Maria-Xeni Garezou

Αν τα εκθέματα είναι οι «πρωταγωνιστές» μιας έκθεσης, η κειμενική πληροφορία είναι η «φωνή» της, καθώς αποτελεί πολύτιμο εργαλείο ερμηνείας και επικοινωνίας με το κοινό. Ζητήματα όπως το κεντρικό μήνυμα, το περιεχόμενο, το ύφος, ο σχεδιασμός και η χωροθέτηση των κειμένων, αναδεικνύονται σε σημαντικούς παράγοντες που συνδιαμορφώνουν οργανικά το εκθεσιακό αποτέλεσμα και την εμπειρία της επίσκεψης.
Η μέχρι σήμερα εμπειρία, όμως, έχει δείξει ότι δεν δίνεται πάντοτε η πρέπουσα σημασία στον χειρισμό του μουσειακού λόγου, ο οποίος μπορεί είτε να «απογειώσει» μια έκθεση είτε, αντιθέτως, να την «προσγειώσει» επικίνδυνα.
Στόχος της ανακοίνωσης είναι η χαρτογράφηση του γραπτού λόγου σε κείμενα υπομνηματισμού μουσειακών εκθέσεων, όπως αυτός προκύπτει από μια κριτική προσέγγιση των μουσειολογικών και μουσειογραφικών μελετών που αφορούν παρεμβάσεις σε αντίστοιχα μουσεία της επικράτειας, οι οποίες σχεδιάστηκαν, ή και υλοποιήθηκαν, στο πλαίσιο του ΕΣΠΑ κατά την τελευταία εξαετία.

After a long period of expansion, Greek archaeological museums find themselves at a crossroads. From 1994 to 2015, the Hellenic Ministry of Culture has successively designed and implemented three major Heritage and Museums Programmes that aim to upgrade the conservation, restoration, interpretation, and display of the country’s vast cultural heritage, and improve access to it.1 Until then, most of the archaeological museums were housed in old and inappropriate buildings, without the necessary infrastructure for the storage and maintenance of the collections, while their display was in many cases archaic. Last but not least, they had very limited facilities and services. The modernisation of museums was imperative to ensure an adequate protection of cultural heritage. It came alongside social changes. Heritage and museum institutions were expected to change with the rise of ‘experience economy’ and the ensuing trend that swept the museum landscape worldwide, calling for a new role for museums.
The consequences of these programmes, which formed part of a wider structural reform co-funded by the EU within the Regional Development, Cohesion, Employment, and Environment policies framework, have been impressive, in that they completely altered the Greek museum world, and had an overall impact on the Greek economy. The number of archaeological museums has almost doubled, state-of-the art museum buildings and infrastructure have been created, and museum exhibitions have been refurbished across the country. It would be no exaggeration to say that, at the peak of the economic crisis, which spawned in 2009, Greek archaeological museums found a new impetus. Is this a paradox? As we will attempt to explain, the specific context of Greek archaeological museums will shed light on the dynamics of the situation.
All this may have serious consequences, should the vision of the archaeological museums and museum-related policies remain unchanged and fail to meet the challenges raised by the limitation of resources, the rising income and social inequalities, and the transformations in the social structure. Thus far, museum policies have failed to adapt to new conditions or provide for future developments on the local, but also on the global scale despite fundamental advances and an overall positive review. The time has come for a critical discussion of the present situation in order to re-evaluate museum policies so as to build on the achievements and ensure continuity on the one hand while adapting to change on the other. What might the mission of Greek archaeological museums be today? What are the key changes required to strengthen the capacity of museums and make them more flexible and resilient?
Without overlooking the importance of other parameters, such as environmental sustainability issues and the digital shift, we will focus our discussion on three crucial aspects: i) an outdated, rigid and over-centralised administrative system, which leaves no room for innovative approaches; ii) the effects of the ongoing economic crisis, which has dramatically raised the question of the financial and economic sustainability of Greek archaeological museums; and iii) the deficit in inclusion and outreach policies, which distances archaeological museums from society and raises the debate on their social sustainability.