A new polemic is building up in the museum world. The Italian delegation at the ICOM (International Council of Museums) has been complaining about the abuse of the practice of loans on payment for works at exhibitions. According to Italian institutions, the use of loans on payment would exclude all those institutions that are not able to compete with these high budgets from the possibility of organizing high quality exhibitions.
Italian museums are experiencing a very particular situation, being cornered by a very slow bureaucracy and countless technicalities, and their operational spaces are extremely limited. This is certainly a point that cannot be forgotten in the attempt to analyze the situation.
The widespread practice of organizing exhibitions is eroding even more the museum public. Public museums cannot compete with private organizations, which are able to finance prestigious loans of works, having a solid marketing structure that allows them to get funds for loans from public and private financers.
All this is undeniable. But, of course, rather than “whining” at the ICOM asking for the banishment of such practice, it would be the case the gird up our loins to find more adequate solutions.
It is true that for Italian museums, at the moment, it is impossible to compete with private structures that realize exhibitions using substantial capitals. So would the solution be to clip the wings also of those who still organize something attractive in our country? It is useless to hide behind pseudo-ethical arguments regarding the commercialization of art. Paying the loan for a work means recognizing economically the cultural value of a piece of heritage. Without forgetting that the institution that grants a loan must be indemnified for the missing of a work in its institution, which implies a reduction in the number of visitors.
And how come private institutions willingly go through this widespread practice? Because investment returns are so high as to guarantee positive incomes that, dear museums, are not blasphemous. They are the opportunity to develop new activities, buy works, organize events, really have an active role on the cultural scene.
Are exhibitions organized by the most successful private institutions only commercial stunts? Again this is true, in most cases. However, it is also true that these commercial stunts, besides allowing to cash in money (help, economy!), also bring closer a public that does not usually set foot in museums and that perhaps starts from the impressionists to then discover a passion for Russian vorticism.
It is undeniable that these problems exist; and there are countless difficulties to overcome. Therefore, we should think about these issues, talk about them, but then we must start acting. The bureaucracy imposed from above is not the only defect of Italian museums, as there is also a substantial immobilism on behalf of executives, who are often very well-prepared figures with an excellent cultural background but a limited vision from a managerial point of view.
Of course, in the last ten years our museums have made some progress, especially thanks to normative changes that, however, are still sterile if they are not applied correctly.
Today we cannot claim to be able to compete with international museums and, apparently, the “threat” is also coming from the inside.
Clearly the problem regarding exhibitions is but the tip of the iceberg of a system that does not work how it should. There is a need for a thorough restructuration, a renewal of the professionalism involved, a greater awareness of new requirements and a necessity to find new resources.
(translated by Giorgina Arcuri)