If I Ran a Museum in Kyiv, Right Now

A couple weeks ago, an American friend wrote to say she was moving to Kyiv for a year, and it gave me a funny bit of homesickness.  I thought of my very first cold January, including a chilly day at an outdoor museum, Pyrohiv with Irina and Bas;  of wanting to photograph some of the women on the subway, beautiful and bundled up so just their face showed;  of trying to puzzle out post-Soviet Ukraine with the help of my students at Kyiv-Mohyla;  of spring slowly coming with babushkas selling berries on street corners and chestnut blossoms everywhere.  But most of all, of course, I thought of colleagues and friends there.

Last week, Ukraine's president, under pressure from Russia, announced he would not move forward on a path towards membership in the European Union.  Since then,  the streets of Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities have filled with growing numbers of citizens protesting--not just that decision.  It seems citizens of all ages are fed up with the cronyism and corruption that characterize so many aspects of Ukrainian life.

But what can a museum do in such a situation?  Here's what I would do if I ran a museum in Kyiv right now (and, I should say, I know some museums are already undertaking a few of these efforts--and if you know of more, please share in the comments).    My thoughts fall into three museum spheres:  representing community values and ethics;  serving the community, and of course, collecting.

Values and Ethics
A number of museums, including the Ivan Honchar Museum and museums in L'viv, have already made public statements in support of the protestors.   Corruption and a wide variety of shady practices have weakened Ukraine's museums, as they have so many other civic institutions.  If I were a director I would make a public statement, but I would also take a look at the ethical practices and transparency of my own museum.  I would permit--and even encourage--the staff at my museum to take part in the protests if they so desired. (I've already seen photos on my Facebook feed of both directors and staff out at the protests).

Serving the Community
It's cold in Kyiv.  If I were director of a museum I would throw open my doors and invite the public in for free.  I would keep the museum open early and late.  If St. Michael's Monastery can be a place of sanctuary and support, why can't museums?  I would have cups of hot tea ready,  find all the battery phone chargers I could,  and provide a warm place for reflection and contemplation.  I might find a space in the gallery for people to write or draw about their hopes and fears;  and if especially motivated, I might install art in a gallery that encourages participants to think about Ukraine as a nation,  about beauty, truth and complicated histories.  If I ran one of the many literary museums, I might host readings that help us understand how Shevchenko's or Bulgakov's work has importance here.

Collecting
Ukrainians know far better than I about the perils of erasing the past.  Ivan Honchar, who founded the museum that bears his name, wrote repeatedly about the efforts of the Soviets to destroy Ukrainian culture through the destruction of artifacts and of course, many scholars over recent decades have brought to light  long-hidden and difficult parts of Ukraine's history for greater understanding.

If I were director of the Kyiv History Museum or the National History Museum,  here's just a few of the items I would be out collecting right now.

• EU flags and Ukrainian flags
• Tweets and Facebook postings
• Large metal barriers,  face-masked helmets and police uniforms
• Oral histories with everyone from Vitali Klitschko to Ruslana, from a protestor to a policeman
• Makeshift Red Cross shirts worn by those treating the injured
• Handwritten lists of people trying to locate other people
• Photographs, of course
• Home-made antidotes for tear gas
• And a vast array of banners and hand-made signs

One of the few remnants of the 2004 Orange Revolution is a single pillar covered with graffiti, shielded by Plexiglass, just outside the main post office.  When I first came to Ukraine in 2009 I heard about a proposed museum for the Orange Revolution and a large archives somewhere, but I never actually saw it, and the museum never materialized.  Only the lonely pillar on the same square where thousands now gather,  told that story. What story will be told of 2013 ten years from now?  or one hundred years?

The progress of Ukrainian museums over the last five years, despite many challenges,  has been quite amazing to me. I look forward to seeing them fully take their place in a newly energized civil society.
 

Update 12.3.13:  The Literary Memorial Museum of Paul Ticino in Kyiv has announced that they will be open for free for all who need warmth, coffee, tea and sandwiches and will continue this effort as long as needed.

Image Credits:  Top photo from the Kyiv Post;  center photos from EuroMaidan on Facebook and bottom photo via Nadia Parfan by Taras Khimchak.

Behind the Curtain: What's Driving the Latest Change in Ukrainian Museums?

Transparency and change:  two things I care deeply about in my work with museums. Last week, thse two concepts connected in unexpected ways.  Early last week I facilitated StEPs training for a group of Connecticut history museums for the Connecticut Humanities Council and the Connecticut League of Historical Organizations.  Then, late last week, and continuing this week,  there is the news from Ukraine that the directors of several national museums have been summarily relieved of their duties by the Ministry of Culture and replaced by new directors, none of whom have museum experience.  Removed have been the directors of Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra, St. Sophia's (both UNESCO World Heritage Sites)  the Taras Shevchenko Museum,  the National Gallery of Art, and Pyrohiv, the National Museum of Folk Architecture and Life--even more removals are rumored.  These are all government museums, but in American terms, picture the removal of the directors of the Smithsonian, the National Gallery of Art, and Colonial Williamsburg, all at once, with no real explanation.

In the United States, transparency in the age of the Internet has become easier in every way--and the government assists, to some degree, in the process of creating transparent organizations.  If I want to know about any non-profit in the United States,  I can look up their 990 tax filing on Guidestar.  I can see how their money came in, how it came out,  how much they have in cash reserves, how much their director is paid, and who their board members are.  Our national museums, the Smithsonian, releases its budget information and journalists regularly cover museum issues ranging from deaccessions to fundraising.   Our small group in Connecticut talked about the reasons why such transparency is important--and I emphasized the fact that, whether a museum takes grant support or not,  the public still supports you--that we operate in the public trust, by virtue of a museum's tax-exempt status.   That's a lesson worth remembering no matter how big or small your organization is.

There is no such pattern of transparency in Ukraine.   Unfortunately, Ukraine continues to rank high on the list of Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index and these removals do nothing to dispel concerns that these changes are meant to benefit individuals.  The reasons given for the firings are sketchy.  Some directors have been accused of financial irregularities,  and at other institutions the need for "change" has been promoted--that museums need to find new ways of doing business.  And of course, that all these dismissals have happened at once speaks to a larger goal, one that is not visible to the public.

So what about that change?  

I'm in full agreement that many museums in Ukraine need changing.  And in fact,  I headed a team that did an evaluation of one of the above museums in 2010, recommending significant changes.  I've seen positive changes in a number of museums each time I return and do everything I can to encourage new ways of thinking.  But, and it's a big but,  it's entirely unclear, because the process has been sudden, outwardly capricious, and without clear rationales or outcomes,  that any change will be for the better.  There has been some talk of monetizing collections--selling off the nation's cultural heritage in order to pay debts.   These museums occupy some very valuable real estate in Kyiv--it's entirely possible that inappropriate development will be allowed to take place.   There have been reports of conversations between the Ministry of Culture and a Canadian firm who promises a systematic way to catalog and monetize collections (but who appears to have no museum clients). On January 31,  the Minister of Culture will hold a press briefing where, one suspects, more answers will not be forthcoming.

Part of the discussion among museum colleagues in Ukraine has been that these new directors have no museum experience. Ukraine is still a place where experts are highly valued.  The track record of directors without museum experience here in the United States is mixed, but there have been successes.  It's possible that a new director with a willingness to listen and to learn could create positive changes.  But without a clear explanation of why the changes were made and without a commitment to a transparent process in every area of museum operations,  I find fear t that the changes will be for the financial benefit of a few, rather than for the benefit of the nation's citizens. New Ukrainian museum directors, please prove me wrong!

A particular thank you to the Ukrainian Center for Museum Development for their work in covering these developments at an extremely challenging time.  Keep up the great work!

Updates: The story of Ukrainian museums continues to develop in complicated and not entirely unsurprising ways.  The Minister of Culture held a press conference earlier this week in which he didn't do much to clarify things, except in several areas.  He said that the collections would not be monetized, would not be used to pay debts or as collateral.  Museum colleagues will, I'm sure, continue to be vigilant about this. Evidently the director of the National Art Museum has not been released and at least two of the directors have done interviews or made efforts to be slightly more transparent.  The new director at Pyrohiv,  Dmitry Zaruba,  has invited journalists to visit the museum and has said that all museum employees will be wearing name tags (small progress, but progress!).   The new director of the Shevchenko Museum, Dmitry Stus,  the son of poet Vasyl Stus, who died in the gulag at Perm-36 (now a museum) gave an interview where he sets out several thoughtful goals for the museum and appears to be listening to staff, even saying, after three days,  he is not ready to decide who is right.

But all that said, it's still unclear about the why for these changes and about how the new directors will be accountable moving forward.  Because of course, problems have existed in these museums for decades, with little or no attention from the Ministry of Culture.