Graverson 1

Collaborating for Radical Change: How Visitor Involvement Bonds Community and Museum

Emilee Graverson HAVC 191 M June 13, 2013 Elisabeth Cameron

Graverson 2 Part I: Why Do People Go To Museums? At the intersection of community and the individual lies the museum. Contemporary museums seek to bridge the differences between an individuals identity and the collective identity of the community. An individual visiting a museums wishes not only to find their place within their community but seeks to learn something about their own individuality that sets them apart. With this in mind, I plan to analyze the museums visitors willingness and openness to share in the museums space and engage with the interactive contents offered by a museum. I strongly believe that the quality and level of participation demonstrates the success of the visit. The more engagement from the visitor, the more satisfied the visitor is with their own personal fulfillment and their discovery of their personal connection to their community. Museums engage visitors in various way; through the implementation of participatory elements, museums are able to gauge the visitors experience in new ways and form a more cohesive critique of their institution through judging the level of interaction and willingness of the visitor to share in the museum space. Specifically I want to use the Santa Cruz Museum at Art and History (MAH) as a case study for these three ways of evaluation. By analyzing visitor interaction and response to a variety of participatory styles, I will show their ability to create positive change within the museum. I believe through analyzing participatory elements used at the MAHs LOVE, Santa Cruz Collects, and Photo ID Exhibits, I can prove that visitors that engage with the content are more likely to be a frequent visitor and these frequent

Graverson 3 visits are more rewarding, and the institution is able to serve the community in a more meaningful way. The Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History (MAH) is a great platform to study for two reasons. For one, the community and institution are so aligned. The community of Santa Cruz is so arts oriented, that people from here have an openness, and an appreciation for community and art coexisting. Secondly, and more importantly, the museum was on the edge of bankruptcy before Nina Simon and her participatory initiative. The MAHs success in the past years is indicative to the improving visitor experience in their museum. These are important facets in understanding the mission of bringing the community into the institution of a museum. A museum should provide for a wide array of people and personalities, and further, make sure any visitor leaves feeling like they spent their time in a worthwhile manner.1 Involving the visitor in the content presented by a museum is only rational given that at participatory museums, like the MAH the visitor is the reason the institution exists. Participation can take many different forms. At a very basic level, participation in a museum can be visiting the museum in the first place. Visitors visit institutions for a variety of reasons, and it is interesting to assess the reasons why people specifically visit museums, in order to better tailor the museum to fit community and individual needs. Spending time in a museum fits under the category of leisure time to most adults, and the way people choose leisure activities says a lot about their personality and individual wants and need. Leisure activities are usually decided upon regarding 1 Rand, Judy. Visitors Bill of Rights. The Museum Journal (44.1) 2000. 158-159.

Graverson 4 these attributes: being with people (social interaction), doing something worthwhile, feeling comfortable in ones environment, having the challenge of new experiences, having an opportunity to learn, and participating actively.2 These attributes are not all important to every demographic, and vary in importance among different groups that visit museums in their leisure time. These leisure time conditions are very specific to each type of visitor to a museum or institution. Marilyn Hood defines visitors into three categories: frequent participants, occasional participants, and non-participants.3 It is important to understand these categories when thinking about participation in an exhibition space. Frequent participants both physically come to the museums space more often, but also participate and interact in a variety of ways within the museum more, and with a higher quality of response. Occasional participants engage and connect less with the exhibition material, so may only visit a museum once, and return sparingly. Non-participants usually do not engage with traditional museum styles, yet still hold important the main attributes of leisure time. Museums, hoping to gain more frequent participants must engage the needs of the non-participant and frequent participant at the same time. Part II: Why Do People Choose To Participate In Museums? Participation can take many forms. Even when specifically applied to a cultural institution such as a museum, participation can be interpreted a variety of different ways, and accomplish different goals of different institutions. When thinking of a 2 Hood, Marylin. Staying Away: Why People Choose Not To Go To Museums. From Reinventing the museum: historical and contemporary perspectives on the paradigm shift. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press, 1983. 2. 3 Hood 3

Graverson 5 participatory project to achieve specific needs of a community, an institution goes in one of 4 directions. Director of the MAH, Nina Simon outlines four levels or areas of participatory projects: contributory projects, collaborative projects, co-creative projects, hosted projects.4 Contributory projects ask viewers to respond to a very narrow or specific prompt, it is rather limited creatively, yet can garner rather precise responses, therefore getting a very good idea of community wants or needs. For example, a comment/ suggestion board. Collaborative projects involve visitors as active partners in the shaping of content in a museum space, for example, getting visitor input on pieces to be included in an exhibition. Co-creative projects use community members as collaborators and use input and ideas from these community members from start to finish. Hosted projects are completed completely in the hands of an outside collaborator. The institution turns over its facilities and resources to present programs developed and implemented by public groups or casual visitors.5 These types of participatory projects create a range of new experiences that fulfill the visitors needs when they spend their leisure time in a museum space. Nina Simon has implemented these types of projects to enhance the MAH, and to completely revolutionize their mission, change their role in the community, and bring real change to the museum world as whole.

4 Simon, Nina. The Participatory Museum. Santa Cruz: Museum 2.0, 2010. These four types of projects adapted from the Public Participation in Scientific Research (PPSR) project. 5 Simon, Chapter 5

Graverson 6 Across the board, any type of participatory element, according to Simon, depends on scaffolding.6 Scaffolding, in a participatory sense, is the rules and boundaries implicitly worked into the design of the project, made to purposefully steer the visitor to a meaningful response. The scaffolding of the project can be the specificity of the prompts, or the design elements to draw the visitor attention a certain way. Basically anything that keeps the responses controlled, yet still allows for visitor creativity. Scaffolding holds up the project, while still allowing for movement and flexibility. Nina Simon claims that the key to a good interactive is not leaving everything up to the visitor. If there are strategic rules, you create a straightforward space to share. What people look for outside of institutions (museums) regarding participation, is usually the same things people seek inside the walls of an institution. People participate to feel included, to compare themselves to others and to add to something they feel is larger than themselves. A simple act of participation is to create or engage with some form of a community, big or small. Participation is slowly being integrated into museums as a way of making the visitor a part of the museums larger mission, and in turn a larger society. Visitor needs often stem from the before mentioned desire to feel a part of a distinct community, usually paired with a desire to do something not usually permitted in a museum space. Museum participation usually banks on the visitor being interested in engaging in something new. That may be: writing on museum walls, adding content to an exhibit, touching or physically interacting with the art, or seeing something new and exciting. 6 Simon, Chapter 1

Graverson 7 In a broader sense, people in general visit museums for certain psychological reasons. But specifically why do visitors interact and pursue participatory elements? John H. Falk discusses this in his book Identity and the Museum Visit Experience. Falk clearly emphasizes the visitor identity, and takes an analytical approach to the identityrelated reasons visitors choose to visit a museum. He outlines a new model for museums and institutions, which will increase visitor satisfaction, claiming he Encourages museums to approach interacting with visitors in more customized and tightly tailored ways to meet the specific needs of individual visitors7 These specific needs usually involve a certain need for social interaction, which corroborates the argument of Hood who listed social interaction among a persons leisure time conditions. Falk claims that these social interactions that take place in the museum are most commonly the memories people take away from the museum visit. These positive interactions serve as a sense of fraternity, community and group identity.8 There are two types of identity brought about by Falk. The identity of the visitor first and foremost, how the visitors own personal convictions and passions lead to them to the museum. The second level is the community identity, which the individual is inevitable is part of. This leads into another important facet of Falks analysis of visitor engagement, the evaluation of how well a museums satisfies the visitors individual (identity-based) needs, as well as a community needs.

7 Falk, John. Identity and the Museum Visitor Experience. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press, 2009. 10.
8

Falk, 32

Graverson 8 The way Falk argues museums can attract new visitors, is to change often and keep the interest. Falk states, Neither the visitor nor the museum and its exhibitions are immutable and fixed; each are fluid and changing--the same individual can engage with the same exhibits and content in fundamentally different ways depending on their current identity related visit motivations. 9 This is important when a museum is considering and evaluating its frequent participants, occasional participants and nonparticipant. As mentioned earlier, frequent participants generally engage and participate in the content because they have previous knowledge of a passion for the content of an exhibition or participatory project. Falks stance on participants is that their identitybased motivations for visiting a museum can changetherefore visitors can fluidly move through the participant groups based on certain facets of their identity or personality changing. Frequent visitors dont want to see the same exhibitions every time they come, so the museum must engage them in other ways. On the other hand, non-participants do not respond to the same excitements that the frequent participants do. Museums have the opportunity to please any visitor demographic with the right adaptation of content and participation. Therefore making content directly aimed at visitors is a sure fire way to draw in those participants from all categories become frequent participants. The MAH has done this is several ways. Part III: Why Museums (Should) Care About Visitor Participation Do all museums care about participation? The short answer is no. Why is this? And are there distinctive characteristics that define whether a museum wants to involve 9 Falk, 36

Graverson 9 participation? Nina Simon outlines why specific museums have trouble integrating participatory elements in a short article featured in her blog, Museum 2.0. She claims that objectively, art museums (over history, childrens, and science museums) have the most trouble integrating participatory style projects into their exhibits.10 This is, in part due to the traditional nature of a lot of art museums and because there usually a separation between the education department and curatorial department. Traditional style museums usually focus more on their content as an authoritative set of facts and knowledge for the visitors consumption. However, with this mindset, the visitors own opinions and needs do not always get satisfied. The benefit of participatory elements has been discussed thoroughly in terms of the visitor. However, it is also extremely important to the museums or institution, and its own identity and place within the community. The MAH has clearly defined itself identity as a participatory museum. Its even in the mission statement. What made the MAHs structure so conducive to the notion of participation? Nina Simon openly studied and researched participation before she started working at MAH, proving that she chose to come to the MAH for specific reasons. One reason could be that small museums usually blend participation into their exhibits more fluidly. Simon stated, I think small museums win out on this one ultimately, they are less focused on authoritative image than large museums and more

10 Simon, Nina. Visitor Participation: Opportunities and Challenges. Exhibitionist. 29 (2010). 1.

Graverson 10 likely to enthusiastically embrace community involvement.11 This speaks at large to the role of a museum in a community. Participatory museums on average act more as community gathering spaces, engaging in social and community issues, while promoting local art and history. Larger museum, as Simon put it, focus on an overall authoritative image that at times means having little flexibility in exhibit design, and not emphasizing a dialogue between museum and visitor. So why should museums care about their community? The topic is widely discussed in museum discourse, and likely has no clear answer. But a good one to think about is engaging with the idea of social capital. Social capital is basically connections and networks of social groups that build up and reinforce a sense of union in a community. Stacey Marie Garcia, Community Programs Director at the MAH says, Social capital has two main forms; it should gradually and increasingly encompass both distinct forms of bonding and bridging to create healthier, wiser, more connected, economically and socially sustainable communities.12 Bonding and bridging social capital affect people in different ways. Bonding social capital brings people together based on interest in a similar topic, whereas bridging social capital refers to a linking of diverse networks to create new relationships. The MAH utilizes its participatory techniques to build this social capital and improve the Santa Cruzs interconnectivity.

11 Simon, Nina. Visitor Participation: Opportunities and Challenges. Exhibitionist. 29 (2010). 2. 12 Garcia, Stacey Marie. Community and Civic Engagement in Museum Programs. Museum 2.0. (2012).

Graverson 11 Part IV: The MAH, a Case Study for Radical Participation The participatory strategies implemented at MAH brought the institution from the brink of bankruptcy. A positive change was made in the museum, which translated to a positive effect in the community. The Nina Simon and the MAH use her project based view on participation mentioned earlier. Implementing a range of participation sure to engage different kinds of visitors. I will discuss projects ranging from contributory, collaborative , co-creative to hosted projects, and how these participatory practices foster a positive visitor experience. Now I will discuss several interactives ranging many exhibitions that use the strategies and theories discussed in this essay so far. All You Need Is Love was an exhibition on display from March 31July 29, 2012.13 One interactive What is the Craziest Thing Youve Done For Love? This project asked the visitor to simply answer this question, free of constraints with a sharpie, on the wall of the MAHs Lezin Gallery. This project had very little scaffolding. The scaffolding must be changed based on community and individual needs. The MAHs design allowed for visitors to share stories and have a dialogue about what love means to them, directly onto the wall of the museum. This type of project, I believe would fall into the co-creative project, outlined earlier. Responses included , Bought a plane ticket to Hawaiithen Spain. Love is insanity. Another visitor commented beautiful and adding a heart. This type of interactive not only builds a community around a common topic of love, but bring the community together in an open way. This type of participation is also referred to as a discussion exhibit, and is really opening up 13 Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History. http://www.santacruzmah.org/pastexhibitions/. June 4, 2013.

Graverson 12 dialogues in many museums. Referenced in Gammons article, he claims that these types of question-answer prompts function best when the question is regarding topics that are emotional and controversial, sparking both dialogue and engagement.14 People seek from participation both anonymity (at times) and also a community, which is a hard balance to make. With this part of the exhibit, the MAH bridged these two, allowing visitors to remain anonymous while still actively involving themselves in a local culture, discussing a common topic. What I think was successful was the prompt garnered meaningful discussion regarding a confusing and generally debated topic, love. The museum space became an area for dialogue and a community meeting point, really mirroring the MAHs mission of becoming a community gathering place. The MAH furthered their participatory involvement in the community with their Santa Cruz Collects exhibition, on display from August 11 to November 25, 2012. This exhibit I would also be a co-creative project because the content of the exhibit, all collections of different objects were taken from proposals from community members. The MAH put a call out to collectors of objects, and chose a wide range of people to show their collections. Knowing that Santa Cruz is a tight knit community, the MAH built off the community need for involvement, participation and interest. Santa Cruz is all about promoting local artists, businesses and crops. An exhibition that featured local people and their special collections was directly in relation to the interests of the community. Building upon this, the interactive elements, including the Memory Jar 14 Gammon, Ben, and Xerxes Mazda. "Power of the Pencil: Renegotiating the MuseumVisitor Relationship through Discussion Exhibits at the Science Museum, London." Exhibitionist 28.8 (2009): Exhibitionist.com.

Graverson 13 station provided a space for open sharing in the gallery space, therefore reinforcing the MAHs mission to become a community gathering and sharing place. The responses gathered in the Memory Jar project were very profound and transformative. The goal of this project was to get visitors to bottle up a memory from their past, and write a label describing it. Then, the memory would be placed on a row of shelves along with other visitors memories. The concept behind creating a communal memory bank for visitors deeply instills a sense of community that the MAH is nurturing. It is clear through visitor responses that the level of content is both personal, and meaningful, showing that the MAH is a space they are willing and eager to share with. For example one labeled Marks memory jar stated: I remember when you were alive, before Iraq and open pit burns which gave you cancer. I remember when we learned that you died in Iraq in our arms at home. I miss you, I miss you.15 A poignant expression, to be sure; one among many that were left to create Santa Cruzs collective memory, and to symbolize togetherness and community. The visitors willingness to share intimate thoughts like this, give the MAH reassurance that their exhibit and projects foster a both creative and safe space to share. Though a collective identity of Santa Cruz is engaged in many ways at the MAH, participation importantly must always relate back to visitors personal identity. This tactic ties into Falks arguments regarding the identity-related motivations of every visitor. The Photo ID Exhibit showing from March to June 2013 featured an interactive element asking two questions for the visitors to fill in on a note card. One stated You see me 15 Garcia, Stacey Marie. Memory Jar. 2012. Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History, Santa Cruz. Flickr.com. June 10, 2013. Photograph.

Graverson 14 as one stated I see me as with spaces to fill in the blanks. Responses ranged from very literal descriptions of looks, to deeper discussions of societys perceptions of beauty. One visitor response said You see me as quiet, indifferent, shy, awkward. I see me as crazy in love with everything! (Figure 6) The act of hanging these ID Cards up among other visitor responses engages visitors to read and learn about other peoples thoughts on the subject of identity. This created dialogue between visitors, then reinforced through the context of the exhibit, which heavily focused on identity through the lens of photography. The interactive elements such as this further the museum as a social place.16 Through Exhibitions, the MAH has been very successful in engaging the visitor in the content, and even allowing the visitor to generate content. Visitor generated content is important to the MAH and gives an institution an idea of who comes to their galleries, how it affects them, and what if anything needs to be changed. In addition the MAH utilizes Special Programs to also engage the community in a participatory way, and to give a new context to the museum space. 3rd Friday festivals center on a theme, and bring in community members as collaborators to interact with visitors and share their skills and passions. These community festivals always involve crafts and activities that tie into the overarching theme, lead by interns or community members. Here, participation is not completely linked to content being portrayed in the museums exhibitions, but rather, participation is focused around fostering community within the museum space. I would 16 Simon, Nina. The Participatory Museum. Santa Cruz: Museum 2.0, 2010. Chapter 1.

Graverson 15 categorize this a collaborative participatory project, because people from outside the museum are collaborating with those inside the museum, all in order to benefit the visitor. In short, these festivals are designed to bond and bridge visitors through creative activities that form participatory dialogical spaces where knowledge is enhanced, widened and deepened through meaningful opportunities for visitors to converse, discuss and collaborate with each other. Participation is not strictly something that takes place in a gallery, it can be adapted to every aspect of the museum, even evaluation. Evaluation is the simple act of critically assessing aspects of a museum and changing them to improve the museum as a whole. These 3rd Friday events always feature a photo booth that takes pictures of visitors. There are chalkboards in the photo booth featuring the prompts At MAH I learned, At MAH I Liked or At MAH I made visitor responses are photographed as a feedback technique. They are reviewed and posted on social media sites such as Facebook and Flickr for visitors to access after the event. This type of project has two important attributes that affect visitor experience. As a feedback tool, the MAH staff can see which activities were most popular. This way, future events can mirror the public interest. Secondly, the visitor has a take-away from the event, a photograph commemorating their time at said event. Kathleen McLean, explains that this tactic reminds the visitor of their visit, and encourages them to return at another time.17 Building on this, the entirety of the festival offers itself to take aways for the 17 McLean, Kathleen. Planning for people in museum exhibitions. Washington, DC: Association of Science-Technology Centers, 1993.

Graverson 16 visitor. Crafts, art activities, demonstrations, all allow visitors to keep the project they have made, reconnecting them to the museums after they have left. This bonding method is a tactic to create a relationship with a visitor, and offer experiences that are different every time they return. In addition to the photo booths(See Figures 3 ,4, 5) the MAH has an interactive feedback station that asks the visitor to draw or write their feedback, then post it on the wall right there in the Atrium. Communication between visitor and museum is often disregarded or underappreciated, and at the MAH these small notes make a big impact. Director, Nina Simon spoke about an amazing story regarding this feedback method. One visitor and her teenage daughter wrote on a feedback note that they were interested in featuring a womens film festival at the MAH. They left contact information, which was passed along to MAH staff members, and landed in the Programs Department. A few months later, LunaFest happened. The film festival featured local food and bakery goods, and was volunteered at by a group of young ladies that now are returning to the MAH for the new Teen Leadership Program.18 Hosted events such as this one are another participatory project mode proposed by Simon. Allowing the MAHs space to be utilized by a community collaborator allows for the bridging and bonding of social capital among social groups in Santa Cruz. (Figure 7) The MAHs implementation of participatory projects has given context to the great community change undergone in Santa Cruz. The MAH has build social capital, connecting Santa Cruz networks, groups and sub-communities. The MAH fosters
18

Simon, Nina. Personal interview. April 2013.

Graverson 17 connections that both bridge and bond groups through community events, collaborations and exhibitions. All kinds of visitors matter. Frequent, occasional and non-participants have, in some manner found their way to the MAH. In conclusion, this paper has been building up to conclude that visitors want to feel like their visit was meaningful. If a visitor deems their visit meaningful, fulfilling or fun, it is likely that their leisure time has been fulfilled. Identity is important to people. Visitors want to learn something new about themselves. If visitors have a chance to show or discover a new part of themselves, it is usually a fulfilling experience. If the content of the exhibition can connect to the self, then it connects the self to the community, and that is a positive experience for many people. The MAH has seen a radical shift in its trajectory since participatory ideas and practices have been involved in the exhibits and programs. I directly correlate this fiscal success to the positive experiences visitors are sharing and generating in the museum. A strong connection can be made between the community and self. As much as an individual tries to distinguish oneself from the group, humans naturally fall in line with people whom share similar interests and follow similar social norms. Communities develop from this, and develop collective identities that is reflect in the institutions they support. Santa Cruz has rallied around the MAH, and participation has been widely embraced. The MAH demonstrates participation as a method for building community and making radical change towards becoming a thriving community gathering place. Word Count: 4,284

Graverson 18 Figure citations:

Figure 1: Garcia, Stacey Marie. Beautiful Indeed. 2012. Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History, Santa Cruz. Flickr.com. June 3, 2013

Figure 2: Garcia, Stacey Marie. Memory Jars. 2012. Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History, Santa Cruz. Flickr.com. June 10, 2013

Graverson 19

Figures 3, 4, 5:

McGowen, Sean. Third Friday. 2013. Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History, Santa Cruz. Flickr.com. June 12, 2013.

Figure 6: (left) Graverson, Emilee. Photo ID Exhibit. 2013. June 4, 2013. Figure 7: (right) Simon, Nina. Feedback Card. 2012. Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History, Santa Cruz. Flickr.com. June 12, 2013