Never Waste a Crisis: Restoring Credibility at the National Museum of Australia after the 'History Wars', 2003-2013

Abstract

Since the early 1990s, a large body of literature has studied high profile controversies in museums. These scholars have called on museums not to hide from controversy, but rather view controversy as a productive aspect of contemporary museology. Their case is founded on transforming the role of museums - by discarding their associations with tradition and, instead, taking a stand on politically contentious subject matter. But in reality, museums face many social and political pressures that prevent them from fully rallying behind this call. Moreover, to date scholars have overlooked investigating if there are legitimate reasons behind this trend of reluctance or cautiousness. This study aims to fill this analytical gap by asking why museums struggle to take a stand on politically contentious subject matter following a controversy.

In its attempt to do so this thesis narrows its analysis to a case study of the National Museum of Australia (NMA). It provides a window into a previously unexamined area - how NMA staff dealt with politically contentious subject matter during its ten-year (2003-2013) refurbishment project and cultural policy debates, after its involvement in the Australian version of the history wars. Analysis of public and grey material, interviews, media clips, and final gallery exhibits illuminates the strategies deployed by NMA staff during: the refurbishment of a gallery exploring transnational history ('Australian Journeys: Australia's Connections with the World'), a gallery presenting a general history of Australia since 1788 ('Landmarks: People and Places Across Australia/), and two unique opportunities to debate cultural policy with federal politicians (Senate Estimates hearings on the efficiency dividend and consultations on 'Creative Australia: National Cultural Policy, 2013-2023'). The analysis is located within interdisciplinary work - including sociology, organisational theory, museum studies, cultural politics, and Australian history - that critiques organisational crises and change.

I argue that the ability of museum managers and curators to earn credibility and trust was problematic and complex during the refurbishment project and the cultural policy opportunities. Following its earlier controversy, NMA staff were faced with addressing a complex tension - between professional, scholarly, and social responsibility considerations and garnering credibility with powerful stakeholders. NMA staff tailored their strategies across two phases, which had a largely constraining impact on curatorial and interpretative practices. Out of necessity I contend that NMA staff prioritised rebuilding trust and belief, or what I call credibility in my study. During the first phase (2003-2009), staff made compromises in order to restore trust with stakeholders with opposing political agendas. During the second phase (2006-2013), which overlaps with the phase, the NMA struggled to garner credibility with socially liberal stakeholders who acted with ambivalence towards the refurbishments and during cultural policy debates.

The study's findings illustrate that the NMA took a more conservative approach than that advocated by much existing scholarly work. It asserts that restoring credibility is a genuine consideration for museums following a controversy. While museums may have to make compromises, the study finds that crises are never wasted effort. This study is not suggesting major museums in Australia avoid provoking controversy with powerful stakeholders. Rather, it acknowledges the worthwhile but considerable task ahead for museums recovering from crises and pursuing reforms that magnify divisive views within Australian society. Show more