A Conversation on Object-Centered Learning in Art Museums

PY: Marilyn Hood, in the very early 80s, studying audiences in Toledo, found that one thing that differentiated people who went to museums from those who didn't (given identical demographic profiles) was that museum goers thought that learning was a pleasurable experience, and they did go to museums to learn. The ones who chose sporting events and zoos over museums thought of learning as laborious, and not a way to spend leisure. We also found at MOMA that most people listed learning as an important goal when visiting. But that doesn't mean that the notion of learning is not pretty vague. I think the paradox here is that even if they say they want to learn, it is in the rather broad sense of being uplifted and inspired. It is not as if they come to museums to work hard at something. DR: I think one of the things that has shifted the debate about visitor experience in art museums in recent years is the fact that for museum professionals trained in art history, post-modern scholarship rejects the notion of the "masterpiece " that can transform through its electrifying presence. The individual art object, instead of being seen as a pleasing combination of formal elements is treated as "as an element of discourse " within a variety of social, cultural and political contexts. In contemporary critical thinking, the museum can no longer claim to be a neutra