical experience to a virtual platform is also tangible and real. Steve Glavesky explains this very well in his recent blogpost on remote work. Glavesky claims that what has happened so far is the transfer of physical work online, but the need to adapt and take advantage of the medium is the next step to consider. This next step would be more about asynchronous communication where presence is not understood as leading to productivity, or hours with output. There are many analogies for museums to explore, particularly with regards to a new understanding of what I call ‘museum time’ that is slowly taking shape.
Last week, I was particularly intrigued by some refreshing and thought proving approach to audience segmentation by emotional need. The google document, available online, lists specific publics by emotive state including bored people, desperate parents, teachers at sea, grieving people … the list continues to evolve and might be still works in progress. There is much in this response which reminds me of Marc Gobé’s concept of emotional branding. That such a focused and bespoke audience classification should be required at this point is a given dicated by circumstances. Indeed, by its very nature, the digital world thinks and ticks audience not media — audience comes first and the act of fitting potential customers to a rigid demographic profile oftentimes leads to what is described as ‘valuable wastage’. The need to go this way is pressing for museums, and the ambition to do so is certainly welcome.
There is, however, a paradox to note in the discussion. Empathy automatically implies putting aside learning, culture, knowledge and opinions in order to truly and objectively understand your publics. Indeed, museums may not find it easy to balance the need for a greater engagement through the emotional with the intellectual responses traditionally expected from the institution. Much, however, depends on project and museum category. As recently discussed by journalist Rebecca Carlsson, some museum typologies or categories are better posited than others to do so. For holocaust museums, the route to an emotional response is simpler and more straightforward than others.
How can we then embrace empathy in meaningful ways?
Empathy is within anyone’s reach and there are simple tools and methods to help you immerse in your publics’ shoes and understand their needs better.
I propose three takeaways to help repositioning thinking modes to become more open to empathy. All three of them can be read and understood in relation to the audience segmentation exercise carried out by emotional needs discussed here.
1. A Humble Ego
Institutional ego is oftentimes grounded in the history and tradition of the museum institution oftentimes manifest in assertive institutional or academic authority.
Letting go of an authoritative and egocentric view of things helps foster a clearer understanding of what museum publics might need or feel. With the right dose of humility, and a willingness to abandon preconceived ideas, museums can improve their ability to empathise.
2. Good Listening and Observation Skills
Empathy implies a deeper understanding of your publics and that requires careful and attentive listening and observation.
By learning not to voice personal opinions or interpretations authoritatively, and consider alternative interpretations and voices even if peripheral to the academic discourse, museums can become empathic institutions. By also reading into behaviours, and look into a broader spectrum of sensations, museums can also achieve a deeper understanding of user experience, ambitions and aspirations.
3. Sincere Curiosity
Considering your publics and audiences from an authoritative view as being in need of help or information, rather than understanding their needs and aspirations, is an obstacle to empathy.
Museums exist to serve the needs of their publics, and your work will not be complete unless you properly understand their needs. As we learn to understand what motivates people and potential museum publics, and by having the right does and measure of curiosity, we can acquire new insights, dig into unexpected modes of engagement and explore people’s lives in more comprehensive ways. Indeed, museums stand to benefit more out of a deep understanding of their publics.
The images featured here are taken from The Canvas Project created by Brazilian artist Gabriel Nardelli Araújo. Images may be subject to copyright.
