General Conclusions - John F. Kennedy Universities Libraries

ON MODELING CIVIC ENGAGEMENT:
CASE STUDIES OF CULTURALLY SPECIFIC MUSEUMS AND
LATINO CONSTITUENCIES
by
Virginia Diaz
September 26, 2005
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Arts
in
Museum Studies
in the
School of Education and Liberal Arts
at
John F. Kennedy University
Approved:
Department Chair
Date
Adjunct Professor
Date
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
INTRODUCTION
1
Overview
Statement of Purpose
Research Questions and Project Objectives
Methodology and Limitations
Product Description
II.
BACKGROUND
33
History and Development of Culturally Specific Museums
Diversity and Civic Engagement in American Museums
Latino Identities in the U.S.
III.
1
14
19
20
29
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum: an Overview
The Japanese American National Museum: an Overview
Public Program Focus: Homofrecuencia
Public Program Focus: The Boyle Heights Project
General Conclusions
34
52
62
73
73
79
84
94
109
IV.
RECOMMENDATIONS
120
V.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
125
VI.
APPENDICES
134
A. About the Museums
B. Interview Questions
C. Illustrations
134
136
139
VII. PRODUCT
145
Latino Participation: Engaging New Constituencies in
Museums (a proposed session for the 2006 Annual
Meeting of the American Association of Museums)
ii
Dedicado a mi abuela Socorro D. Lopez y a mi padre Bernabe C. Diaz que
con su valor, fuerza y diligencia nos han traido a este paíz y continuan
apoyandome con su guianza;
for my mom Esther S. Diaz who taught me to honor my curiosity
and instilled in me a respect for knowledge;
and for Auriah Macrina Hernandez Diaz who is a joy
and whose pure honesty inspires me.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I owe gratitude to many people who helped me complete this project and
graduate program.
Dr. William MacGregor, who served as project coordinator for a large
part of the process challenged me to think critically, reintroduced me to
important thinkers, and most importantly validated my need and desire to present
this particular project to the field. Marjorie Schwarzer provided crucial feedback,
direction, and support that helped shape the project; I admire her lucidity and
ability to see the big picture. Margaret Kadoyama and Kristen Stangl, carefully
read drafts, gave thoughtful comments, asked probing questions, and helped
bring clarity to my writing. Dr. Susan Spero and other Museum Studies faculty
provided expertise and encouragement including Kathleen Brown who shared
resources and information about first-voice institutions. Dr. Timothy Fong at
CSUS was very gracious with his time and comments. John Taylor, Colette
Walker, Molly Matchett, Michael Gardner, Thereza Cheng, and other staff at
JFKU were enormously helpful. The product of this project is a result of
collaboration with Cecilia Garibay, Clement Hanami, Margaret Kadoyama, and
Dr. Tey Marianna Nunn, and benefited from the support of Carolee Smith
Rogers. Dr. Sylvia Gorla gave me incisive advice early on about how to approach
this undertaking, which has been especially effective. Paulette Hennum, my
supervisor at the California Indian Heritage Center was exceptionally
understanding, warm, and supportive.
This project would not have been possible without the assistance of the
very generous people who talked with me about their work and shared
information about the museums they work at: Randy Adamsick, Juana Guzman,
Carlos Tortolero, and Nancy Villafranca at the Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum; Tania Unzueta and Jorge Valdivia at Radio Arte; Emily Anderson,
Clement Hanami, Sojin Kim, and Allyson Nakamoto at the Japanese American
National Museum (JANM); Ruben “Funkhuatl” Guevara who has been involved
in projects at the JANM; and Sandra D. Jackson at the Studio Museum in
Harlem.
Finally, I am indebted to all my loved ones who fed me, gave me shelter,
were incredibly patient with me, and nudged me toward completion. I am
particularly grateful to my mom, papa, grandma, and brothers Luis Bernabe and
Daniel. Many thanks to all my other family, especially the Monarques in Elk
Grove; Lola de la Riva and Dr. Osa Bear Hidalgo de la Riva in Hayward; and the
Peñuelas in Concord. Joanna Peñuela beared with me, encouraged me to take
breaks, and sustained me and for that I thank her from the bottom of my heart.
Finally, I need to express appreciation to all my colleagues, friends, and family
that periodically asked about my progress, endured conversations about museums
and cultural politics, and kept me going in many ways.
iv
INTRODUCTION
“Darling, I think it’s time we get out of this
neighborhood,” mom said. She explained that it was
no place for me to grow up. It was dangerous, and
there was no place for me to play.1
This excerpt from the book that accompanies Marisol Luna, American
Girl’s 2005 doll of the year, upset of some residents of Pilsen, Marisol
Luna’s former Chicago neighborhood. Community leaders asked for a
formal apology from American Girl and Mattel, its parent company. Pilsen
is one of the oldest Mexican neighborhoods in the Midwestern United
States and is also home to the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum, one of
the country’s largest culturally specific museums2 and the only Latino3
museum accredited by the American Association of Museums. The doll’s
book explains that Marisol Luna’s family fled to Des Plaines, a suburb of
Chicago, due to the personal risk of living in Pilsen. Angered at the
vilification of the neighborhood by a children’s toy company, public
1
Excerpt read on National Public Radio’s Morning Edition, February 22, 2005.
Though the term “culturally specific museums” refers to organizations with a broader
focus on cultural identity, for the purpose of this project, I limit my definition of to those
that focus on American ethnic groups. Hence, I use “culturally specific museums” and
“ethnic museums” interchangeably. Two examples of institutions that are culturally
specific, but do not refer to an ethnic group are the Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender
Historical Society in San Francisco and the Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C.
3
I use the term “Latino” to refer to the heterogeneous population from Latin American
and the (Spanish-speaking) Caribbean. The term encompasses groups that have been
officially referred to as “Hispanic” by the U.S. government. The word “Hispanic” is
directly linked to Spain, thereby denying the Indigenous and African heritage of many
Latinos. I infrequently use Hispanic in reference to census data.
2
officials responded hastily. Jointing them were Juana Guzman, Carlos
Tortolero, Nancy Villa Franca, and others who work at the Mexican Fine
Arts Center Museum. In addressing the offensive representation, the
museum’s administrators noted that American Girl had missed an
opportunity to provide a more realistic understanding of a young Latina’s
experience of growing up in an urban neighborhood.4 Instead, the
company and Gary Soto, the book’s author, imply that Pilsen is a
neighborhood to be feared and one which inhibits the success of youth
who grow up there.5 Marisol Luna is only able to feel safe and continue
her ballet instruction when her family moves to a Chicago suburb. Mattel
and American Girl refused to apologize or change the book and have not
accepted any invitations to visit the community. The companies helped to
perpetuate for a new generation of middle-class children, that urban
neighborhoods have nothing to offer other than fear. As is evident in the
Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum’s staff speaking out against the
representation of their Pilsen neighborhood, culturally specific museums
work to be advocates for communities.
4
Amanda Paulson, “Doll tells a tale of demographic shifts; a fictionalized character
leaves her Hispanic neighborhood for the Chicago suburbs,” The Christian Science
Monitor, 14 February 2005, p. 1 and Carlos Tortolero, interview by author, 19 April,
2005, via phone.
5
Yolanda Perdomo, “Marisol in the Middle: A new doll is causing controversy in
Chicago’s Mexican community,” Hispanic, April 2005, 12.
2
In 2004, the director of the Mexican Fine Art Center Museum
described it as an institution that is, “based on advocacy for the
community and demanding respect for our cultural heritage.”6 While many
museum directors historically have advocated for their personal and
political beliefs, it is particularly critical for neighborhood-based and
ethnic specific museums to do so because their constituents seek their
leadership on community-related issues.7 Culturally specific museums, as
Wing Luke Asian Museum Director Ron Chew describes, have long
advocated and defended the honor of the communities of which they are a
part. Yet clearly, as the Mattel story illustrates, much progress is still
needed to more accurately portray the lived experiences of Latinos and
other American ethnic groups.
Culturally specific museums make explicit the distinct history and
experiences of “others,” which too often get masked in the discourse of
multiculturalism.8 In creating these museums, founders frequently sought
6
Ron Chew, “Taking Action! Advocates? Or Curators of Advocacy?,” Museum News 83,
no. 2 (March/April 2004): 40.
7
Ibid., 42-43. Quoting Marjorie Schwarzer and Juanita Moore.
8
I would like to problemitize simplistic uses of the word “multicultural,” and hence
multicultural practices, which void the concept of its original intent. Having emerged
from the liberatory struggles for self-empowerment of disenfranchised populations,
multiculturalism, as Darrell Moore has pointed out, raises more questions than it answers
because its “theoretical and material meaning… is continually negotiated and contested.”
Stanley Fish, asserts that there are at least two kinds of multiculturalists. He notes, “The
boutique multiculturalist resists the force of culture he appreciates at precisely the point
at which it matters most to its strongly committed members.” Darrel Moore, “White Men
Can’t Program: The Contradictions of Multiculturalism,” in Art, Activism, and
3
to present stories oppositional to those such as American Girl’s and others
commonly found in mainstream media. Culturally specific museums give
Americans an opportunity to create their own narratives about who they
are and the many contributions they have made to U.S. culture and history.
For example, through exhibitions, public programs and publications, the
Makah Cultural Resource Center in Neah Bay, Washington has been able
to counter negative representations of its tribal traditions in the local
media, with more accurate and complicated depictions of the community’s
customs.9 One of the challenges for culturally specific museums, however,
is advocating for a community without reducing specific identities,
complex histories, and multiple needs in the way multicultural education
frequently does.10 This master’s project seeks to critically examine how
these important cultural institutions define who they are for and how they
involve various sectors of communities.
Museums that fit into this genre include New York’s Chinatown
History Museum, and Arizona’s Ak-Chin Him Dak. They aim to collect,
Oppositionality: Essays from Afterimage, ed. Grant H. Kester (Durham and London:
Duke University Press, 1998), 51 and Stanley Fish, “Boutique Multiculturalism, or Why
Liberals Are Incapable of Thinking about Hate Speech,” Critical Inquiry 23 (Winter
1997): 379.
9
Patricia Pierce Erikson, “A-whaling We Will Go: Encounters of Knowledge and
Memory at the Makah Cultural and Resource Center,” Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 4
(November 1999): 562.
10
For instance, the adoption of a pan-Latino/Latin American focus at El Museo del
Barrio, a museum that had been developed specifically by and for New York-Puerto
Ricans, which I discuss at length in the Background section to this project.
4
preserve and present the histories and cultures of “other” Americans not
included in “mainstream” museums including Jewish, African American,
American Indian tribal groups, Puerto Rican, Chinese, or queer/Lesbian,
Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender people.11 While some culturally specific
museums were founded in the late 1800’s, most emerged in the wake of
the civil rights struggles of the 1960s.12 Today, new ethnic and culturally
specific museums continue to be developed across the county. In 2005, the
National Underground Railroad Freedom Center opened in Cincinnati,
Ohio, as did the National Museum of the American Indian in Washington
D.C., and this past May the Arab American National Museum opened its
doors to visitors in Dearborn, Michigan. These new museums signal the
continued demand for institutions that tell the stories and manage cultural
resources of all Americans.
As illustrated in the Mexican Fine Art Center Museum’s response
to the negative depiction of their neighborhood, ethnic museums have an
intense connection with their communities. For example, El Museo del
Barrio, in New York’s East Harlem neighborhood, was founded in 1969
11
Though the queer/LGBT community is not an ethnic group, it provides an example of
another marginalized group that is asserting and historicizing itself through its own
institutions.
12
Fath Davis Ruffins, “Mythos Memory, and History: African American Preservation
Efforts, 1820-1990,” in Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public Culture, ed.
Ivan Karp, Christine Mullen Kreamer, and Steven D. Lavine (Washington and London:
Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992), 557.
5
by Puerto Rican educators, artists and community activists in the context
of local struggles for civil rights. During this era, groups – such as the
Young Lords (U.S. based Puerto Rican activists) – advocated cultural
pride, and self-representation became a privileged means of community
self-determination. El Museo del Barrio and other early culturally specific
museums focused mostly on community visibility, hence education and
exhibitions were privileged over building a collection.13 Similar
motivations created ethnic museums across the country – a distinct genre
of museums committed to educating and empowering people
disenfranchised from dominant museums.
El Museo del Barrio also provides an example of how ethnic
museums respond to changing cultural/identity politics. In the 1990s, the
collection and exhibition goals of El Museo broadened to include Latin
American art. Museum leaders responded to economic, cultural, and
institutional pressures by altering the museum’s mission.14 The change in
direction at El Museo del Barrio was rationalized as a response to the
changing demographics amongst Latinos in New York and as an attempt
to increase the exposure of Puerto Rican artists by encasing them within
13
María-José Moreno, “Art Museums and Socioeconomic Forces: The Case of a
Community Museum,” Review of Radical Political Economics 36, no. 4 (2004): 513.
14
Ibid., 507.
6
the context of Latin American art.15 Ironically, stakeholders – who were
concerned over the loss of a community institution and felt their distinct
Puerto Rican identity threatened – did not receive the transformation in the
organization’s focus enthusiastically.
Such shifts provide clear examples of Patricia Pierce Erikson’s
concept of “museum subjectivity” which understands an institution’s
identity to be “neither innate nor independent of its contexts.”16 El Museo
del Barrio is not only a product of the Puerto Rican artist Ralph Montañez
Ortiz and others who founded the institution as part of the 1960s civil
rights struggles, but also responds to contemporary concerns. Culturally
specific museums thus continue to be public sites in which complex
identities are negotiated and contested. A museum’s subjectivity may be
further complicated by specific localized experiences (such as in the case
of El Museo del Barrio responding to changing Latino demographics in
New York) or, in global economics (such as the growing market for Latin
American art).17
My interest in culturally specific museums partially emerged from
my fascination with El Museo’s evolution and process in redefining what
15
Arlene Davila, “Latinizing Culture: Art, Museums, and the Politics of Multicultural
Encompassment,” Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 2 (May 1999): 189.
16
Patricia Pierce Erikson, “A-whaling We Will Go: Encounters of Knowledge and
Memory at the Makah Cultural and Resource Center,” Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 4
(November 1999): 563.
17
Davila, 183.
7
it is and whom for.18 I was curious about the recent history of El Museo
because it countered my own (perhaps romantic or naive) notions about
the connection between culturally specific museums and communities.
The story was, for me, an entry point to developing this research project,
which is primarily an investigation of culturally specific museums today
and their efforts to engage the participation of U.S. Latinos in their public
programs.
I concentrate my inquiries on the question of Latino participation
at culturally specific museums for two reasons. Partly this choice was due
to demographic changes in the U.S. and the affect these emerging
populations will have on American communities of all sizes across the
nation. As I learned at a 2005 California Association of Museums
Regional Workshop titled “Building a Diverse Audience for your
Museum,” many museums in Northern California – of varying types and
located in very different communities – are concerned about Latino
engagement.19
The emerging recognition of the Latino population amongst
museum professionals, however is not the only reason I chose to look at
18
I discuss the transformation of El Museo del Barrio more fully in the Background
section.
19
A good number of the workshop participants were specifically interested in learning
strategies for reaching out to Latinos in their communities. The workshop, which was
coordinated by Laura Esparza, was held April 25, 2005 at the Children’s Discovery
Museum in San Jose.
8
this demographic group. Latinos are an incredibly heterogeneous group
and thus lend themselves well to a study in community engagement. The
umbrella term Latino may refer to people who speak Spanish, or not; who
“look” Latino, or not; who have immigrated from rural or urban
communities in any of the varying countries in South or Central America,
from the Dominican Republic, Cuba, or Mexico. The term also refers to
those who have been in the U.S. for generations – even before it was the
United States, or who migrated from Puerto Rico, which was a colony of
the United States. I strategically examine Latino participation at culturally
specific museums because the classification refutes easy definition and it
exposes the need for museum workers to be specific as to which Latino
community they refer to – or whether that community even identifies itself
as “Latino” at all.
Since historically, culturally specific museums have had close ties
with their communities, museum leaders acknowledge the opportunity to
learn from culturally specific museums, which have “set the standard by
establishing deep and meaningful civic involvement as their founding
principle.”20 This project then seeks to go beyond a discussion of the
politics of including communities historically marginalized from museums
20
Ellen Hirzy, “Mastering Civic Engagement: A Report from the American Association
of Museums,” in Mastering Civic Engagement: A Challenge to Museums, American
Association of Museums (Washington, D.C.: American Association of Museums, 2002):
10.
9
and other public institutions. Rather, it investigates ethnic museums as
socially responsible institutions that can provide the broader museum field
with a different perspective on civic engagement.
I investigated two museums: the Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum in Chicago and the Japanese American National Museum in Los
Angeles. Although they are located in the top two metropolitan areas in
which Mexicans and Mexican Americans make their homes in the United
States, the lessons learned in researching these museums could apply to
many American communities.21 Certainly each place, each community,
and each museum has its own history and culture that require a unique
methodology for doing “multicultural” work, but all museums will benefit
from learning about how these institutions remain relevant in their
complicated urban terrain where cultures converge and yet remain distinct
in their resistance to homogenization.
One of the questions this project addresses is how these cultural
organizations – which started out to create a place for the exhibition of a
particular ethnic group’s history and culture – adapt as those marginalized
subjects further define and articulate their complicated and changing
21
David Mendell, “Changing Faces and Places,” Planning 68, no. 1 (2002): 4. As
Mendell points out, only Los Angeles now has more Mexicans than Chicago which at
one time ranked third after San Antonio and Houston. This statistic is quite coincidental.
Though I sought to look more broadly at Latino participation in the MFACM and the
JANM, in conducting the research this project I found that both museums specifically
sought specifically to engage Mexican/Mexican American/Chicano communities.
10
social locations. Institutional shifts such as the one at El Museo del Barrio
are interesting because they show the increasing awareness of the
contemporary needs of Latinos and the complexity of being a communitygrounded organization in the midst of shifting identity politics.
Culturally specific museums have been documented as valuable
institutions to their communities because they:
•
give voice to individuals and groups absent from dominant cultural
institutions,
•
insert marginalized groups into the national narrative by presenting
and interpreting their heritage, traditions and expressive culture,
•
function as repositories and caregivers for the material culture of
those groups, and
•
prioritize the goal of instilling pride and self-determination in their
constituents, both established and newly embraced.
This project, however, concerns itself with examining how the work of
culturally specific museums is further complicated in our contemporary
time.
In 2005, disenfranchised groups in the U.S. still struggle to gain civil
liberties and achieve the promises of democracy, and simplistic notions
about ethnic identity are destabilized by the articulation of gender
subordination and sexual identity. In investigating these complicated
11
issues, this master’s project became, for me, an exercise in exploring the
contemporary function of culturally specific museums as they respond and
adjust to the needs of their multiple participants. More specifically, my
interest was in investigating the ways that the Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum (MFACM) and the Japanese American National Museum
(JANM) broaden beyond their founding “cultural specificity” to emerging
constituents from within their ethnic group (in the case of the Mexican
Fine Arts Center Museum) or to new audiences from outside of their
ethnic group (in the case of the Japanese American National Museum).
The project is fore grounded in Erikson’s idea of museum subjectivity,
since depending on their particular place and the political/social time,
museums have responded differently to changes in their communities.
To investigate the contemporary role of culturally specific
museums in engaging new Latino constituencies, I looked at how
culturally specific museums have mobilized their expertise in engaging
their primary audience to expand services to members of local
communities perhaps not initially thought of as constituents. This concept
originated after becoming familiar with the work taking place at the
JANM. I was intrigued by the museum’s deep connection to Japanese
American communities across the country and its ability to simultaneously
engage in collaborative, multi-ethnic programming and exhibition
12
development locally. They are committed to utilizing the stories and
experiences of Japanese Americans in the U.S. to shed light on broader
concerns of social justice and democracy, such as current legislation
affecting immigrant populations. One of my initial questions about the
Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum was about its openness to nonMexican Latinos in Chicago. The museum is in located the heart an 89
percent Mexican neighborhood, but the city also has an established Puerto
Rican population and more and more Central Americans are making
Chicago their home. I was curious as to the museum’s relationship to
other Latinos, but found that efforts in expanding its constituency
primarily focuses on refining the definition of who Mexicanos are, rather
than embracing a pan-Latino identity as did El Museo del Barrio. In
particular, the Mexican Fine Arts Center museum has been developing
programming to include and meet the needs of their women’s and LGBT
communities.
Recent programs at culturally specific museums disrupt narrow,
essentialized constructions of community. The Noche de Arco Iris/Queer
Prom hosted by the Mexican Fine Art Center Museum in 2005 speaks to a
more complex understanding of the contemporary needs Mexicanos in
Pilsen have of the museum. Similarly, the Japanese American National
Museum extended its reach beyond those who were the museum’s initially
13
intended constituency, with the Boyle Heights Project. Among partners for
the project were the Jewish Historical Project of Southern California and
Self Help Graphics and Art, a Chicano art organization.
Culturally specific museums are now thinking about
intercommunity issues of difference as well as how they can serve a
broader public. This master’s project is particularly interested in
illustrating how the present-day function of these museums is changing by
engaging people not normally thought of as their constituents. My
questions revolve around ideas related to the MFACM’s and the JANM’s
efforts to broaden their reach, which has resulted in their multiplying,
growing, and further specifying the communities that they aim to serve.
Statement of Purpose
The purpose of this master’s project was to investigate culturally
specific museums in the United States and their efforts in engaging diverse
Latino participants through public programs. To this end, I examined of
the development, and implementation of public programs through case
studies of the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum (MFACM), and the
Japanese American National Museum (JANM). In particular, I sought to
determine how the MFACM and the JANM expand their constituencies
beyond the Mexican/Mexican American and Japanese American groups
14
which established them. These community-based institutions adjust to
changes in cultural politics, reflecting of complex articulations of ethnic
identity. My intention is to nudge the museum professional toward a new
epistemology, one beyond simplistic notions about multiculturalism,
inclusion, and diversity.
As the Latino population swells across the country, museums are
increasingly looking for ways to court this potential audience; this project,
however, shows the need for public institutions to think beyond reacting to
demographic changes and pressures to be meet diversity standards. Rather,
museums ought to consider their relevance to new/potential audiences,
which have particular needs that they can support as educational
institutions. Hence, I call on museums to forge reciprocal relationships
with U.S. Latinos to engage them in more than short-term or limited time
special projects that ultimately are of little benefit to either party. By
exploring the current efforts and challenges in involving Latino
constituents at culturally specific museums, I seek to contribute to the
growing body of research about these unique institutions that have long
had strong relationships with their local communities. This project also
aims to dispel the notion that culturally specific museums are separatist
and serve a limited sector of the population, namely members of the
communities that they represent. To this end, I bring to the forefront the
15
work that ethnic museums are doing to educate and engage a broad public
in relating to larger social and political dynamics that affect all Americans.
My interest in examining public programs at culturally specific
museums is quite intentional. I see public programs opportunities for
constituents to actively participate in the work of the museum. I do not
mean to imply that visitors to museum exhibitions passively receive its
messages; the agency of visitor cannot be emphasized enough. This
project, however, concerned itself with public programs because they have
the potential to involve participants over a longer period and with more
depth. I believe that programs can potentially offer dynamic opportunities
for the transformation of everyone involved including program
participants, the organization, and ultimately the communities that they are
a part of. Constituents were more deeply engaged with the museum as
well as with members of their communities including collaborative
partners and other museum constituents in the two public programs I
studied. The Japanese American National Museum’s Boyle Heights
Project, a community history project of the East Los Angeles
neighborhood, took place over three years and many participants were
involved for several months or more. Homofrecuencia, the Spanish
language LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender) program produced
through Radio Arte, a youth initiative of the MFACM requires participants
16
to make a significant time commitment, ensuring their participation over a
year. This level of participation affects the depth at which participants
become familiar with available resources in the community, including the
museum. I am intrigued by the potential for personal growth and
transformation through such civic participation. Museums are unique
institutions that can provide opportunities for this kind of deep level of
interaction and learning. Innovative and well thought out programs may
lead to changes in the perceived role of the institution, a more engaged
citizenship, and shifts in personal agency.
The following Background section of this master’s project
provides an overview of three areas that give context to this project: the
philosophy and development of culturally specific museums;
“mainstream” museums’ efforts to connect with historically underserved
populations; and Latino demographics and identities in the context of the
United States. I seek to work against simplistic definitions on each of
these topics. For example, culturally specific museums are celebrated in
the museum field as models for community engagement and Latinos are
frequently thought of as a monolith of Spanish-speaking immigrants.
Through this project I seek to provide a more complex understanding of
culturally specific museums by exposing some of their challenges in
engaging community, and also show how “Latino” is not as tidy a
17
classification as it is often thought to be. By placing these museums in
their specific historical and local context, I work against the
essentialization so prevalent in well-meaning, but uncritical contemporary
efforts to be more multicultural. Hence I see this study as emerging from
the body of work that I call “critical museology” which encourages me to
think about museums as sites for struggle over power.22
One recommendation to emerge from my research findings is for
the museum field to think outside of the “museum model” box. While it’s
true that culturally specific museums have expertise in engaging
constituents that have not historically been involved in museums, each
institution must consider specific circumstances when embarking on new
ventures in community engagement. Museums must consider their own
institutional history and motivations as well as the real needs and desires
of potential audiences. As the Findings and Conclusions section of this
project reveals, there are no prototypes for community engagement; this
work is quite relational and must be tailored by each institution for each
individual constituency group. This master’s project also provides some
recommendations to the field at large.
22
The Background section of this project discusses some of the thinkers and writers
about museums whose work foregrounds this study including Eric Gable and Austin
Surat. Others already mentioned in this Introduction section are Arlene Davila, MaríaJosé Moreno, and Patricia Pierce Erikson.
18
Research Questions and Project Objectives
I developed the following initial questions and project objectives to help
guide my investigations throughout the course of this master’s project:
Research Questions
1. What are culturally specific museums?
2. Who are culturally specific museums for?
3. How are the needs of Latino communities being met by culturally
specific museums?
4. What can the museum field learn about diversity and community
engagement from culturally specific museums?
Project Objectives
1. Investigate the philosophy and development of culturally specific
museums.
2. Research how culturally specific museums define their audience
or constituency.
3. Determine if culturally specific museums actively seek to partner
with Latino communities, and if so, ascertain why and how they
do so.
4. Investigate approaches to diversity and community engagement in
museums and develop a list of recommendations for the field
19
reflecting what I learned about culturally specific museums in this
regard.
Methodology
Several research methods were employed to collect data for this
master’s project. In researching how culturally specific museums have
initiated strategies for involving Latino constituents I conducted a
literature and web site review; interviews with museum programming,
curatorial, and administrative staff, and program participants; and case
studies of public programs at two museums: the Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum and the Japanese American National Museum. Additionally, to
ascertain how museums in general have addressed the needs for increased
involvement of historically underrepresented communities, I attended the
California Association of Museum’s (CAM) Regional Workshop
“Building a Diverse Audience for your Museum” hosted by the Children’s
Discovery Museum of San Jose on April 25, 2005.
Reviewing museum web sites gave me a better understanding of
the philosophy, development, programming, and organizational structure
of culturally specific museums today. A multidisciplinary literature review
allowed me to track discussions about diversity and community
engagement in the museum field as well as marked shifts in U.S. Latino
20
identities and demographics, particularly in relation to specificities such as
ethnic/national identity and geographic location. These initial
investigations helped to set the context for the project and gave me a
sound foundation on which to build my case studies. Through careful
analysis of interviews I gained in-depth knowledge about each
organization as well as specifics about their methods for and challenges
encountered in engaging diverse Latino communities through public
programs. In attending the CAM Regional Workshop “Building a Diverse
Audience for Your Museum,” I became acquainted with the motivations
and needs of some museums in Northern California. The workshop also
helped me better define ways in which museum professionals understand,
frame, and approach issues surrounding diversity in museums.
My coursework in Museums and Communities at John F. Kennedy
University prepared me for this research project albeit in an inverted
fashion. The course starts with an investigation of a particular
community’s needs and ends with the creation of a strategic plan for a
particular institution to meet those needs. My process with this master’s
project was reversed in that I started with existing programs and inquired
about their origins and purpose, development, methodologies for
implementation, and challenges that were encountered during
implementation.
21
Literature Review
A review of scholarly research and periodicals (primarily U.S.
newspaper articles and magazines) established the necessary foundation
for this project. A multidisciplinary review of books and journal articles
enabled me to map out the development of culturally specific museums
and their institutional role as leaders in public education and civic
engagement. Museum studies publications were used to investigate
discussions in the field related to mandates to diversify American
museums and as well as consequences related to such directives.
Demographic shifts in American communities and the dynamics of Latino
identities were studied by reviewing reports by the National Council of La
Raza and other policy/advocacy groups, articles in popular media
(newspapers and magazines), and multidisciplinary scholarly books and
journals in Latino Studies. The web sites of culturally specific museums
were useful in allowing me to investigate the formation and histories of
the museums as a genre, their organizational structure and public program
schedules.
Case Studies
A focused investigation of programs that broadened involvement
beyond those constituencies that founded the Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum and the Japanese American National Museum were the primary
22
method for better understanding the reasons for these programs as well as
their intended outcomes and results. These case studies helped determine
the strategies, challenges and rewards in implementing successful
programs at culturally specific museums. Some of the major areas of
inquiry for case studies included:
•
Conceptualization of the program and its relationship to the
museum’s mission,
•
Description of the program, strategies for implementation, and
challenging aspects of program implementation, and
•
Goals and results of the programs.
Also of interest were methods for engaging wider participation such as
forging partnerships with intra-community service providers, the creation
of opportunities for intergenerational exchange, and increasing the skills
and knowledge of community members directly. Where possible, I also
tried to interview community members that were involved in the programs
on some level including partners, advisory group members and program
participants.
The museums were selected based on my desire to learn about
various types of culturally based institutions across the United States. I
specifically did not want to limit my exploration to Latino based
institutions, but rather wanted to demonstrate how these culturally specific
23
museums are redefining who they are for and how they make the material
and expressive cultures of the population which they represent accessible
and relevant to a broader public. Additionally, Chicago and Los Angeles –
which are home to the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum and the
Japanese American National Museum respectively – are the two of the top
metropolitan areas with high concentrations of Latino populations in the
U.S.
Interviews
Lengthy discussions with museum/program staff and participants
allowed me to explore and assess the current practices, implementation
challenges, and future plans of these two culturally specific museum with
regards to broadening their constituency base to diverse Latinos. At the
Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum, I spoke with the Executive and
Associate Directors and Directors of Development and Education as well
as the General Manager and a Senior Producer/participant at Radio Arte.
At the Japanese American National Museum, I had conversations with the
two Co-curators, a Program Coordinator and Exhibit Designer, an
Educator, participant who was a member of the Community Advisory
Committee for the Boyle Heights Project. I chose to conduct most of my
research through interviews because of the depth of information it would
provide to me. At the MFACM, for example, staff clearly articulated a
24
deep commitment to the museum’s local community, and the need to resist
homogenization into the “Latino” or “Hispanic” category. As previously
mentioned, the museum is physically located in a neighborhood, which is
nearly completely Mexican. As one interviewee stated, “We are constantly
thinking about those that live across the street from us.” Detailed
discussions with staff clarified for me the museums’ approaches to their
work and gave me deeper insight as to how they are thinking quite
complexly about how they involve communities.
Speaking to staff at the museums gave me first-hand accounts from
those that manage the museum and are involved in implementing public
programs. In particular, staff who participated in programming helped me
to think about elements of successful programs, strategies for meeting the
multiple needs of communities, and also contributed to my understanding
of the needs U.S. Latinos might have of informal education organizations.
Most importantly, talking with programmers gave me a sense of the stakes
involved in opening up to new constituencies. Discussions with museum
administrators and public program coordinators gave me a better
understanding of past and future goals in relationship to community
25
involvement. I spoke with all interviewees over the phone between the
months of April and July, 2005.23
Limitations
Several limitations constrained the gathering of information about
culturally specific museums and their efforts to expand their programming
to engage Latinos. Primarily, constraints in time and resources limited the
scope of this project. While my interviews with staff at the two museums
optimized the collection of this data, more interviews with people who
have a different vantage point would have been preferred. For example,
discussions with institutional partners may have given me a better sense of
how they perceived the programs and might envision future museum
collaborations. Talking with more program participants would have
deepened my understanding of the program’s effects on them personally,
and talking with more museum staff and other stakeholders may have
enhanced my understanding of how others make sense of and receive
these ventures in expanding to new constituencies.
Though I chose to focus on public programs at ethnic specific
museums for this project, with more time and resources I could have
23
All informants received interview questions in advance of our discussion except for a
few who refused questions in advance and one with whom I experienced a technical
difficulty.
26
covered more areas in the work of culturally specific museums, which
make these institutions unique in their approaches to working with
communities. For example an analysis of the museums’ hiring and training
practices, membership on the board of trustees, past and upcoming
exhibitions, collection’s policies, or exhibition development processes
would have given me more insight as to how the organizations operate
more broadly.
Financial constraints limited my ability to conduct site visits to the
museums and talk to staff and participants in-person. Personal contact
would have been given me the opportunity to observe the museums’
programs first hand. For example, the Japanese American National
Museum has archived many resources which document the development
and process of planning the Boyle Heights Project that may have enrich
my understanding of the its related programs. Fortunately, staff at the
museums were very willing to share the resources they could. I had
frequent multiple conversations and email exchanges with some
informants, which included follow-up conversations and discussions about
the proposed product of this project.
Finally, as this project unfolded, I found many areas of interest that
I was not able to explore, but which may have strengthened it. Two of
them are the era in which these museums now operate, and generational
27
differences amongst staff. Examining, in more depth, what exactly is
different today culturally and politically from the era in which the museum
was founded may have provided a more nuanced understanding of how or
why these culturally specific museums are able to and chose to multiply
their constituencies in this particular moment. Furthermore, this sort of
deeper analysis might also shed light on the generational differences
between younger and older staff at the museums and what seems to be a
difference in their cultural politics, or perspectives on ethnic institutions
and cross-cultural programming.
I focused on two case studies of museums in the major
metropolitan areas of Chicago and Los Angeles. With regards to Latino
populations in the U.S., I would like to have looked at culturally specific
institutions in other cities such as New York, Houston, or Miami, had I
had more time. An examination of museums in smaller or non-urban
locales would have made my Findings and Conclusions richer, perhaps by
helping me understand how museums outside of major cities may
conceptualization “community” differently. Looking specifically at these
two metropolises only gave me a sense for how institutions within this
particular social/political location (the city) think and act cross-ethnically.
Due to recent field-wide mandates calling for museums to realize
their potential as agents of civic engagement, a more multifaceted study of
28
culturally specific museums and their work in partnering with
communities, government agencies, social service providers, public
schools, and other museums and cultural organizations is needed. While
some of my findings clearly point to the value of these unique
organizations, the field will benefit immensely from closer examinations
of culturally specific museums and their efforts in forging such ventures.24
In investigating the perspectives of staff at these institutions I was able to
assess their motivations for engaging members of their communities,
which usually signaled the institution’s fundamental role in creating social
change and empowering communities.
Product Description
The product for this master’s project, is a session proposal for the
annual meeting of the American Association of Museums (AAM) in 2006.
Should the session be accepted, it will provide a forum for museum staff
to engage with each other and the field at large about the work they do to
enlist the participation of diverse members of their communities. During
the session entitled “Latino Participation: Engaging New Constituencies at
Museums,” participants will share strategies for programmatically meeting
24
A superb study and contribution to the field in this regard is the recent anthology
Common Ground: The Japanese American National Museum and the Culture of
Collaborations, ed. Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A.
Hirabayashi (Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005).
29
the needs of Latinos in various types of museum projects. The proposed
session seeks to gain the endorsement of the AAM’s Standing Professional
Committee on Diversity in Museums and will increase dialog in the field
about the changing role of museums in increasingly complex
communities.
The theme for the 2006 annual meeting is “A Centennial of Ideas:
Exploring Tomorrow’s Museums” and asks, “What must we be, for
whom, and to what purpose? How do we educate effectively, attract new
audiences, partner with communities?”25 The call for proposals
encourages sessions to “imagine how museums might transform the world
of the future” and seek to “ensure that museums continue to matter.” My
proposed session fits the theme of the meeting in that it will engage
panelists in dialog about varied strategies for enlisting the participation of
diverse Latino constituents including youth programs, advisory
committees, collaborative exhibition design, and visitor research.
“Latino Participation: Engaging New Constituencies at Museums,”
is proposed as a single session (75 minutes in length) and will be
presented in the “forum” format in which the moderator poses questions to
discussants creating an open dialogue. The moderator for the proposed
session is museum consultant and faculty at John F. Kennedy University,
25
Session proposal guidelines can be found at the American Association of Museums
web site at www.aam-us.org/am06/proposal.cfm. Accessed May 24, 2005.
30
Margaret Kadoyama. Clement Hanami, Production Manager and Art
Director at the Japanese American National Museum is a participant in the
session. Mr. Hanami has been working at the museum since it opened in
1992 and has contributed to several multiethnic initiatives at the JANM
including the Boyle Heights Project and the new National Center for the
Preservation of Democracy. Another panelist will be Tey Marianna Nunn,
Curator of the Contemporary Hispano and Latino Collections at the
Museum of International Folk Art, who is forming advisory committees to
help revision the Hispanic Heritage Wing and Contemporary Hispanic
Changing Gallery at the museum. Finally, Cecilia Garibay, who has
worked with many museums including The Exploratorium, the
Smithsonian Institution, and the Chicago Children’s Museum, will discuss
how culturally appropriate and responsive evaluation practices can deepen
a museum’s understanding of Latino audiences. The purpose of the
session is to ignite discussion about how museums can become more
relevant institutions in their local communities as shown by the
engagement of Latinos as museum constituents.
Among the topics discussed in the proposed session will be
strategies for assessing the needs and desires of Latinos in museum
programs, the importance of recognizing the complexity of Latinos as a
heterogeneous cultural group, and ways to create opportunities for cross-
31
ethnic learning. The format for the session itself – an open dialog to share
information – lends itself to the opportunity to discuss the complexity of
working with Latinos in specific communities with particular localized
challenges around cultural participation.
32
BACKGROUND
Though culturally specific museums are relatively a small group of
museums, it is important to become familiar with the particularities of this
genre of museum and recent changes among them to preface a discussion
of their efforts in meeting the needs of Latinos in their communities.
Museum leaders in the United States have been thinking about, writing
about, and activating strategies aimed at becoming more relevant to a
broader audience for many years. The second portion of this Background
section thus discusses research, pedagogy, and theory of museums such as
civic engagement, which inform this project. Most importantly, I also
point to some of the shortfalls and challenges of well intentioned acts to
diversify museums which indicate the need to think more critically about
our museological work.
Finally, it is necessary to provide a framework for a discussing
engaging Latinos as a historically underserved community. To this end, I
give an overview of contemporary Latino demographics in the U.S. as
well as in the cities of Chicago and Los Angeles, where my case studies
are geographically located. It was also important to provide a summary of
some of the pressing concerns and shifts in Latino cultural and identity
politics. My hope is that a summary of a few of the intensely complex
33
issues related to Latino identities will make clear that they are not a
monolithic group that can or should be treated in a one-size-fits-all
approach.
History and Development of Culturally Specific Museums
African American museums… grow out of a desire
to preserve what is of value to the people, out of a
need to define and interpret the core culture that
sustains African Americans. Museums that emerge
from within the African-American community
inherit the responsibility of the griot tradition – they
are modern-day keepers of the culture.26
As early as the 1860s, American ethnic and cultural groups
developed museums devoted to preserving their history and celebrating
their cultural heritage.27 Following the oral tradition of the griot, among
the first culturally specific preservation institutions were founded at Black
colleges and universities. They became the institutional repositories and
preservers for Americans of African descent to continue the tradition of
keeping the culture.28 Many such institutions emerged from the need to
support, preserve and present the art, history, traditions, and material
26
John E. Fleming, “African-American Museums, History, and the American Ideal,”
Journal of American History 81 no. 3 (December 1994): 1021.
27
Fath Davis Ruffins, “Culture Wars Won and Lost: Ethnic Museums on the Mall, Part I:
The National Holocaust Museum and the National Museum of the American Indian,”
Radical History Review 68 (Spring 1997): 88.
28
Ronald Roach, “Auctioning off Yesterday: For Many Black Museums, It’s ‘Buy Buy
History’,” Black Issues in Higher Education, 8 January 1998, p. 24.
34
culture of American ethnic groups, which had historically been
marginalized from the master narrative of the nation’s achievements, and
therefore had no preservers. But it was not until after the unrest and
ensuing shift in power that took place during the turbulent civil rights era
in the United States that these ethnic museums began to surface in greater
numbers around the country. Historian Fath Davis Ruffins has written,
The civil rights movement affected many aspects of
cultural process, both within Black communities
and in the wider society. It is impossible to
overstate the importance of the movement in the
socio-cultural arena; it affected the terms of cultural
discourse and modes of societal process, and helped
generate an outpouring of artistic expression.29
It is within that context of struggle for economic and social justice that
U.S. minorities increasingly became involved in public culture and created
their own heritage and arts institutions.
The range of culturally specific institutions in the United States
varies in terms of their collections, presentation focus, and in their work
with communities. Among those institutions dedicated to the preservation
and presentation of politically and economically disenfranchised groups
that were founded in the civil rights era were the DuSable Museum
(formerly the Ebony Museum of Negro Culture in Chicago, established in
29
Fath Davis Ruffins, “Mythos, Memory, and History: African American Preservation
Efforts, 1820-1900,” in Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public Culture, ed.
Ivan Karp, Christine Mullen Kreamer, and Steven D. Lavine (Washington D.C.:
Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992), 556.
35
1961) and the Mexican Museum (established in 1975 in the heart of San
Francisco’s Mission District). Most early creators of these unique
institutions positioned the organizations as learning centers devoted to the
presentation of history, art and culture with broad people-centered goals
such as self-determination and community empowerment in mind. In
1969, for example, community leaders who had called for the New York
City School District for Puerto Rican cultural enrichment programs in
“Spanish” or East Harlem founded El Museo del Barrio.30 Similarly,
others who founded ethnic specific museums envisioned communitybased organizations that would support “a constructive pathway toward
the development of ethnic and personal pride.”31
Whereas dominant or mainstream museums have usually emerged
from the collection of a donor, ethnic museums often began through a
network of activists working to address real needs in disenfranchised
communities.32 Art education for children, teacher training workshops,
support for local artists33 and historians, and youth training skills are
30
Herlinda Zamora, “Identity and Community: A Look at Four Latino Museums,”
Museum News 81, no. 3 (May/June 2002): 38, 37-41.
31
Davis Ruffins, Mythos, Memory, and History, 556.
32
Moreno, 510.
33
Sandra D. Jackson, SMHARTS, summer 2004, p. 16. As Jackson describes, in fact, the
Studio Museum in Harlem was initially established in 1968 not as a museum, but as an
experimental art space where black artists to work without constraint. Ultimately, as
interest in the studio project grew, artists, teachers, art historians, dealers, and community
figures began to plant the seeds for the museum.
36
among the services that culturally specific museums such as the Anacostia
Museum in Washington D.C. made available to neighborhood residents.34
The early work of the Anacostia Museum has been well
documented. Established in 1967 as the Anacostia Neighborhood
Museum, it is perhaps it’s affiliation with the Smithsonian Institution, the
United States’ principal public museum, that brought it so much attention,
particularly in its’ first ten years of operation. Even today John Richard
Kinard, the first director of the Anacostia, is noted as a great leader in the
movement to create community-focused museums internationally. As one
contemporary practitioner puts it, Kinard, who had been trained as a
community activist and held a degree in Divinity, had an awareness that
“an African American museum ought to be the product of a dialogue with
its immediate neighbors… [helping them to] see and understand their own
situation more clearly.”35
These direct benefits to the target community, however, are not the
only generators of self-determination and empowerment at culturally
specific museums. An indirect (and conceivably less obvious) affect of
their work is their ability to create interventions in the construction of the
34
Edward P. Alexander, The Museum in America: Innovators and Pioneers (Walnut
Creek: AltaMira Press, 1997), 151.
35
Edmund Barry Gaither, “’Hey, That’s Mine’: Thoughts on Pluralism and American
Museums,” in Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public Culture, ed. Ivan Karp,
Christine Mullen Kreamer, and Steven D. Lavine (Washington D.C.: Smithsonian
Institution Press, 1992), 60.
37
grand American narrative. As agents of civil society, museums are sites
through which identity is defined, queried, challenged and reconstructed.36
Museums, says Ivan Karp, are “bound up with assertions about what is
central or peripheral, valued or useless, known or to be discovered,
essential to identity or marginal.”37 This is no less true for ethnic specific
organizations. Culturally specific museums emerged in contestation to
exclusive practices in the country’s mainstream universities and museums.
Chicana anthropologist Karen Mary Davalos notes that culturally specific
museums such as Chicago’s Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum present a
different image of the nation through a focus on the contributions of socalled ‘minorities’ than that which is constructed at U.S. public
museums.”38
Often a goal of tribal and other culturally specific museums is to
counter the hegemonic representations and interpretations of a group
found in popular culture or previous museum displays. 39 In offering space
36
Ivan Karp, “Introduction: Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public Culture,”
in Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public Culture, ed. Ivan Karp, Christine
Mullen Kreamer, and Steven D. Lavine (Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press,
1992), 4-5. Following the lead of theorist Antonio Gramsci, Ivan Karp describes civil
society as inclusive of various institutions (family, educational organizations and ethnic
groups and associations among them) that produce and legitimate the social order.
37
Ibid., 7.
38
Scholar Karen Mary Davalos, Exhibiting Mestizaje: Mexican (American) Museums in
the Diaspora (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2001), 6.
39
Patricia Pierce Erikson, “A-whaling We Will Go: Encounters of Knowledge and
Memory at the Makah Cultural and Resource Center,” Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 4
(November 1999): 562.
38
to develop exhibitions and programming, and to continue traditional
practices, these culturally specific museums have – with local participants
– created alternative, more complicated understandings of the group and
their relationship to society at large. Ethnic specific museums have
contributed to the cultural endurance of people whose histories and
cultural expressions have only recently begun to be interpreted and
understood from their own perspective. They have been sites through
which American ethnic groups – largely excluded from mainstream
museums and misrepresented in popular media – have constructed their
own narratives and shared those narratives with the public to counter
prevalent stereotypes and beliefs about American minorities.
One example of such an organization is the Makah Cultural and
Research Center (MCRC) in Neah Bay, Washington established by the
Makah tribal community. The MCRC produces exhibits and has a
substantial collection of items. As Patricia Pierce Erikson describes,
through exhibits at the MCRC,
[T]he Makah people produce and validate
knowledge about themselves, offering
representations that are preferable to, but in
dialogue with, those of the dominant
historiography… [Exhibits at the MCRC] document
how the Makah negotiation of dominant notions of
39
Indianness has been one of their strategies of
survival and self-determination.40
Thus, in developing exhibitions at the Makah Cultural and Research
Center, tribal members have constructed and validated their own sense of
self and communicated those notions of who they are to a wider public.
Ethnic specific cultural institutions were established to have more control
and ownership over the stories and representations of American ethnic
groups in public culture. As well, a strong sense of accountability is
evident in work of those that seeks to properly exhibit marginal
populations in ethnic museums.
Contemporary culturally specific museums still play a crucial role
in countering the masked history and (mis) representations of American
minority communities. The intervention of staff at the Mexican Fine Arts
Center Museum in the over-simplified representation of the Pilsen
neighborhood by American Girl, as discussed in the Introduction to this
master’s project illustrates this. This very grounding in community politics
and advocacy is what makes culturally specific museums unique. They
have long been in the practice of developing reciprocal relationships with
their communities whom have historically been neglected by middle-class
cultural institutions.
40
Ibid., 572.
40
Most culturally specific museums were not, however, created only
with the populations that they represent in mind. As one founder puts it,
“We want both the local community and the mainstream world to visit…
so that we can break down some of the barriers… If only our own people
come here, we have failed in our mission. We believe this place is for
everyone.”41 The American Association of Museums agrees that these
community-focused institutions can contribute broadly to public
education. In 1984, the Association’s Commission on Museums for a New
Century established that culturally specific museums play a crucial role in
providing the broader public with opportunities for learning. Their report
states that, “Institutions dedicated to fostering and preserving particular
ethnic heritages will be increasingly important in helping Americans
understand their historical experience from different perspectives.”42
Ethnic specific museums are often misunderstood to be not only
about a specific set of the population, but also for that particular segment
of the population. As Ron Chew, Director of the Wing Luke Asian
Museum in Seattle, has said, there has been a “maturation in thinking
41
Zamora, 39. Quoting Carlos Tortolero, president of the Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum in Chicago.
42
American Association of Museums, Commission on Museums for a New Century,
Museums for a New Century, (Washington D.C.: American Association of Museums,
1984), 24.
41
about how [all Americans] fit in together.”43 Ethnic specific museums are
mindful about being accessible to many audiences and strive to have broad
appeal.44 Though ethnic museums prioritize the specific stories,
experiences and material culture of “minority” groups, they do not do so
to be exclusive. Irene Y. Hirano, Executive Director and President of the
Japanese American National Museum, says that what appealed to her
about working at the museum was “the potential to create an institution
that would be based in the community and could ensure that our history
was told from a personal perspective, accurately, sensitively, and in a
meaningful way, to a broad audience.”45 One of the JANM’s goals is “to
serve as an institution that gathers people together to explore their
history… and to create new histories.”46
The Japanese American National Museum is unique, however, as
are all museums, culturally specific or not. As Kinshasha Conwill former
director of the Studio Museum in Harlem reminds us,
43
Meredith Kleinschmidt, “After the Activism, What Comes Next?: Examining the
Development of Culturally Specific Museums Since the 1960’s” (M.A. thesis, John F.
Kennedy University, 2000), 101. Quoting Ron Chew.
44
Arlene Williams, “Museums in Crisis: A Strong Sense of Mission Helps Many
Survive,” American Visions 7, no. 1 (February 1992): 25.
45
Irene Y. Hirano’s comments at Museums for the New Millennium: A Symposium for the
Museum Community, September 5-7, 1996 in Washington D.D. The session was:
“Changing Public Expectations of Museums.” The symposia was organized by the Center
for Museum Studies, Smithsonian Institution in association with the American
Association of Museums. Proceedings were published in 1997: 41.
46
Irene Y. Hirano “Introduction: Commitment to Community,” in Common Ground: The
Japanese American National Museum and the Politics of Collaborations, ed. Akemi
Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A. Hirabayashi (Boulder: University
of Colorado Press, 2005), 10.
42
[I]n the 1960s there was a particular set of
notions about institutions and their roles.
Institutions that started 10 years later, 15
years later, came out of a different historical
context, and our learning and growth curve
have been different. While I think we can
learn from each other, we are all very
distinct; our communities are distinct and
our histories are distinct.47
The JANM was founded in Los Angeles in the 1980s during a different
historical period and a different social “place” than, for example, the
Anacostia Museum which was founded in Washington D.C. in 1967. Even
the Wing Luke Asian Museum, also incorporated in 1967 is different due
to its local context and the community history of Seattle. Still yet, leaders
of culturally specific museums are more and more aware of the need to
speak to a broader audience. Ron Chew of the Wing Luke is cognizant that
they must strive to design exhibits that resonate for a wider public. In 2000
Mr. Chew predicted that balancing the Wing Luke’s function as an
educational institution intended for a broad public with its commitment to
grassroots sensibilities and its ability to maintain legitimacy with the
[Asian American] community would the greatest challenge.48 Other
culturally specific museums have also made commitments to “outsiders”
47
Donald Garfield and Jane Lusaka, “Museum News Interview: Kinshasha Holman
Conwill,” Museum News (May/June 1996): 40.
48
Ibid., 103.
43
who are not represented in the museum’s collection, exhibitions, or public
programs.49
El Museo del Barrio may best illustrate how one ethnic museum
recently navigated through conflicting pressures such as these. In the
1970s, the museum lost a significant amount of funding from the New
York City Department of Education and the administration at the museum
changed from community members and educators to a board of trustees
and a director with art gallery experience. The Museo transformed into a
more conventional museum over the next three decades, seeking
connections in New York’s cultural and political sectors and accreditation
by the American Association of Museums. In the late seventies and the
eighties, minority communities across the United States sought to integrate
politically into the mainstream. For El Museo del Barrio, a move from a
storefront in the middle of East Harlem to the Museum Mile along Fifth
Avenue dramatically signaled such a change. During this period in the
museum’s evolution, the collection grew to include “fine” art by Latin
American artists; an altered programming schedule focused on adult
(rather than youth) education; and due to demographic shifts amongst
Latinos in New York – and subsequent pressures from funders – the
museum extended programs to the city’s new Mexican and Central
49
Kleinschmidt, 116.
44
American communities.50 Stakeholders of El Museo sensed the institution
was drifting from its original mission and focus on the New York-Puerto
Rican community.
Today, decades after El Museo del Barrio’s establishment, New
York’s Puerto Rican artists and scholars still have a vested interest in the
organization, albeit an embattled one. The contemporary level of Puerto
Rican investment in the museum was evident in stakeholders’ independent
establishment of organized groups to monitor the changes at the museum.
Over a period of six years three organizations emerged: Next Millennium
(1997-1999), We are Watching You (2001-2002), and Nuestro Museo
Action Committee (2002). They appealed to museum administrators and
trustees to ensure a there was community voice in the institutional
development process.51
Beginning in the 1990s, the museum’s staff and board began a
decade-long process of reassessing its direction, which resulted in the
board writing and adopting three different mission statements. New
directions at El Museo intended to expand its focus from its original
50
Ibid., 517.
Yasmin Ramirez, “Passing on Latinidad: An Analysis of Critical Responses to El
Museo del Barrio’s Pan-Latino Mission Statements.” Paper presented at the Interpretation
and Representation of Latino Cultures: Research and Museums National Conference at
the Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. November 20-23, 2002, 1. Accessed at
http://latino.si.edu/researchandmuseums/presentations/ramirez_papers.html (25 April
2005).
51
45
audience and exhibition subject: from Puerto Rican to a more diverse
audience of Latin American descent.52 In 1994 after three years of work,
El Museo’s staff and board revealed its first “official” mission statement.53
Printed in Visiones, a museum member’s publication, it read: “El Museo
del Barrio’s mission is to establish a forum that will preserve and project
the dynamic cultural heritage of Puerto Ricans and all Latin Americans in
the United States.”54 The new mission adopted in 1996 read, “the mission
of El Museo del Barrio is to collect, preserve, exhibit, interpret, and
promote the artistic heritage of Latin Americans, primarily in the United
States.”55 Curiously, while the most recent mission statement, adopted in
2000, reinserts the Puerto Rican specificity of the 1994 mission, it also
omits the concept of the museum as a forum. “The mission of El Museo
del Barrio is to present and preserve the art and culture of Puerto Ricans
and all Latin Americans in the United States.”56 This decision not to “open
up” the museum to a forum format is interesting because the museum field
has discussed the concept as a viable strategy for becoming more
responsive to communities.
52
Ibid, 1.
Susana Torruella Leval, “El Museo del Barrio” in Museum Mission Statements:
Building a Distinct Identity, ed. Gail Anderson, (American Association of Museums
Technical Information Service: Washington D.C., 1998), 71.
54
Ramirez, 2.
55
Susana Torruella Leval, El Museo del Barrio, 70.
56
Ramirez, 1.
53
46
These changes in El Museo’s direction were a hotly debated topic
amongst Puerto Rican artists, cultural critics, scholars and other
stakeholders who felt that the institution no longer belonged to them.57
The created ad hoc committees – as mentioned above: Next Millennium,
We are Watching You, and Nuestro Museo Action Committee – and web
sites, held meetings to discuss the organizational changes and demanded
remedy of the museum board’s lack of community representation. One
stakeholder group passed a resolution that insisted that the organization
remain rooted in the socially conscious and working class origins upon
which the museum was established; in other words, they insisted that El
Museo del Barrio remain true rooted in its original cultural specificity and
serve the Puerto Rican community.58 Prompted by the influx of new
Latino immigrants to the neighborhood and city, however, the institution
set out to extend its constituent reach and further cultivate a panLatino/Latin American identity at the museum.59
57
Arlene Davila, “Latinizing Culture: Art, Museums, and the Politics of U.S.
Multicultural Encompassment,” Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 2 (May 1999): 189, 180202.
58
Even the briefest review of the Nuestro Museo Action Committee web site provides a
sense of the level of commitment to engage in the redefinition of the organization by
stakeholders. Accessed at http://www.nuestromuseo.org/ (4 June 2005).
59
Susana Torruella Leval, “Coming of Age with the Muses: Change in the Age of
Multiculturalism,” Paper Series on the Arts, Culture, and Society, The Andy Warhol
Foundation for the Visual Arts, 1995, 5. Accessed at
http://www.warholfoundation.org/paperseries/article5.htm (25 April 2005).
47
As the work of scholar María-José Moreno shows, for over three
decades El Museo del Barrio went through various transformations
brought about by larger political and economic forces. The contested
changes in leadership, philosophy, and purpose were a result of the
organization’s need for financial support and institutional legitimacy.
Ultimately El Museo has assimilated from a grassroots/community
organization into its institutional context amongst various other museums
along New York’s Museum Mile.60 Arlene Davila points out that Latino
artists have noted that such dynamics, which require ethnic organizations
to legitimize themselves against mainstream institutions are a continued
form of colonization.61 Unfortunately the organization, in its move to gain
legitimacy from the broader museum sector – including affiliation with the
American Association of Museums and funding from the National
Endowment for the Arts – did not include its core constituency – who
founded the Puerto Rican institution and in fact was still deeply invested
in it – in plans for change. Given this example, then, Pierce Erikson might
say that El Museo del Barrio’s subjectivity is “the product of the
interaction between the [museum, its stakeholders, funding organizations,
and the field’s directive institution, the AAM] and broad social processes
60
61
Moreno, 524.
Davila, 188.
48
[such as adopting a pan-Latino identity, thus masking difference and
hence specificity].”62
Significant developments surrounding issues of the content and
audience of culturally specific museums are especially important to view
through the concept of museum subjectivity. As Kinshasha Holman
Conwill has reminded us, consideration of the historical context for the
current transformations at culturally specific organizations will help us
best understand their development and thus the work that they currently
aim to do. The Studio Museum in Harlem, for example started out in the
1960s as a studio space for African American artists to produce work.
Within a few years, it formalized its Artist-in-Residence Program and
began conducting school programs. By the late seventies, the organization
was formally acquiring art and artifacts. In the eighties, the Studio
Museum began to look outside of the U.S. to put African American art in a
wider worldview.63 The museum’s collection now includes nineteenth and
twentieth century African-American art, twentieth century Caribbean and
African art, and traditional African art and artifacts. The Studio Museum
thus went from being an African American art organization to one that
focuses more broadly on art from the African Diaspora. The mission of the
62
Pierce Erikson, 563.
Robin M. Bennefield, “The Studio Museum Celebrates 30 Years of Uplifting Black
Art,” The New Crisis 105 (February/March 1998): 43.
63
49
Studio Museum in Harlem currently identifies the organization as “the
nexus for… work that has been inspired and influenced by black
culture.”64 Thus the museum today shows artists who may not be black,
African American, or of the African Diaspora at all as long as they have
been influenced by black culture.
Such was the case in the museum’s 2003 exhibition Black Belt,
which publicly presented this symbolic “opening up” at the Studio
Museum. The exhibition reviewed art at the intersection of hip-hop and
Eastern martial arts. Lowery Sims, Executive Director, describes the
show,
Seen through the work of 19 contemporary
artists of diverse backgrounds, this
exhibition affirms the complementary
relationship between cultures as opposed to
their estrangement from one another. This
exhibition also illustrates how SMH has
expanded its long-standing mission to
support and promote African-American
artists and artists of African descent to also
consider work that has been influenced or
inspired by the black experience.65
Exhibitions like Black Belt are possible because of our historical and
cultural time. Christine Y. Kim, Assistant Curator at the museum who
64
SMH Museum Fact Sheet provided to me by Sandra D. Jackson, Director of Education
and Public Programs.
65
Lowery S. Sims, SMHARTS, Fall 2003, 2.
50
produced the show – which delved into “hip-hop’s debt to Asian culture”66
– selected artists “who illustrate the parallel between the AfricanAmerican fascination with Asia in the 1970s and the Asian obsession with
black American culture today.”67 Shows such as Black Belt chronicle hiphop as a cross-cultural phenomenon, thus extending the reach of this
culturally specific museum.
This repurposing of ethnic museums show that they are on the
cutting edge of concepts such as identity, culture, and community that
constantly shift and are continually contested. The Studio Museum
responded to a growing consciousness about Africans presence around the
world, and fore grounded the significance of cross-cultural and global
connections. Similarly, the Sor Juana Festival at the Mexican Fine Arts
Center Museum emerged from the Women’s Committee who create a
feminist agenda at the museum that defies narrow constructions of who
Mexicans are.68 The Festival has celebrated the work of Chicana lesbian
writer and scholar Alicia Gaspar de Alba as well as Afro-Peruvian,
Guatemalan, and African American artists and activists.
As these dynamic organizations continue their important
community work, how will they respond to economic and institutional
66
Malcolm Beith, “It’s a Hip-Hop World; How a Movement Shaped and Absorbed
Global Culture,” Newsweek, 10 November 2003, 58.
67
SMHARTS, Fall 2003, 5.
68
Davalos, 177.
51
pressures? With the development of new and substantial museums on the
threshold, it will be most interesting to witness the course of these young
cultural institutions.
Diversity and Civic Engagement in American Museums
Thirty-three years ago, a committee convened by the American
Association of Museums (AAM) pointed to an emerging challenge facing
urban museums: “Its traditional public, the middle class, has removed to
the distant suburbs, while vast numbers of new people, mostly the
dispossessed agriculturals from the rural South, [the American] Southwest
and Puerto Rico, have taken up residence in the neighborhood.”69
Museums: Their New Audience, which was a report to the Department of
Housing and Urban Development made explicit that museums have a
“unique opportunity to fill the gap in education and urban problems and
experiment with totally new approaches.”70 Finally, the Co-chairs
correctly predicted that the work of the committee would only be the
beginning of the work needed for museums to become more relevant to
their changing communities. In the decades since, discussion in the field
has continued to attempt to address the changing communities that they
69
American Association of Museums, Museums: Their New Audience (Washington D.C.:
American Association of Museums, 1972), 6.
70
Ibid., iii.
52
are a part of. I focus my discussion specifically on those conversations
amongst museum leaders and practitioners that have taken place over the
last fifteen years to chart the ways in which museums are in fact changing.
The ratification of the Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) legislation in 1990 forced American
museums and universities to be accountable to American Indians. The
legislation required that human remains and funerary objects that were
taken from graves by anthropologists and collectors be returned to their
most likely descendents. Though some museums had already been
working with Native communities and tribes, NAGPRA was necessary for
museums and other public institutions to change for good. During this
time the production of critical scholarship related to museums and the
politics of cultural representation began to emerge in greater quantity.71
Both of these shifts in the museums’ modes of operation are relevant to
this project: the shift in institutional practices with regards to communities
and critical studies of methods of representing “others.”
Just as the language for NAGPRA was being finalized, the Board
of Directors of the AAM adopted a policy statement reflecting two and a
half years of work by its Task Force on Museum Education. Excellence
and Equity states the mission of every museum should state unequivocally
71
Ivan Karp and Steven D. Lavine, Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetics and Politics of
Museum Display (Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1991).
53
that its purpose is educational, that museums should “reflect our society’s
pluralism in every aspect of their operations and programs,” and that
museums’ ability to reach their potential relied on leadership from both
within and outside of the museum community.72 People who work in
ethnic museums have criticized the report as part of a cycle of studies that
come along every several years to nudge museums closer to racial
inclusiveness.73 While Excellence and Equity provides a plan for action,
the final principle – a commitment of leadership and financial resources –
and its related recommendations suggested should have been a top priority
on the plan for action. Radical change at most American museums is still
needed and those changes will not come without the dedication of crucial
resources.74
There are, however, negative consequences of mandates that direct
museums to change policy, be accountable to communities, and “open
up.” Seemingly created in reaction to changing demographics and cultural
politics, they direct museums – via professional associations and funding
72
American Association of Museums Task Force on Museum Education, “Excellence
and Equity: Education and the Public Dimension of Museums,” (Washington, D.C.:
American Association of Museums, 1992), 3.
73
Carlos Tortolero, “Museums, Racism, Inclusiveness Chasm,” Museum News
(November/December 2000), 35.
74
Kevin F. McCarthy and Kimberly Jinnett, A New Framework for Building
Participation in the Arts (Santa Monica: Rand 2001) 48. Prior to building a
“participation-building” strategy, Kevin McCarthy and Kimberly Jinnett suggest that
organizations need to determine both necessary and available resources. The list will
undoubtedly include funding and staff, but not to be forgotten are leadership; knowledge
of target populations; and visibility and reputation in the community.
54
sources – to broaden their audience and engage in “outreach.” Mandates
may then result in moderate efforts in reaching new communities to
accommodate foundations, donors, or trustees, says Carlos Tortolero,
Executive Director of the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum. He suggests
that such efforts should be about trying to transform the institution; I
would add that such initiatives should also be grounded in a commitment
to providing direct benefits to new or potential participants. The need for
institutional transformation is made evident in the report “Willful Neglect:
The Smithsonian Institution and U.S. Latinos.” In 1993 Secretary Adams
requested that a Task Force be created to study and report on the status of
Latinos in the institution; the group’s findings revealed the need for a
radical transformation at the largest public museum in the country:
The Smithsonian Institution almost entirely
excludes and ignores the Latino population
of the United States. This lack of inclusion
is glaringly obvious in the lack of a single
museum facility focusing on Latino of Latin
American art, culture, or history; the nearabsence of permanent Latino exhibitions or
programming; the very small number of
Latino staff, and the minimal number in
curatorial or managerial positions; and the
almost total lack of Latino representation in
the governance structure. It is difficult for
the Task Force to understand how such a
consistent pattern of Latino exclusion from
55
the work of the Smithsonian could have
occurred without willful neglect.75
A common critique of “mainstream” museums is that they have
been exclusive in their collections, representational practices, programs,
personnel, and governance and thus that they are irrelevant and
inaccessible to much of the public. This is not a new criticism, nor has it
been dispelled completely. In the din of discussion about civil society and
public culture; authority, control, identity and participation; museum
relationships with communities; and inclusive museological practices,
American museums in nineties were in the midst of a revolution.76 Leaders
called for social relevance77 and articulated museums as unique
institutions that could provide new ways of seeing, learning and
understanding.78 Museums were at last (theoretically) becoming adaptable
organizations that could serve a number of purposes for people
individually and for communities.79
75
Report of the Smithsonian Institution Task Force on Latino Issues, by Raúl Yzaguirre,
chair (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1994, photocopied). My emphasis.
76
Ivan Karp, Christine Mullen Kreamer, and Steven D. Levine, Museums and
Communities: the Politics of Public Culture (Washington and London: Smithsonian
Institution Press, 1993).
77
Ivan Karp and Steven D. Levine, “Museums and Communities: Partners in Crisis,”
Museum News (May/June 1993): 45.
78
Robert Sullivan, “Lessons for the Ruling Class,” Museum News (May/June 1993): 55.
79
Stephen E. Weil “Introduction,” Museums for the New Millennium: A Symposium for
the Museum Community Sept 5-7, 1996. Center for Museum Studies, Smithsonian
Institution in association with the American Association of Museums, Washington D.C.,
15.
56
Museums have responded by creating new programs, expanding
their collections, training a new cadre of workers, and developing new
exhibitions. The field’s professional institutions and funding agencies
began to offer practitioner guides and handbooks that provide lessons
learned in successful initiatives that address a pluralistic society. The
changing institutional practices are now chronicled in publications
including: Opening up the Museum: History and Strategies Toward a
More Inclusive Institution (1993), Museums for the New Millennium: A
Symposium for the Museum Community (1996), Toward a Shared Vision:
U.S. Latinos and the Smithsonian Institution (1997), Museums, Trustees,
and Communities: Building Reciprocal Relationships (1997), Museums as
Catalyst for Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Beginning a Conversation
(2002), Mastering Civic Engagement: A Challenge to Museums (2002),
Urban Network: Museums Embracing Communities (2003), and New
Forums: Art Museums and Communities (2004).
These practical guides, many which highlight successful model
programs are useful to museums who want to learn how to engage new
members of the diverse communities which they are a part of. They give
real-world examples from other museum professionals about developing
relationships by partnering with local service-providers and other
educational institutions, expanding public programs, mounting new
57
exhibits, and providing services beyond the walls of the museum building.
One lesson that can be learned in reviewing these publications, for
example, is that museum staff that work to involve communities
historically underserved by museums are partnering with communitybased service organizations. These community gatekeepers have the
potential to help museums begin this challenging work by informing them
of community needs, providing a connection to essential networks and
resources, and suggesting other stakeholders to talk with. As many
ventures in community engagement mention, community-based
organizations are advocates for their constituents and play an important
role in connecting museums with new/potential constituents.
Museums indeed are changing. In fact, it seems that there has been
a radical shift in thinking about museums and the communities they now
aim to serve as well as their practices of representation. Institutions are
now being more inclusive in their collections, they are interpreting revised
versions of American history, and also incorporating the contributions of
U.S. ethnic minorities to the fields of art and science. In fact,
comprehensive practices have been in existence at some museums long
enough to have conducted evaluative studies on them. Critical studies that
examine practices of representation have been of great valuable to this
master’s project. They provide a vital perspective that goes beyond mere
58
celebration of the progress museums have made. Rather, these critical
studies have helped me to better gauge the work currently taking place in
museums as well as that which still needs to be done.
Eric Gable’s study at Colonial Williamsburg, for example, takes a
serious look at the practice of interpreting African American life on a
Southern farm.80 He found that the problems in representing accurate
narratives about slaves at Colonial Williamsburg were a result of how tour
guides were trained. Historians and education staff did not help long-time
guides in developing new ideological understandings about the social
construction “race” which may have made it possible for them to address
visitor questions about such issues as white-black relationships and
misogyny. Similarly, a study of a public program and exhibition in the
Amherst, Massachusetts public schools by Austin Sarat also gave me a
new lense through which to interpret the inclusion of people historically
marginalized from museums.81 Sarat looks at how the local Puerto Rican
and LGBT communities respond to schools’ efforts to represent them. He
shows how the terms of inclusion were determined by authority figures (in
this case school administrators). He concludes that ultimately, even though
80
Eric Gable, “Maintaining Boundaries, or ‘Mainstreaming’ Black History in a White
Museum,” in Theorizing Museums: Representing Identity and Diversity in a Changing
World, ed. Sharon Macdonald and Gordon Fyfe (Cambridge: Blackwell, 1996): 177-202.
81
Austin Sarat, “The Micropolitics of Identity/Difference: Recognition and
Accommodation in Everyday Life,” Daedalus 129, no. 4 (Fall 2002): 147-168.
59
public institutions are attempting to present “difference,” their strategies
are problematic and thus potentially exasperate the situation.
Both Gable and Sarat show how well intentioned practices might
easily turn into missed opportunities to create real change. Their studies
show that mere inclusion due to the politics of tolerance is inadequate. We
must be mindful of the potential for museums to create real shifts in
power. They show how public institutions must seek to go beyond
including “others” by fundamentally changing the ways in which they
approach concerns about difference. Exposing the construction of racial
categories and engaging communities in accurately representing
themselves in exhibitions may help to expose the ways in which
differences have been constituted. In the end, the goals for including new
perspectives should be to help participants/visitors understand the function
of social inequalities as part of a method of subjugation. Merely including
new American stories will do little to truly influence visitor’s behaviors
and attitudes about the diverse society they are a part of. Together Gable
and Sarat point to critical points that could change the way we practice
“embracing diversity” and “engage community.”
Recently American museums have been described as having the
potential to be “about changed lives and communities,” accountable for
60
“meaning and value,”82 and “incubators of social change.”83 From
NAGPRA in 1990 to Mastering Civic Engagement in 2002, museums are
at the center of a revolution, a paradigm shift away from being collection
storehouses. At the core, this change in the thinking about museums as
socially responsible organizations is about people and bringing them to the
center of institutions and community life. Museums are doing important
work in their communities, and they are sharing strategies amongst one
another to increase diverse participation in all museums. It is common
practice for institutions to impart lessons and resources through
publications and at meetings of professional associations. Museums’
accounts of successful strategies that increase involvement have given us a
great many list of items to attend to, for example, building trust by going
into communities and supporting their events. Prior to embarking on
community engagement projects, however, museum staff will need to
know the populations they are targeting and understand some of the
particularities about those communities. As an example, I will provide
some information about Latinos in the United States to set the context for
my case studies.
82
Harold and Susan Skramstad, “Dreaming the Museum,” Museum News (March/April
2005): 55.
83
Bill Shore, “The Power to Bear Witness,” in Museum News (May/June 2005): 54.
61
Latino Identities in the U.S.84
“Latin U.S.A.: How Young Hispanics are Changing America”85
“2000 Census Shows Latino Boom”86
“Census Jolts Business World: Corporate America Suddenly Discovering
the Latino Market”87
These headlines, taken from mainstream journals and newspapers,
show that Latinos are being “discovered” again. Though the ancestors of
many U.S. Latinos were indigenous to the Americas and the Caribbean, it
was not until the 1990s – after Selena Quintanilla was killed; Jennifer
Lopez’s sex appeal became a hot topic; and Ricky Martin encouraged all
Americans to “Live la Vida Loca,” – that the corporate sector began to
notice the potential buying power of the large and swelling Latino
population. As the cultural landscape in the United States grows
increasingly complex demographically, it is more important than ever to
better understand U.S. ethnic groups to be best prepared to meet their
needs as (potential) constituents of cultural organizations. As public
84
I would like to note that I do not make gender distinctions amongst Latinos (i.e.
Latina/Latino or Latina/o) for the purpose of simplification. I do recognize however that
scholars and activists in Latino communities, particularly feminists, point to the inherent
sexism of the Spanish language, which erases women from discourse. This project is
inclusive and in fact makes broad references to people who in fact may not identify
themselves as Latinos. Due to limitations of time and space, such abbreviations are used.
85
Brook Larmer, “Latin U.S.A.: How Young Hispanics are Changing America,”
Newsweek, 12 July, 1999, 48.
86
Robert Fields, “2000 Census Shows Latino Boom,” Los Angeles Times, 22 March
2001, A27.
87
Bob Golfen and Hernan Rozember, “Census Jolts Business World: Corporate
American Suddenly Discovering the Latino Market,” Arizona Republic, 31 March 2001,
B1.
62
institutions, all museums are challenged to meet the multiple needs of their
communities, which are changing rapidly. Looking specifically at the
Latino population in the United States to better understand complicated
issues such as identity and pluralism, I think, will inform current concerns
and future discussions about museums’ relevancy, access, and social
responsibility.
As anticipated, U.S. Latinos have already become the “majority
minority” in some individual states in the union. As reported in American
Demographics, the 2000 Census concluded that the Latino population is
heavily made up of Mexicans, Puerto Ricans and Cubans, but also
growing are smaller groups of “new” Latinos including immigrants from
Central and South America and the Dominican Republic.88 Most Latinos
in the U.S. are of Mexican descent: 58 percent according to the 2000
census, but subgroup counts are inaccurate. Having caused confusion by
testing different ways to analyze ethnicity and “racial” identity amongst
Hispanics, the numbers of Nicaraguans versus Dominicans, or “white”
versus “black” identified Latinos, for example are difficult to determine.89
This is further exacerbated by Latinos’ inability to fit into rigidly defined
88
Anonymous, “Diversity in America: Hispanics,” American Demographics, November
2002, S8.
89
Janny Scott, “Census Numbers for Hispanic Subgroups Rise,” New York Times, 6 May
2003, B7.
63
racial categories common in the U.S.90 Still, it is important to note that
many cities in the country have become predominantly Latino: Hialeah,
Florida is over 90 percent, and Laredo, Texas is over 94 percent Hispanic.
Among U.S. metropolitan areas where Latinos make their home, Los
Angeles and Chicago are two of the top three. In Los Angeles, over 46
percent of the total population is Hispanic and in Chicago 26 percent of all
residents are Latinos.
Important to note is that overwhelmingly, Latinos in the U.S. are
young. These members of Generation Y – now between the ages of 10 and
29 – made up 38 percent of Latinos counted in the last Census.
Considering that educational attainment amongst Latinos has historically
been below the U.S. average and the continued disparities in schools
across the county, this statistic is particularly alarming to government
agencies.91 What remains to be seen, however, is how this trend may
change in the future due to the increase of “GenY” Latinos who are able to
access at least minimal education resources.
An interesting trend reported by the Columbia Journalism Review
is that much of the growth of the Latino population in the U. S. between
1990 and 2000 occurred in places like Georgia, Kansas, Minnesota,
90
Ricardo Alonzo-Zaldivar, “For Millions of Latinos, Race is a Flexible Concept,” Los
Angeles Times, 11 March 2003, A1.
91
Solomon Moore, “In the U.S., 1 in 7 Residents is Latino,” Los Angeles Times, 9 June
2005, A10.
64
Nebraska, and North Carolina.92 These new communities in rural America
are certain to affect cultural politics in areas such as North Carolina where
racial dynamics have been construed dichotomously as simply black/white
for hundreds of years. The town of Emporia, Kansas experienced a 184
percent population growth amongst its Hispanic population between 1990
and 2000. What such remote places will do to about the drastic
demographic changes in their community remains to be seen. How will
school districts, for example, approach the challenge of finding teachers
who are trained in English language acquisition? Or at what point do cities
and county agencies begin making cultural sensitivity or Spanish language
training available to their social services staff?
U.S. Latinos, however, are not all immigrants. In the Southwest,
some families lived in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming,
Nevada, Utah, or California for generations before those states even
became U.S. territory in 1848; hence the popular Chicano saying “We
didn’t cross the border, the border crossed us.” Similarly, Puerto Ricans
have a complex history with the United States in that Puerto Rico’s
residents became U.S. citizens after the Island became an overseas
possession of the United States in 1898. The status of Puerto Rico changed
in the early 1950s as the island transitioned from being a colony of the
92
Brent Cunningham, “The Latino Puzzle Challenges the Heartland,” Columbia
Journalism Review, 40, 6 (Mar/April 2002): 34.
65
United States to a colonial commonwealth with self-government in local
matters and American jurisdiction in state affairs.93 These particular
histories with Chicanos and Puerto Ricans explain the groups’ articulation
of themselves as “colonized” people. Puerto Ricans and Chicanos joined
in the fight for civil rights initiated and lead by African Americans in the
1960s, to improve their own condition as second-class citizens in this
country. These Brown and Black Power struggles afforded some advances
in the areas of education, housing, employment, and social services
including the Civil Rights Act, the desegregation of public schools,
assurance of fair housing, education, and employment legislation.
Later new Latinos who came to the U.S. in the “postindustrial
multinational era” as a result of the global market and transnational labor
forces also benefited from advances made during the civil rights era.94
Earlier in the history of the country, through labor initiatives such as the
Bracero Program and Operation Bootstraps, the United States defined its
need for and use of Latinos (usually male) for its labor force. Economic
forces internationally and the need for new laborers along with civil unrest
in Guatemala and El Salvador brought Central American refugees to the
United States during the eighties. Similarly, Latinos from Mexico, the
93
Jorge Duany, “Nation, Migration, Identity: The Case of Puerto Ricans,” Latino Studies
1 (2003): 425.
94
Ramon Saldivar, “Transnational Migrations and Border Identities: Immigration and
Postmodern Culture,” The South Atlantic Quarterly 98 1/2 (Winter 1999): 226.
66
Spanish-speaking Caribbean and other Latin American countries have
immigrated to the U.S. attracted by what seems to be an opportunity for a
better life – namely the availability of low-skilled jobs.
The term Latino itself is useful for strategic purposes in some
circumstances, but it is ambivalent to some. When ethnicity is used as a
basis for organization, it refers to an “imagined community,” suggesting
the potential for alliances across cultural boundaries such as national
origin, gender, sexuality, or language.95 Increased acceptance of the
category by Latinos and in mainstream culture demonstrates an affiliation
based on similarities, namely language. The formation of a pan-Latino
identity might best be described as a successful attempt to unify varied
groups with some shared experiences and similar histories. After all,
Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Mexico, and countries in
Central and South America all have in common their Indigenous,
European, African, and in some cases Asian heritages, and were all
initially colonized by Spain (except Brazil which was colonized by
Portugal). While there are heritage, linguistic, and (some) cultural
similarities amongst Latinos, ethnic and national groups have traditionally
95
ChorSwang Ngin and Rodolfo D. Torres, “Racialized Metropolis: Theorizing Asian
Americans and Latino Identities and Ethnicities in Southern California,” in Asian and
Latino Immigrants in a Restructuring Economy: The Metamorphosis of Southern
California, eds. Marta C. Lopez-Garza and David. R. Diaz (Stanford: Stanford University
Press, 2001), 376. Quoting Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities.
67
separated along geographic lines. Mexicans and Puerto Ricans have lived
separately in Chicago for decades, for example.96 Those trends are
changing, however: cities and counties in Florida have an extremely
diverse Latino population, and a “trans-Latino” identity is said to be taking
root.97 A popular Cuban restaurant in Miami now serves Argentine dishes
and hires mariachis (a Mexican-style group of musicians) who are
Colombian.
The oversimplification of the term “Latino” continues to be
contested, however. Scholar Ana Yolanda Ramos-Zayas writes, “Despite
its strategic virtues in certain political contexts, Latinidad remains an
ahistorical, diluted political identity that underplays the various forms of
U.S. intervention in Latin America and the Caribbean.”98 The allencompassing label has the potential to simultaneously erase the
specificities of ethnic and national groups with distinct histories,
experiences, and cultures while trying to unify them for political purposes.
Its has also frequently been uses to homogenize Latinos making invisible
96
Ana Y. Ramos-Zayas, National Performances: The Politics of Class, Race, and Space
in Puerto Rican Chicago (University of Chicago Press: Chicago and London, 2003), 46.
97
John-Thor Dahlburg, “Changes in Rhythm in Florida,” Los Angeles Times, 28 June
2004, A1.
98
Ana Yolanda Ramos-Zayas, National Performances: The Politics of Class, Race, and
Space in Puerto Rican Chicago (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press,
2003), 237.
68
the very real differences among them. As a recent significant Latino
Studies article expressed, there is a need for
“[C]areful analytical attention to the
racialized constructions of identities in these
times of major demographic shifts, changing
class formations, and new forms of global
dislocation. Minimally, they serve to explain
why one-size-fits-all responses to Latino
education, citizenship and well-being within
the U.S. will always be insufficient.99
Latino identities vary based on many factors which may include
national origin, language or time and degree of incorporation in the U.S.
Speaking specifically about Latinos from Central America, scholar Arturo
Arias describes that
Central American migration to the United
States includes, after all, a heterogeneous
array of social groups, among which we can
name anti-Sandinista Nicaraguans,
Hondurans, Costa Ricans, as well as
Indigenous, Afro-Caribbean and “Ladino”
(mestizo) sectors from each of these
nations.100
Even within these specific ethnic groups themselves, identities
may be contested or struggled over based on other aspects of identity such
as class status, phenotype, gender, sexuality, or national/cultural identity.
Frances Negrón-Muntaner points to the complicated associations of
99
Antonia Darder and Rodolfo D. Torres, “Mapping Latino Studies: Critical Reflections
on Class and Social Theory,” Latino Studies, 1 (2003): 308.
100
Arturo Arias, “Central American-Americans: Invisibility, Power and Representation in
the U.S. Latino World,” Latino Studies, 1 (2003): 172.
69
boricuaness (Puerto Ricanness) and issues of an authentic, classed identity
that emerged when Mattel began the distribution of the Puerto Rican
Barbie. Puerto Ricans on the Island and in the mainland could not agree as
to what the doll looked like (more European with straight hair and light
skin, or more African with darker skin and kinky hair). Puerto Ricans took
up issue with Barbie’s hair, as Negrón-Muntaner recalls, “symbolically
teasing Barbie’s hair let some blow off steam; lovingly combing it held
fantastic pleasures for others.” 101 Such public debates on the subject of
Puerto Rican identities are testament to the varied notions of boricuaness
(and even Latinidad) that are localized in (Island/U.S., in this case)
politics and history as Negrón-Muntaner calls attention to.
Certainly Latinos are not free from other complex intra-community
issues of authenticity. The story about Marisol Luna moving to the
suburbs in the Introduction section to this project begs questions of
“genuine” Latino identities as they may relate to class and affluence. Other
qualities related to educational attainment and language acquisition bring
about questions about group membership. In cities like New York where
“new” Latinos are arriving to in greater numbers, there is sometimes more
of an alliance between Puerto Ricans and African Americans than between
101
Frances Negron-Muntaner, “Barbie’s Hair, Selling Out Puerto Rican Identity in the
Global Market,” in Latino/a Popular Culture, ed. Michelle Habell-Pallan and Mary
Romero (New York: New York University Press, 2002), 56.
70
Latinos that grew up in the city and those that are newcomers.102 The
metamorphosis of identity constructions such as race and ethnicity
together with the real experienced differences amongst Latinos frequently
leads to new and unexpected alliances, particularly in urban contexts. Also
important to note is that contemporary Latinos frequently experience their
relationship to the United State in a transnational nature; modern
technology allows them to remain connected to family and friends in their
countries (if they are from outside of the U.S.), and some are even able to
return to their homeland regularly.103
This brief overview provides an example of how cultural identities
and definitions of communities defy easy classification. I discuss the
heterogeneous Latino group in the U.S. in particular to provide an
example of why museums need to be specific when initiating projects that
aim to serve communities that may be quite diverse. I now turn to the
three areas I have just laid out: culturally specific museums; increasing
community engagement in museums; and Latinos as new (potential)
constituents to investigate the development and implementation of public
programs that engaged Latino constituencies at two culturally specific
102
Robert Smith, “‘Mexicanness’ in New York: Migrants Seek New Place in Old Racial
Order,” NACLA Report on the Americas 35, no. 2 (September/October 2001): 17, 14-18.
Smith discusses his disturbing findings related to immigrant status, racialized hierarchies
and violence in New York.
103
Ngin, 377.
71
museums in particular. My research is focused on two museums in
American cities, which, like many other cities in the U.S. are experiencing
demographic changes. To determine how culturally specific museum’s
respond to the challenge of serving a broader audience, I investigated
public programs at the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum in Chicago,
Illinois and the Japanese American National Museum in Los Angeles,
California.
72
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum in Chicago’s Pilsen
neighborhood and the Japanese American National Museum near East Los
Angeles were selected as my case studies because of their location in two
of the top three major U.S. metropolitan areas that Latinos make their
homes in the U.S. Pilsen is 89 percent Latino, and East Los Angeles – just
across the river from Little Tokyo where the Japanese American National
Museum is located – is 96 percent Latino. Coincidentally, both
neighborhoods are inhabited predominately by Mexican immigrants or
Americans of Mexican descent.
First I provide an overview of each institution, I then one public
program at each museum including its development and implementation.
My conclusions reveal unconventional approaches to civic engagement. I
thus close this section by reflecting on the usefulness of civic engagement
“models.”
The Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum
73
In 1982 two educators in Chicago founded the Mexican Fine Arts
Center Museum (MFACM)104 recognizing that public schools were not
meeting the basic needs of youth. Helen Valdez and Carlos Tortolero, both
teachers at Bowen High School in South Chicago wanted to increase selfesteem in youth, educate people about their cultural heritage, and create
unity between Mexican Americans and Mexican immigrants. The
museum’s goal to be a place for cross-cultural contact as well as its
definition of the Mexican community as one without borders are evidence
of founder’s influences including Brazilian theorist Paulo Freire and the
Chicago Freedom Movement.105
In 1987 the MFACM officially became a member of Chicago Park
District’s Museums in the Parks when it moved into the renovated boat
shop in Harrison Park. In 2001 the museum completed its first expansion
that afforded it an additional thirty-three thousand square feet and they are
currently planning to grow even more to have conservation space,
education classrooms, a larger performance stage and box office, a
catering kitchen, rooftop enclosed garden, and public space for community
104
The museum was originally called the Mexican Fine Arts Center, but in 1986
“Museum” was added to the name of the organization. Chicano scholars have pointed out
that keeping the word “center” in the organizations title modifies its concept as a
museum. Chicana anthropologist Karen Mary Davalos has conducted a remarkable
amount of research on the MFACM which was the basis of my research on the museum’s
origins and development. See her book Exhibiting Mestizaje for a more complete
interpretation of the museum and its exhibitions.
105
Davalos, 114, 166-168.
74
use. They are, as Assistant Executive Director Juana Guzman described,
victims of their own success.106 Service to a broader audience has created
the demand for more space and bigger exhibitions.
In addition to its space in Harrison Park in the Pilsen
neighborhood, the MFACM has two youth initiatives, which largely
conduct their programming in satellite locations. In a more centralized
area of Pilsen is Radio Arte/WRTE, a youth-run radio station. The
museum selected the location and architecture at Radio Arte to dispel the
myth that all Latino youth are involved in gangs (Figure 1).107 WRTE
shares space with a portion of the Yollocali Art Reach program (formerly
the Yollocali Youth Museum); other Yollocali programs take place at sites
across the city and in suburbs including schools, churches, and community
centers. Additionally the museum sponsors special education programs in
targeted neighborhood schools, for example its AARTEE Program
(Academics and Art Together for Effective Education), sponsored by a
five year 21st Century Learning Grant from the State of Illinois
Department of Education, involves 18 families in youth and adult literacy
106
Juana Guzman, Associate Executive Director, Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum,
interview by author, May 11, 2005, via phone.
107
Tortolero, interview with author.
75
development.108 Museum educators also frequently conduct workshops on
Mexican art, history, and culture in other schools and public libraries.
The museum estimates the 51 percent of its visitors are from
Chicago’s Mexican communities, though there are challenges in tracking
audience demographics because except for infrequent special exhibitions,
there is no admission charge. They have close relationships with the Board
of Education and suburban school districts, however, and accommodate
1800 buses a year. The museum has 250,000 visitors a year and an annual
budget of 5 million dollars (in 1987 when the museum officially became
part of the Parks District, the budget was $110,000). There are 35 full time
staff and 30 docents in addition to 18 gallery attendants. The Mexican
Fine Arts Center Museum boasts that it is the only Latino museum
accredited by the American Association of Museums – a feat that took ten
years.
The museum’s role as a broad-based community center is evident
in the list of groups that meet there. Ranging from community-based
organizations – including a Latina support group that conducted breast
cancer workshops and screenings in the gallery – to meetings of Chicago
Park District officials and Chicago Public School principal’s. A few of the
current local agencies and organizations that work in partnership with the
108
Nancy Villafranca, Director of Education, Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum,
interview with author, May 18, 2005, via phone.
76
MFACM include the Adler Planetarium, the Department of Human
Services, the Department of Public Health, and the University of Illinois,
Chicago. The museum has been selected as a venue for major city events
in the past, often because they are seen as a good compromise between
blacks and whites in the highly segregated city.109 The museum has always
tried to reach non-Mexicanos because it is important to teach them and
there is a need to improve things through cross-racial learning.110
Several staff at the museum cited the annual Dia del Nino
(Children’s Day) program as the best example of the organizations
responsiveness and commitment to its core constituency. The program
began in 1997 as a Saturday morning radio show on Radio Arte but soon
grew into mini-festival in the community with hands-on activities offered
by other city museums. Other partners included Chicago Public Schools
and local service provides such as bilingual resources. In 2003 staff of the
MFACM were approached for help by a local consortium whose goal it
was to lower obesity in Chicago children. Health educators informed them
that Latino children have two times the incidents of diabetes as other
children. 111 The following year Dia del Nino was organized as a health
fair with cooking demonstrations, wellness testing, dental and weight
109
Tortolero, interview by author.
Ibid.
111
Randy Adamsick, Director of Development, Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum,
interview by author, May 12, 2005, via phone.
110
77
screenings, and sports and dance activities. Prizes ranged from fruit to
bikes, health organizations had information booths, and cultural
demonstrations included American Indians and South Asian folk dance
groups. The event has gotten so big that in 2005 it was moved it to the
University pavilion just two miles from the museum and was kicked off
with a walk from the museum, which five hundred people participated in.
It is estimated that the attendance was ten thousand this year, of which
twenty percent were from the barrios of Pilsen and neighboring Little
Village.112
The Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum is not only committed to
the Mexican community in Pilsen, but also to other culturally specific
organizations. At a recent planning meeting for the development of a new
Latino cultural center in Chicago, Carlos Tortolero learned that
overwhelmingly Guatemalan and Puerto Ricans in the city wanted their
own centers rather than a pan-Latino center. He suggests that the more the
public knows about distinct Latino groups the better. The museum is also
currently mentoring eight institutions around the country with support
from the Wallace Foundation. The four year grant in leadership and
excellence allows the museum to host staff from other institutions for a
week-long residency to disseminate best practices including community
112
Nancy Villafranca, interview by author.
78
involvement initiatives. They have hosted staff from the National Alliance
of Latino Arts and Culture, the Wing Luke Asian Museum, the Mexican
Museum, and the Arab American National Museum.
The Japanese American National Museum
In 1982 a group of World War II veterans and a businessman in
Los Angeles’ Little Tokyo began to independently investigate the idea of
starting a museum about Japanese Americans. Though the internment of
Japanese Americans during World War II is now a recognized fact about
American history, at the time, Japanese American’s were still raising
public awareness about the tragedy and continued to press the government
for redress. The two groups joined to incorporate the Japanese American
National Museum (JANM) in 1985 with the purpose of preserving the
heritage and cultural identity of Japanese Americans. Soon the museum
began to gain local support and in 1986 entered an agreement with the
City of Los Angeles to make the abandoned Nishi Hongwanji Buddhist
Temple its home. The museum began to grow its base of volunteers,
searched for artifacts, and commenced the publishing of newsletters to
increase the public’s recognition of the institution. Before the end of the
79
decade, the JANM had three full-time staff on board: Dr. Akemi
Kikumura, Executive Director Irene Hirano, and Dr. James Hirabayashi.
The efforts to create a museum national in its scope included travel
all over the country and in Hawai`i as well as the creation of a National
Board of Trusees and a National Scholarly Advisory Council. Fundraising
activities took place locally and all over the country with aid from leaders.
The success of building constituencies across the United States has
continued to this day. Shortly after the JANM opened, the first project of
the National Partnership Program started in Portland, Oregon.113 It served
as a foundational program for the museum, which made possible other
collaborative and community-based efforts such as finding family stories
and the Boyle Height Project which I discuss below.114
When civil unrest broke out in Los Angeles in April of 1992
following the verdict of the Rodney King trial, the museum would not
have its regularly scheduled opening as had been planned for the
following day. Held several days later, the opening was an opportunity for
the museum to commit itself to working with community organizations to
113
Akemi Kikumura-Yano, “The National Partnership Program: A Model for Community
Collaborations,” in Common Ground: The Japanese American National Museum and the
Culture of Collaborations, eds. Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and
James A. Hirabayashi, (Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005), 89.
114
Carol M. Komatsuka, “Expanding the Museum Audience Through Visitor Research,”
in Common Ground: The Japanese American National Museum and the Culture of
Collaborations, eds. Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A.
Hirabayashi, (Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005), 62.
80
advance public education about democracy and civil rights and building
bridges among diverse ethnic groups.115
Since their opening, the Japanese American National Museum has
facilitated the development of exhibitions, public programs, and
educational materials about Japanese Americans as well as other ethnic
communities across the United States including Arkansas and New York,
and internationally in Canada, Latin America and Japan.116 The museum is
particularly good at developing partnerships, many of which have been
other cultural institutions including the Ellis Island Immigration Museum,
the Japanese American Historical Society of San Diego, the Densho
Project of Seattle, and the Oregon Historical Society. In 1995 the JANM
began the finding family stories project, which was intended to foster
dialog between different ethnic communities in the Los Angeles area.
Over seven years working on finding family stories, the museum
eventually came to work with the Korean American Museum, Plaza de la
Raza, Watts Towers Arts Center, the Skirball Cultural Center, the Santa
115
Irene Y. Hirano, “Introduction: Commitment to Community,” in Common Ground:
The Japanese American National Museum and the Culture of Collaborations, eds. Akemi
Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A. Hirabayashi, (Boulder: University
of Colorado Press, 2005), 2.
116
Masato Ninomiya, “International Exchanges at Museu Histórico da Imigração
Japonesa no Brasil,” in Common Ground: The Japanese American National Museum and
the Culture of Collaborations, eds. Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and
James A. Hirabayashi, (Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005), 182.
81
Barbara Museum of Natural History, the Chinese American Museum, Self
Help Graphics and Art, and the California African American Museum.117
The JANM is committed to promoting an understanding and
appreciation for Americas’s diversity and promise of democracy beyond
the Japanese American experience through education and participation.
The museum has instituted the National Diversity Education Program,
which seeks to create a network of educators and organizations committed
to encouraging a deep understanding of diversity by developing new
educational tools for diversity education.118 In October 2005, the JANM it
will open its new affiliate project the National Center for the Preservation
of Democracy (NCPD), which trains local educators to develop high
school student’s skills in research, critical thinking, collaboration and
participation in civic society.119 At the NCPD, small groups of youth from
different schools in the Los Angeles area take part in a six week program
that aims to transform their engagement within their communities. The
NCPD has been envisioned as an opportunity to broaden the idea of the
museum. For example, the inaugural exhibition – which is meant to be
experienced with a facilitator – examines the experiences of several people
117
finding family stories web site accessed at
http://www.janm.org/exhibits/ffs/history.html (23 April 2005).
118
See the National Diversity Education Program web site accessed at
http://janm.org/about/depts/education/ndep.php (18 March 2005).
119
Clement Hanami, Program Developer, Japanese American National Museum,
interview by the author, May 13, 2005, via phone.
82
in the World War II era and brings out some of the similarities in their
experiences.
Projects at the JANM that put Japanese Americans at the center of
the story of America include the Hirasaki National Resource Center which
is serves as the museum’s library and archives, a Moving Image Archive
of home movies, and the Media Arts Center which produces media for
multiple uses from exhibitions to public television. The museum, since its
inception and especially prior to its opening, however, realized that it
could potentially have a greater impact. A look at the trajectory of
programming at the museum shows a clear path to the development of a
greater understanding about the unique role of this Japanese American
cultural organization in an increasingly diverse and complex society.
Report of Findings
To report on the findings of public programs that have engaged
new Latino constituencies at the two museums, I will discuss the public
program which I focused on at each. The origins and development of these
programs were of particular interest to me as were the challenges staff
experience(d) in implementing the programs. Unfortunately, formal
evaluative studies are not available for both, therefore evidence of the
83
impact of Radio Arte and the Homofrecuencia program associated with
the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum is based on anecdotal information
and can only be suggestive. Evidence of the impact of the Japanese
American National Museum’s Boyle Heights Project programs are based
on a retrospective evaluation conducted by Harder+Company Community
Research in March of 2003. Conclusions follow the discussion of the
programs and are organized thematically.
Homofrecuencia on Radio Arte, a MFACM Youth Initiative
On May 27, 2005 the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum in
Chicago was the improbable host of a Gay Prom. The prom was organized
by teens involved with Radio Arte/WRTE, one of the museum’s youth
initiatives and was attended mostly by queer Latinos, but also by other
queer youth and straight allies. The radio station and its unconventional
programming emerged from the museum staff challenging themselves by
asking what more they could be doing to better serve their community.
In 1996 the Boys and Girls Club of Chicago approached the
Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum (MFACM) with an urgent offer to
purchase a youth-run radio station in Pilsen, the predominately Mexican
neighborhood that is also home to the museum. It took some convincing
for the museum to agree to purchase the station, but ultimately it did for so
84
for $12,000. During the time of transition from the Boys and Girls Club to
the MFACM, the youth were skeptical of all of the promises made to
them: a new location, better equipment and paid positions. Eventually the
station became one of the museum’s youth initiatives, which did in fact
employ youth who programmed there when it was part of the Boys and
Girls Club. Jorge Valdivia, now General Manager of WRTE, had been
working at the station when the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum
(MFACM) purchased it nine years ago; he was 21 at the time.
Radio Arte bills itself as the only Latino youth-operated radio
station in the country. The station offers 150 youth ages 15-21 two years
of training in radio production including three months of theory covering
topics such as production, journalism, voice training and writing for
radio.120 Participants select to take classes in either Spanish or English
(most frequently Spanish) and select a programming team to be part of.
Teams explore topics ranging from housing and gentrification in Chicago
to issues related women and gender. They are then expected to participate
in their programming team’s weekly meeting to discuss their research,
interviews, production and script assignments and also put in a few hours
a week of on the air. A variety of skills are learned in the training program
and many youth have gone on to get jobs in major Spanish-language radio
120
Author unknown, “New Mexicans,” Museum Practice Magazine (Spring 2003): 28,
24-29.
85
stations in Chicago as well as internships with the local National Public
Radio station. WRTE also recently began training adults in radio
production and they have not been able to meet the demand for classes for
this segment of the community.
While the programming at Radio Arte is Latino-centric, it does not
privilege Mexicano listeners. According to Valdivia, there is a degree of
separation between Radio Arte and the MFACM.121 In fact, there is quite a
bit of separation. The museum is the licensee of WRTE, but the station
operates fairly independently and has its own vision programmatically and
financially according to Valdivia. WRTE staff, however do participate in
museum-wide staff meetings, work with museum staff when they
coordinate programs there, and have a close relationship with the
development department through which they do all of their fundraising
and grant writing. Administrators and staff at the museum have mentored
Valdivia in his three years as General Manager for Radio Arte and in his
previous positions at the station. WRTE also employs three other full-time
staff: an Assistant General Manager – who has also been there since the
days of the Boys & Girls Club – a Director of Training Programs, and a
Director of Community Relations, and seven part-time staff.
121
Jorge Valdivia, General Manager, Radio Arte WRTE (a Youth Initiative of the
Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum), interview by author, May 10, 2005, via phone.
86
Though the station’s frequency only has a fourteen-mile range, it
can be accessed on the Internet and the online broadcast reaches 40,000
listeners. The target population for Radio Arte ranges between 15-40,
depending on the program. The audience is mostly Latino (and
presumably straight), though the station plays both English and Spanish
music throughout the day. With an eclectic selection of music including
different genres from all over Latin America, the Caribbean and Spain,
World Music, electronica, U.S. based hip-hop and a variety of Latino
music from inside and out of the U.S., WRTE appeals to a very broad
audience. The station regularly gets donations from non-Latinos, from
students at local universities, and from outside of the city.
Valdivia states that Radio Arte focuses on diversity in all aspects
of the lives of Latinos. Youth involved in the station produce shows
ranging from popular culture (Figure 2) to news reports to Latino punk,
but currently the two most popular programs – La Femme and
Homofrecuencia – best illustrate Radio Arte’s and the MFACM’s
commitment to engage multiple sectors of the local Latino community.
The La Femme program began four years ago to recognize the histories,
struggles and triumphs of Latina women. The web site for the La Femme,
states that the youth involved define themselves as a “network of young
women of color” that exist to “provide a medium for young women to
87
engage in a productive and meaningful exchange of ideas and concerns”
and strive to redefine femininity and womanhood from the Latina youth
perspective.122
Homofrecuencia, which started in August 2002, provides a space
for Latino youth who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) or
unsure about their sexuality (Figure 3). Ivan Torrijos, a youth participant
with Radio Arte wrote a proposal for the program during his first phase of
training in 2002, which demonstrated the need for a Spanish language
radio program for the queer community.123 The purpose of the show is to
connect LGBT communities to resources; to serve as a resource about
queer issues; and to put LGBT queer issues into the Latino community
through radio.124 One of the goals of the program is to “raise
consciousness and encourage dialog between neighbors, family, friends,
parents, and amongst ourselves about human rights.”125 Youth participants
are constantly trying to connect the multiple issues that queer Latinos
youth deal with, for example on a recent show about civil rights, youth
discussed both immigration and same-sex marriage. Participants of the
Homofrecuencia program have been sought out to help start Gay Straight
122
La Femme web site accessed at http://www.wrte.org/la_femme/ (29 April 2005).
Tania Unzueta, Homofrecuencia Producer, Radio Arte, interview by author, June 7,
2005.
124
Ibid.
125
Homofrecuencia web page http://www.wrte.org/homofrecuencia/ (April 29, 2005).
123
88
Alliance organizations in area schools. Of all of the WRTE productions,
the Homofrecuencia show has the most extensive web site, which is
almost completely in Spanish and includes links to local resources and
publications. The depth of the program’s online presence perhaps reflects
the prevalence of the queer Internet community, particularly among gay
men.
Valdivia, the General Manager of Radio Arte, was at first hesitant
about putting Homofrecuencia on the air in 2002, but says he found the
courage in asking what more the station could be doing for the
community. He has also said that he was daunted in his role as the “go-to”
guy at the station for queer-related issues.126 This commitment to pushing
the audience reflects Carlos Tortolero’s statement that staff at the Mexican
Fine Arts Center Museum recognizes the need to be leaders and “take the
community in a new direction.”127 Much to their surprise, the station was
flooded with e-mails thanking them for their bold move of putting the
show on the air. Radio Arte has since received an award from the National
Federal Community Broadcasting; acknowledgment as one of the top
youth art programs in the U.S. by the National Endowment for the Arts
126
Etelka Lehoczky, “Radio free homo: Chicago-based Homofrecuencia is bringing gay
outreach to teenagers and around the globe,” The Advocate, 10 December 2002. 65.
127
Tortolero, interview by author.
89
and the National Endowment for the Humanities; and recognition from the
Mayor of Chicago and his Lesbian Gay Task Force.128
The program has taken some getting used to in the community and
at Radio Arte, however. One donor pulled his donated to the station. He
had given $200,000 the year prior to Homofrecuencia coming on the
air.129 While staff and other youth involved in Radio Arte are positive and
supportive, there still sometimes seems to be a sort of “shady” tone when
people ask, “So you work with Homofrecuencia, huh?”130 Coincidentally
since the production classes for adults that the station recently started,
there have been homophobic articles published on Radio Notas, a web
magazine about radio in Spanish, which talk about a “conversion” agenda
on the show. When one of the adult programmers was asked not to preach
about the Bible on the air he asked why Homofrecuencia could talk about
religion but yet he could not. Some time ago Ivan Torrijos – one of the
program founders who had an interest in the intersection of homosexuality
and religion – anonymously interviewed priests about interpretations of
the Bible. The show started a good discussion about the prominence of
Catholicism in the Latino community. Other weekly discussion topics the
Homofrecuencia program covers relate to the diversity of the Spanish
128
Author unknown, “New Mexicans,” Museum Practice Magazine (Spring 2003): 28,
24-29.
129
Tortolero, interview by author.
130
Ibid.
90
speaking queer community ranging from society and politics to
entertainment and family support.
Youth involved in the program sometimes get challenging phone
calls; they deal with it by putting them on the air and asking people to be
respectful, they sometimes have to cut people off of the line, but usually
youth who are queer allies are the ones who speak to them. Tania Unzueta,
who is the senior producer for the show and also works at La Raza a local
Latino newspaper, recalled that when the editor received the press release
for the Queer Prom he made fun of it out loud until he realized she was
listed as the contact person. “Even the environment within a ‘progressive’
newspaper trying to help Latinos is oppressive,” she said.131
The Queer Prom at the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum was
amongst the first public programs put on by youth involved with
Homofrecuencia (Figure 4). In fact, the Noche de Arco Iris/Queer Prom
was a greatly anticipated event locally. Though it was not the first time
Chicago had a gay prom, others had been hosted in Boystown, the queer
neighborhood on the North side of the Chicago. Unzueta, told journalists
covering the event, “It’s just a party. It’s something that may seem so
basic, but at the same time it has such incredibly significance for us. We
want people to understand that the gay community is not only in
131
Unzueta, interview by author.
91
Boystown, and also that if you are gay and you live in Pilsen, you don’t
have to go to Boystown because we have to create space here where we
can be comfortable.”132 Social service providers shared the news of the
prom with one another over the Internet so that they could pass the word
along to their clients.133
Carlos Tortolero, the museum’s director, was sure to clarify for
local journalists that the MFACM is no stranger to gay causes, “When we
opened for weddings two years ago, the first couple to get married were
lesbians.”134 Organizers of the 2005 Queer Prom stated that although they
had never felt especially connected to the MFACM as participants in
Radio Arte in the past, the prom changed that. They felt a strong sense of
support from museum’s Executive Director Carlos Tortolero who was at
the prom all night talking to people. It meant a lot to people that they were
at a queer event at the museum.135 Carlos said a few words to welcome
everyone and told attendees, “We are honored to have you here tonight.
132
Gisela Orozco, “Celebracion Alternativa,” La Raza, 19 May 2005. Accessed at
http://www.laraza.com/news.php?nid=22611 (2 July, 2005). Translation by author.
133
Author unknown, “Latino LGBTQ Youth from Pilsen organizing prom,” Chicago
Social Service Network on 17 May 2005. Accessed at
http://cssn.chicago.vc/forum/viewtopic.php?p=89 (2 July 2005).
134
Casey Sanchez, “Pilsen Tiene Baile de Graduacion de Adolescentes Gay,”Extra News,
2 June 2005. Accessed at http://extranews.hdnweb.com/news.php?nid=924 (2 July,
2005). Translation by author.
135
Tania Unzueta, Homofrecuencia Producer, Radio Arte, interview by author, June 7,
2005.
92
You are always welcome here”136 and “This is always your home,
remember that, okay?”137 The prom was a great success and
Homofrecuencia now plans to host a drag king show next year.
La Femme and Homofrecuencia are examples of how WRTE
addresses “difference” in their community. The staff at Radio Arte is not
apologetic about their focus on Latinos at the radio station. Pilsen is 89
percent Mexican and Little Village, a nearby neighborhood, is 97 percent
Mexican. Valdivia notes that Latinos are still the most underserved group
in Chicago and that the radio station “is a resource to create a bridge to
that community.”138 The student body of WRTE reflects the community in
that students are predominately of Mexican heritage with some Central
American, Puerto Rican, and African American participants. “It’s
important,” says Valdivia, “to look inward at our community to create
social movements, but it is also so important to look outward too.”139 As
part of their production assignments, youth participants in the training
program frequently attend rallies to interview and survey people on a wide
range of issues including education, immigrant rights, war, housing and
136
Marie-Jo Proulx, “Latino Queer Prom is a Hit,” Windy City Media Group, 1 June
2005. Accessed at
http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=8403 (2
July 2005).
137
Emily Alpert, “Debajo del Arco Iris,” In the Fray Magazine, 13 June 2005. Accessed
at http://inthefray.com/html/article.php?sid=1191 (2 July 2005).
138
Jorge Valdivia, General Manager, Radio Arte WRTE/Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum, interview by author, May 10, 2005, via phone. His emphasis.
139
Ibid.
93
health care reform, and same sex marriage. The students work to make
explicit parallels between these issues in their broadcasting. “I would like
to think we’re creating leaders,” Valdivia says of the Radio Arte staff’s
efforts. The station’s motto is “youth redefining the concept of radio,”
perhaps through their connection to and growing relationship with the
MFACM, they are also redefining “museum.”
Boyle Heights Project: A Multiethnic Community History Project
On September 8, 2002, the Japanese American National Museum
(JANM) in Los Angeles’ Little Tokyo opened Boyle Heights: The Power
of Place, an exhibition about an East L.A. neighborhood in the vicinity. In
the early twentieth century, Boyle Heights was a multiethnic community,
so much so in fact that it was a target for government-sponsored urban
social engineering designed to geographically separate racial groups.140
The community was regarded as Los Angeles’ first integrated
neighborhood and was home to Jewish Americans, African Americans,
Japanese Americans, Mexican Americans and international families.
Boyle Heights was largely a multiethnic neighborhood until the post
World War II period. The cultural history exhibit was just one component
140
George Sanchez, “‘What’s Good for Boyle Heights is Good for the Jews’: Creating
Multiculturalism on the Eastside during the 1950’s.” American Quarterly, 56 (September
2004): 636.
94
of the Boyle Heights Project the museum had initiated two years earlier
which also included oral history and photo collection, relationship
building, and varying other programs. The idea for the project seemed to
naturally materialize from the work the museum had already been doing:
giving voice to an unheard community and partnering with local
organizations.141
The staff at JANM were well into the finding family stories project
which it had started in the mid-nineties to examine the broad concept of
“family” by partnering with other cultural organizations in the Los
Angeles area. finding family stories came about as an effort to facilitate
cross-cultural exchange among diverse communities, artists, and
organizations in Southern California in the era following the civil unrest
that ensued upon the verdicts of the Rodney King trials.142 When the
Boyle Heights Project was taking place, the last finding family stories
cycle – on which they worked with Self Help Graphics and Art for the first
time – was coming to completion. finding family stories used the JANM’s
National Partnerships Program approach143 to community history by
141
Sojin Kim, Curator, Japanese American National Museum, interview by author.
finding family stories web site accessed at
http://www.janm.org/exhibits/ffs/history.html (23 April 2005).
143
Carol M. Komatsuka, “Expanding the Museum Audience Through Visitor Research,”
in Common Ground: The Japanese American National Museum and the Culture of
Collaborations, eds. Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A.
Hirabayashi, (Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005), 62. See Akemi Kikumura142
95
working with eight different local cultural organizations – mostly ethnic
specific – and was an opportunity for staff to develop the skill of working
with partnering organizations,144 which created a strong foundation for the
Boyle Heights Project.
Sojin Kim, co-curator of the Boyle Heights Project was working in
the museum’s Life History Program with Darcie Iki when they conceived
of a undertaking that would explore Japanese American internment from
the perspective of those whose friends and neighbors were sent to camp.145
Sojin had recently worked on Shades of L.A., the Los Angeles Public
Library project that duplicated and archived the city’s diversity by
selecting pictures from family albums. She remembers that when she
worked on Shades of L.A. she saw many photos belonging to families
from all over the world that had been taken in Boyle Heights; several
people told her stories about their Japanese friends who had to leave the
neighborhood for camp when they were interned during the war.
When the idea for the project began to take form, staff contacted
George Sanchez, American Studies Professor at the University of
Southern California, who was already been conducting research on
multiethnic relations in Boyle Heights. It soon grew to become an
Yano’s article “The National Partnership Program: A Model for Community
Collaborations,” in Common Ground.
144
Kim, interview by author.
145
Ibid.
96
extraordinary effort that mobilized partner organizations, local youth,
elderly, businesses and scholars including past and current neighborhood
residents in exploring the dynamic community.146 Boyle Heights: The
Power of Place was one of two exhibitions related to the Boyle Heights
Project; the other exhibition, About, By, From: Boyle Heights –
Expressions, Impressions, and Memories of a historic neighborhood in
East Los Angeles was mounted at Self Help Graphics and Arts, an
established Chicano arts organization in the neighborhood. “No person or
ethnic group lives in a vacuum,” said Emily Anderson, co-curator of the
exhibition, “Boyle Heights is the perfect example of a neighborhood
where Japanese Americans lived with others. The purpose of the exhibit
was to explore those intersections and diversity.”147 The project created in
fact, not only opportunities for different ethnic and cultural groups to
interact, but also for intergenerational communication in hopes that those
exchanges would provide “ideas and insights for better understanding the
146
Partners for the Boyle Heights Project were the International Institute of Los Angeles,
the Jewish Historical Society of Southern California, Self Help Graphics and Art,
Theodore Roosevelt Senior High School (Los Angeles Unified School District), and the
Japanese American National Museum. There were also forty project advisors including
community members, scholars in various disciplines and museum professionals Lonnie
Bunch and Ron Chew. Funders for the project were members and donors of the Japanese
American National Museum; the California Council for the Humanities, a state affiliate
of the National Endowment for the Humanities, in partnership with the James Irvine
Foundation; University of Southern California SC/W Exposition; The John Randolph
Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation; the Institute for Museum and Library Services; the
National Endowment for the Humanities; The Nathan Cummings Foundation; Nissan
Foundation and the Bank of America Foundation.
147
Emily Anderson, Assistant Curator, Japanese American National Museum, interview
by author, April 18, 2005, via phone.
97
present and the changes that affect all communities.”148 Hence, one of the
goals of the project was to connect the stories of past and present
neighborhood residents.
Indeed, Boyle Heights had been an ethnically diverse community
for decades. It had at one time been compared to New York’s Lower East
Side in its long-standing role as home to the city and country’s
newcomers, and as the Ellis Island of the West Coast.149 In 1955, Ralph
Friedman, a writer for Frontier magazine, enthusiastically described the
area as a "U.N. in Microcosm," a place where "amazing progress in human
relations has been made.”150 Since the late 1950s, however, the
neighborhood has been home to a large Mexican American population, but
difference continues to mark Boyle Heights today in that the neighborhood
has increasingly become the receiving neighborhood for immigrants from
Mexico and Central America. Various cultural institutions that serve those
Armenian, Jewish, Russian and Japanese American communities, which at
one time lived in Boyle Heights, are still located in the community.
Though many of the people they serve have moved to other parts of the
148
Boyle Height Project Vision Statement accessed at
http://janm.org/exhibits/bh/resources/proj_overview.htm (18 February 2005).
149
LA Times Saturday, April 29. 2000 found at Boyle Heights: Neighborhood Sights and
Insights, USC. Accessed at http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/pase/bhproject/index09.htm (5
April 2005).
150
Quoted in Boyle Heights: Neighborhood Sights and Insights, University of Southern
California http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/pase/bhproject/index06.htm (5 April 2005).
98
L.A. area, a lot of them return to access social services and attend worship
regularly.
There were two types of public programs developed in relation to
the Boyle Heights Project. The Japanese American National Museum
(JANM) generally tends to think of their exhibitions as the culmination of
a larger effort.151 In the case of this project, several pre-exhibition
programs were organized by to generate broader public interest, and also
to collect past and current residents’ experiences of living in the
multiethnic neighborhood. These programs included Photo Duplication
Days; various small programs with seniors through church groups,
reunions and board meetings; a Community Forum; oral history training
and collection with area youth and college students; cultural history
discussions on local radio stations; art programs in the neighborhood; and
an intergenerational panel on youth culture in the 1930’s and 2002. All of
these programs were organized by the museum and partner organizations
and most took place at various locations away from the museum. While
the programs were open to a broad public, the targeted audiences were
past and current residents of the neighborhood who could contribute to an
understanding of the multiethnic relationships in Boyle Heights.
151
Clement Hanami, “Self-Creation: Defining Cultural Identity Within Museum
Exhibitions,” in Common Ground: The Japanese American National Museum and the
Culture of Collaborations, eds. Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and
James A. Hirabayashi, (Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005), 20.
99
Programs that were to take place during the run of the exhibitions
were intended to address topics that had not been sufficiently developed,
such the long history of musicians in the Boyle Heights community, or
opportunities for former and current residents to share their experiences in
the neighborhood with one another. As well, programs were opportunities
to celebrate the intra-ethnic vitality of the community. When Boyle
Heights: The Power of Place finally opened in late 2002, many different
types of programs were planned to take place throughout its run. The
largest of those was The Eastside Revue: 1932 - 2002 A Musical Homage
to Boyle Heights which was an outdoor day-long music festival that
Rubén “Funkhuatl” Guevara guest curated. The event showed the diversity
of the East L.A. music scene over time and its significance to youth
culture.152 The bill consisted of nineteen acts including Mexican, African,
Asian, Jewish, Anglo, and Cuban American musicians that got their start
in Boyle Heights. All artists were paid through programming funds that
had been set up the year prior. About 1,500 people attended the free
concert in the museum’s pavilion and many saw the exhibition while they
were there.
Many school children attended the museum to see the exhibition
with their classes. The museum held a preview event for local educators
152
Emily Anderson, Assistant Curator, Japanese American National Museum, interview
by author, April 18, 2005, via phone.
100
and distributed the teacher’s guide to all teachers who booked a tour. The
teacher’s guide included pre- and post-visit activities as well as
information on how to conduct a community history project in their school
neighborhood.153 Portions of the guide were developed to offer general
information not localized in Los Angeles or Boyle Heights since the
intention was to distribute the guide to teachers all over the country as it
was hoped the exhibition would travel to other museums. Enthused
teachers and students from Hamilton Middle School went home and
started their own local project which involved ten students in an after
school program in which the teachers followed the guide to facilitate their
research about their North Long Beach community. The students and
teachers revisited the exhibition on multiple occasions and later presented
their projects at their school and at the museum. Hamilton Middle School
youth also spoke to a group of teachers from across the country at
JANM’s Teacher Institute about their involvement in the project.
One major program related to the exhibition is its extensive web
site, which is an enormous resource containing many different levels of
information. Its content varies including general information for planning
a visit to the museum or to other sites of public programs related to the
exhibit, press releases about the community history project, exhibitions
153
Allyson Nakamoto, Educator, Japanese American National Museum, interview by
author May 18, 2005, via phone.
101
and related events, a list of programs, and information about the teacher’s
guide and project partners, advisors and funders. The depth of information
presented on the web site, however is in its “Information Resources”
section, which includes a timeline of the neighborhood from the 1700’s, a
bibliography, and maps showing the changing demographics in the area
from 1940-2000 make explicit the growth of the Latino population
between 1950 and 1960. For others wanting to conduct similar community
history projects, the web site illustrates the varied strategies employed by
the JANM in gathering stories and experiences of living Boyle Heights.
These include information on how they coordinated intergenerational
participation and engaged in collaborative partnerships with other
organizations. The web site also includes excerpts of several oral history
interviews and an example audio diary produced by Roosevelt High youth
from interviews they conducted with elderly members of the community.
The resource portion of the web site serves as a tool for anyone wanting to
know more about Boyle Heights and the significance of such
neighborhoods as sites of dynamic cultural exchange which George
Sanchez, Professor at USC and one of the project’s advisors, states is more
common of urban neighborhoods than the myth of the racially
homogeneous ghetto or barrio.154
154
George Sanchez, “Working at the Crossroads: American Studies for the 21st Century,”
102
The Boyle Heights project was for JANM an opportunity to target
Latinos and Jewish American audiences including Mexicans/Mexican
Americans who were current residents or had at one time lived in the
neighborhood. Rubén “Funkhuatl” Guevara a musician, who grew up in
the neighborhood and lives there now, for example, assisted with musicrelated topics on the project.155 He was quite involved in fact; he guest
curated the Eastside Revue, a day-long concert featuring East L.A.
musicians past and present that took place during the exhibition; served on
the Community Advisory Committee; helped with oral history collecting;
put together a music listening station for the exhibition at the JANM; and
participated in theater workshops in the gallery.
Other Latino constituents were involved in the Boyle Heights
Project including current and former residents who participated in Photo
Collection Days and the Community Forum to share their experiences of
living in the neighborhood and help shape the project and exhibition.
Latino (and other) students from Roosevelt High School and the
University of Southern California helped collect data on Photo
Duplication Days. A multi-ethnic group of students participated in oral
history collection projects through Roosevelt and USC as well. Local
American Quarterly 54, no.1 (March 2002), 4.
155
Ruben Guevara, Boyle Heights Project Advisory Committee Member, Japanese
American National Museum, interview by author, July 10, 2005, via phone.
103
Latino artists helped with contemporary art installations in the gallery
from graffiti to altars. A visit to the exhibition inspired youth from Long
Beach and their teachers to conduct a community history of their
neighborhoods, and Latino family members participated in Great Leap’s
multicultural theater workshops and production that took place in the
galleries during the exhibition’s run. The museum experienced a ten
percent increase156 amongst Latino visitor during the exhibition, some left
their memories written in the visitor comment book.
The first public programs of the Boyle Height Project were the
Photo Duplication Days, which took place on a weekend in April 2000
with the assistance of two project partners: the Jewish Historical Society
of Southern California and Theodore Roosevelt Senior High School. The
purpose of the Photo Duplication Days were to connect the project with
past and current residents of the Boyle Heights neighborhood and collect
copies of their photographs. It was decided that the event would take place
at Roosevelt High School since it is a neighborhood landmark and
returning to the school in and of itself would be a draw for some. Most of
the publicity was done through word of mouth, but there was a flyer and a
small announcement in the L.A. Times (Figure 5). An open invitation was
put out to alumni and the community to bring in photos to be duplicated
156
Komatsuka, 63.
104
for a neighborhood history project. Over the two days, graduate students
from the University of Southern California selected photos for duplication
and collected information about them with the help of college and high
school interns who had gone through a brief training (Figure 6). During
Photo Collection Days, photographers duplicated 200 photos from 150
participants. Images and stories collected were deposited into the archives
of the Jewish Cultural Society of Southern California and the JANM. Over
the weekend friends and neighbors reconnected, families and generations
meet, and strangers talked amongst one another about their memories of
Boyle Heights (Figure 7). Museum staff took the opportunity to collect
information from participants to keep in contact with them during the
development of the exhibition and other programs. They also took
referrals for other people they should contact.
Key informants were later invited to another pre-exhibition event,
the Community Forum, which all of the partner organizations of the
project attended (Figures 8 and 9). It was held in September of that same
year at the International Institute of Los Angeles. The goal of the forum
was for the participating institutions and advisors to hear from attendees
about their experiences living in Boyle Heights as well as to get their input
as to what they would like to see in an exhibition about the neighborhood.
While museum staff had some ideas for the exhibition, the Community
105
Forum was intended as a public airing of what the hopes for the exhibition
might be long before it began to take shape. Project partner’s explained
the goals for the project and asked attendees to brainstorm topics for the
exhibition in small groups.
In her article about the exhibition, co-curator Sojin Kim discusses
some of the challenges encountered in developing an intergenerational
history project. Depending on their age, education, and experiences,
people discussed topics differently. Many of those drawn to the project,
she states, were invested in “promoting a particular memory of past
community life…. their stories… spoke of a tolerant, supportive, diverse
community (versus ones that reflected conflict or prejudice)… [those
participants were the ones who] shared on record or in public formats.”157
She admits also that project outreach emphasized recovering the
neighborhood’s history and therefore there was not enough sustained
discussion about contemporary community issues.
Emily Anderson, co-curator of the exhibition spoke of the a
challenge it was to remain conscious about not representing Boyle Heights
as a dichotomous community that appeared to be prosperous and intact in
the thirties in comparison to the contemporary immigrant community it is
157
Sojin Kim, “All Roads Lead to Boyle Heights,” in Common Ground: The Japanese
American National Museum and the Culture of Collaborations, eds. Akemi KikumuraYano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A. Hirabayashi, (Boulder: University of
Colorado Press, 2005), 157.
106
now, which in the popular consciousness has a bad reputation and is
assumed to be gang infested.158 She said that is why the exhibition was
organized thematically rather than having a start and an end point. The
exhibit, Anderson said, sought to include celebratory aspects of the
neighborhood without ignoring contemporary difficulties.
Despite these challenges posed to the staff, the project was
successful at recontextualizing the experiences of former residents like
those of Mollie (Wilson) Murphy who asserted that she, as a member of
the African Diaspora, seemed to be left out of the account of Boyle
Heights that a member of the alumni network described in his invitation
for project participation.159 Molly donated bags of letters to the museum,
which her friends wrote her while interned in camps across the U.S.; she
was also one of the subjects of the oral history component of the project.
Because of her involvement the public has access to a unique description
of Japanese American internment and multiethnic relations in Los
Angeles.
Most Latino visitors and participants came in contact with the
JANM and its partners for the first time through the Boyle Heights
Project. Many probably only have faint memories of their visit to the
158
Emily Anderson, Assistant Curator, Japanese American National Museum, interview
by author, April 18, 2005, via phone.
159
Kim, “All Roads Lead to Boyle Heights,”158.
107
exhibitions or attendance at the Eastside Revue or other public programs.
For some like Rubén Guevara it marked the start of a new relationship.
Rubén has stayed in touch with the museum and was invited to do youth
leadership training at the National Center for the Preservation of
Democracy this summer. Others who were more deeply involved – like
Elva Escobedo who interviewed Henry “Hank” Yoshitake on his
experience as volunteer soldier during WWII – developed a deeper
understanding of what it means to be an American and are more aware of
the unique multiethnic community Boyle Heights was the forties.160
Latinos got involved in the Boyle Height Project in consultation, as
project partners, through program development, exhibition design, and as
participants in public programs. Though they project was not developed to
increase the participation of Latinos in particular, they, in addition to other
ethnic groups, became involved in programs in high numbers. The
exhibition increased attendance at the museum by ten percent amongst
Latinos and eight percent amongst European Americans.161 Boyle Heights
Project and its related programs are an example of one culturally specific
museum’s successful effort to expand its reach by involving members of
diverse Los Angeles communities.
160
Audio Diaries page for Boyle Heights Project, Collecting Resources accessed at
http://janm.org/exhibits/bh/resources/collecting/audio_diaries.htm accessed (18 February
2005).
161
Komatsuka, 63.
108
General Conclusions
People, not artifacts, are the vital center of a
dynamic community-based museum.162
The traditional concept of the museum is changing. Today,
museums are recognized as being much more than collection warehouses
but rather, more complicated places. A recent proposed (re)definition for a
museum describes it as a “dynamic ‘field’” that entails a special set of
networks revolving around
people exchanging objects, ideas, skills, and
so forth, with the aim of developing an
exhibition and related educational materials,
public programs, and the like. These people
carry out their work through the media of
dialogues, individual and collective learning,
and practical working collaborations. In this
sense an exhibition, shown to the public, is
only the end product of a complex and
multifaceted set of social relations,
negotiations, and sometimes even struggles
having to do with differential access to
resources, prestige, and power.163
162
Ron Chew, “Community Roots,” in Mastering Civic Engagement: A Challenge to
Museums, (Washington D.C.: American Association of Museums, 2002), 64.
163
Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, Akemi Kikumura, and James A. Hirabayashi, “Conclusion,” in
Common Ground: The Japanese American National Museum and the Politics of
Collaborations, ed. Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A.
Hirabayashi (Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005), 209.
109
Such notions of what museums are and do make their work all the more
important for the health of their communities. They point to a high level of
awareness about the real consequences of the work that takes place in
museums on the people who use them. I turn now to consider what I have
learned about the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum and the Japanese
American National Museum to reveal some of the implications of their
work.
Culturally specific museums have long been recognized as
different in many respects from conventional museum models. As noted in
the Background section above, many were founded in opposition to large
art museums and established historical societies, which had exclusive
collecting and exhibition practices, leaving out the contributions of groups
marginal to the art historical cannon and master narrative of American
history. It was in contrast to the norm of museum representation that
ethnic museums were developed to preserve, interpret and display the
history and expressive culture of “others” and engage those populations as
participants. Motivated by the need to give voice to those otherwise
rendered invisible, culturally specific museums put people at their center.
Despite the efforts of some culturally specific museums to be
relevant to the general population, they have been assumed to be
exclusively for that group which they represent. Several years ago, for
110
example, the Studio Museum in Harlem conducted a survey that found
many respondents did not know non-black people could visit.164 One of
the challenges of culturally specific museums currently is to appeal to a
broad population and balance the needs of their core constituencies with
those of new/potential audiences and participants.165 While mainstream
museums explore and activate methods for involving communities
historically underrepresented as museum audiences, many culturally
specific museums have long been experts at engaging deep participation
from their stakeholders. One of the initial inquiries of this project was
about how culturally specific museums define which people they are for.
The work that takes place at these two museums to expand their defined
constituencies and include new Latino stakeholders complicates the
definition of a “culturally specific” museum, hence constructing more
fluid definitions of “community” and “culture.”
Putting people at the center of museums requires that institutions
be responsive to those stakeholders’ needs. The MFACM and the JANM
are quick to respond to situations that affect the communities that they
serve and the core values of the institution. The Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum’s swift response to American Girl and Mattel about the negative
164
Sandra Jackson, Director of Education and Public Programs, Studio Museum in
Harlem, interview by author, April 26, 2005, via phone.
165
Kleinschmidt, 107. Quoting Ron Chew.
111
picture they painted of Pilsen is a perfect example as is the Japanese
American National Museum’s change of plans when civil unrest broke out
in Los Angeles the night before their grand opening. These particular
situations stem from the specific communities they seek to represent: their
experiences historically as well as their particular contemporary and local
circumstances. Though both museums seek to reach a broad public, the
MFACM clearly thinks of them selves as primarily for the local Mexican
community, while the JANM is much more expansive in their
conceptualization of “community.”
The MFACM’s radio programming exemplifies how a museum
can directly respond to a local community need. Due to their sense of
accountability to their local community the youth-run radio station in the
neighborhood was purchased from the Chicago Boys and Girls club who
could no longer manage it. Radio Arte has become a major youth initiative
of the museum – though the two are somewhat removed from one another
– and participants themselves drive the programming.
Likewise, the proposal for Homofrecuencia, came directly from
youth who recognized the lack of resources for Spanish speaking LGBT
communities and recognized that WRTE could provide a service in that
respect. Such initiative on the part of a participant shows a strong sense of
ownership in the station, which is an asset in the community. Staff simply
112
responded to the expressed need for Homofrecuencia and Noche de Arco
Iris/Queer Prom. Radio Arte and the MFACM became valued allies by
allocating institutional resources and facilitating the development of
programs to support queer Latinos, an emerging constituent group. Thus,
even though this kind of programming has larger global implications in its
giving a voice and public presence to queer issues, MFACM definitely
began with local needs.
In contrast, the JANM’s Boyle Heights Project began from larger
concerns related to marketing and public relations research, and then
honed in on the local East Los Angeles neighborhood which is now
predominately Latino. A participatory community history project on Boyle
Heights would allow the museum to explore the Japanese American
experience from a different perspective – that of their friends and
neighbors. It also gave the museum an opportunity to continue building
multiethnic relations locally and to promote the intra-community dialog so
needed in Los Angeles after the 1992 civil unrest.
Thus, neither Homofrecuencia nor the Boyle Heights Project were
developed with the purpose of engaging new Latino constituencies.
Instead Latino participation resulted quite naturally as part of the
museums’ long-established commitments to community wellbeing.
Among the reasons stated for the work that they do was that they seek to
113
empower people to tell their stories and to take advantage of the resources
available to them.166
Putting people at the center of museums enfranchises communities.
Jorge Validivia, General Manager of Radio Arte, sees his role as one of
“creating leaders” and socially conscious citizens.167 Through
Homofrecuencia, queer Latino youth have been afforded space on the air,
on the Internet, and in Pilsen. Noche de Arco Iris gave these new
constituents a place to gather in their own neighborhood rather than
having to go to Boystown, the identified “gay neighborhood” in Chicago.
Homofrecuencia serves as a resource to the community at large by helping
to develop high school Gay Straight Alliances and plays an important role
by providing straight listeners with the tools to support their family
members and friends who are queer, thereby creating allies.
The Japanese American National Museum identified that they exist
to give voice to an unheard community.168 Several of the programs
associated with the Boyle Heights Project not only amplified the stories of
members of the community, but created opportunities for people to gather
together to remember and valorize their experiences in a unique
multiethnic neighborhood. Advisory group members felt that the project
166
Villafranca, interview by author.
Valdivia, interview by author.
168
Kim, interview by author.
167
114
enriched and empowered individuals and the larger neighborhood by
affording them a sense of place, of self, and of pride in their
community.169 Staff at the JANM describe their role as facilitators who
help create transformation in participants by developing critical thinking
skills.170 Through examination of American history, and in making
connections between personal memory and contemporary issues whenever
possible, the JANM actively strives to create change. The core staff of the
Boyle Heights Project aimed to “generate an emergent awareness and
respect for the ways disparate experiences & perspective may relate”
amongst participants of the intergenerational, multiethnic community
history project.171 The project afforded multiple partners – past and current
residents, cultural organizations, schools, service providers, researchers,
and scholars – opportunities to exchanged skills and resources.
Institutional partners and scholars recognized the value of truly inclusive
collaborations through which they built relationships.172
The MFACM and the JANM enfranchise communities by opening
themselves up to broad participation and by being flexible enough for
stakeholders to make the museum theirs. In providing opportunities for
169
Harder +Company Community Research, “Evaluation of the Boyle Heights Project
prepared for the Japanese American National Museum” March 2003, 14. photocopy.
170
Clement Hanami, interview by author.
171
Kim, “All Roads Lead to Boyle Heights,” 156.
172
Harder +Company Community Research, “Evaluation of the Boyle Heights Project
prepared for the Japanese American National Museum” March 2003, 6. photocopy.
115
constituents to access resources and participate in public programs, these
museums remain relevant institutions in their neighborhoods and cities.
The MFACM and the JANM adjust to changing definitions of community,
becoming more hybrid and complex institutions as needed by their
stakeholders and potential constituents. They respond to contemporary
cultural politics in which queer Latinos assert themselves and demand that
the boundaries of inclusion be expanded. They are institutional leaders
that facilitate cross-cultural collaborations to remember and redefine
personal experiences and community. They are places where
ethnocentricity is destabilized and ideas and people intersect, have dialog,
and construct new meanings about themselves. These museums traverse
fresh terrain when they disrupt the notion of a conventional or limited
culturally specific museum by diversifying constituencies. In doing this,
they offer the field new ways of engaging new participants and perhaps
even creating new stakeholders. The MFACM and the JANM are public
education institutions which define their role broadly by filling in what
they feel are the gaps in formal education: social responsibility,
empowerment, critical thinking, and a heightened level of selfconsciousness.
Though the words “civic engagement” were rarely spoken by staff at
the MFACM or the JANM during my interviews, the work taking place at
116
the museums seems to fall right into line with what museum leaders
predict museums can become – essentially, leaders in collaborative efforts
to solve civic problem through partnerships with community members and
other public resources. The important work these institutions do is to
enfranchise their constituents (and hence communities). The nature of the
empowerment they potentially afford their stakeholders occurs in their
shift from margin to center, from invisibility to visibility; both by
“representing” them accurately and respectfully, but also by giving them
opportunities to become active participants in their communities, therefore
ensuring they have a role in their communities and civic society.
Are culturally specific museums, then models of civic
engagement? Highlighting model programs and initiatives is one way the
field communicates about what is working. Museums, like other nonprofit institutions, tend to copy successful models in their need to diminish
uncertainty and search for legitimacy in the field.173 Leading museum
thinkers suggest that ethnic and community-based museums are civic
engagement models that mainstream museums should emulate.174 I,
however, question the usefulness of civic engagement models, which are
grounded in a particular institution and a distinct community.
173
174
Moreno, 508.
Hirzy, 11.
117
Given that the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum and the
Japanese American National Museum work within the context of their
specific communities and respond to those community’s particular
circumstances, it seems that in fact imitating exemplary archetypes will be
impossible. While Radio Arte and the Boyle Heights Project provide the
museum field with fantastic examples of civic engagement, their success
is based on the particular circumstances of the distinct communities they
seek to enfranchise. As explained above, those circumstances relate to the
motivations for founding the institution; their demonstrated commitment
to putting people at their center; their ability to be open to and respond to
their needs; and their efforts to enfranchising them. These conditions point
to the reasons civic engagement seems to happen naturally at culturally
specific museums.
Neither the museums nor the programs they produce can provide
civic engagement models that can be easily emulated. They come out of
attempts to solve problems associated with local needs – Spanish language
queer resources and social space, and opportunities to improve and build
community. These concerns are localized in distinct issues. Institutional
partners and participants aid in determining the methods for responding
and help to create solutions based on unique needs and available
resources. These express circumstances make the search for models of
118
civic engagement an inadequate approach to making museums institutions
that are more relevant in the communities of which they are a part of.
119
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are directed to museums that aim
to increase their significance to their local community. This project looked
at public programs that engaged new Latino constituents at two culturally
specific museums in the U.S. From that focused examination emerged four
main suggestions to museums seeking to increase the participation of
historically underserved communities through civic participation. These
recommendations may be useful to museum staff at various levels,
trustees, or even institutional partners. They are offered to aid in the effort
to make American museums important and accessible community
resources.
1. Museums should begin the process for becoming more relevant
civic institutions by developing – amongst all stakeholders – a
mutually agreed upon understanding of the public value of the
institution. Responses to institutional mandates, pressures for
funding, and reactions to demographic changes lead to projects
aimed at broadening museum audiences. While such ventures may
in fact lead to increased attendance, they are not sufficient
solutions to civic problems and should not be confused with efforts
120
to make museums more significant to their local communities.
Rather, projects should be initiated in the spirit of enhancing the
role of the museum to become valuable resources to BOTH a
broad public and local neighborhoods and communities. This
requires that museums put people at their center.
Engaging stakeholders in developing a commitment to this
new role of the museum is a step in the process that cannot be
bypassed; in particular, the people who work at museums need to
be brought on board to infuse the daily operations with civicminded values. The goal should be to create a heightened sense of
awareness about the potential significance of the institution and the
role of all participants in making it an important resource.
Museums will become more relevant in their communities by
focusing on in-reach, not outreach. This requires engaging trustees,
administrators, staff, donors, core constituents, and
business/institutional partners in processes that promote the
development of these new values. Cultivating the motivation for
civic engagement initiatives early on will result in an organization
that is prepared to take on the role of becoming a partner in
strengthening communities.
121
2. Museums must become familiar with the nuanced reality of the
specific communities they seek to engage.
Though museums may have a broad target population they seek to
involve – Latinos, for example – it is important they develop an
understanding of the complexity of culture, identity, and
community as they relate to their local populations. Broadly
defined groups frequently have more differences than they do
similarities, which can be based on nation of origin, class status,
regional history, intercommunity dynamics, or any number of other
factors. Museums should become familiar with these fine details
about the populations they seek to reach. They will also need to
determine the localized needs of target communities and how those
groups have historically related to one another. Community
gatekeepers – i.e. service providers, religious leaders, business
owners, educators – can play a significant role in helping museums
learn about the needs of the communities they seek to engage.
Museum will then need to be creative and think broadly about all
of the resources available to them to aid in meeting those needs.
3. Museums must become more agile if they are to be resources
intended to meet community needs.
122
For the museum to be a trusted advocate by its constituents, it
needs to be responsive to situations that arise that affect
stakeholders. In order to remain relevant, institutions will have to
be aware of current issues in their locales and anticipate the need to
act in response to issues when needed. This requires that museums
stay in tune with the specific communities they are a part of and
the particular circumstances that affect those communities.
Keeping focused on the unique needs of the local community will
help museums stay abreast of potential topics they may be
expected to take action on. To remain valued resources, museums
will need to respond quickly and appropriately to situations that
involve the constituents they serve.
4. Museums need to become more democratic to be better at
meeting community needs.
Bureaucratic institutions bound to models will always be trapped
in simplistic understandings of community. Museums must be
willing to change from hierarchical institutions to being driven by
the needs of their local community. Such an approach will ensure
that museums remain relevant resources that help solve civic
problems. Museums must not only listen to what the needs are, but
123
should also enter reciprocal partnerships with other civic-minded
institutions with the aim of developing creative solutions to local
challenges. This will help them develop more nuanced
understandings of the public they serve. To become more peoplecentered, museums will need to practice being flexible enough to
respond swiftly to community concerns as needed. These changes
in museums will ultimately lead to a more relevant institution
focused on engaging community in its resources for a broad public
good.
124
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adamsick, Randy. Director of Development, Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum. Interview by author, 12 May 2005, via phone.
Alexander, Edward P. The Museum in America: Innovators and Pioneers.
Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press, 1997.
Alpert, Emily. “Debajo del Arco Iris.” In the Fray Magazine, 13 June
2005. http://inthefray.com/html/article.php?sid=1191 article (2 July
2005).
American Association of Museums, Museums: Their New Audience.
Washington D.C.: American Association of Museums, 1972.
_________. Commission on Museums for a New Century. Museums for a
New Century. Washington D.C.: American Association of Museums,
1984.
_________. Excellence and Equity: Education and the Public Dimension
of Museums. Washington D.C.: American Association of Museums,
1992.
American Association of Museums Task Force on Museum Education,
“Excellence and Equity: Education and the Public Dimension of
Museums.” Washington, D.C.: American Association of Museums,
1992. Photocopied.
Anderson, Emily. Assistant Curator, Japanese American National
Museum. Interview by author, 18 April 2005, via phone.
Ardali, Azade. Black and Hispanic Art Museums: A Vibrant Cultural
Resource. New York: The Ford Foundation, 1989.
Arias, Arturo. “Central American-Americans: Invisibility, Power and
Representation in the U.S. Latino World,” Latino Studies, 1 (2003):
168-187.
Author unknown, “Diversity in America: Hispanics Americans”
Demographics (November 2002): S8-S10.
125
_________. “Exhibitions on View: Black Belt.” SMHARTS, Fall 2003: 5.
_________. “New Mexicans,” Museum Practice Magazine, Spring 2003,
24.
_________. “Latino LGBTQ Youth from Pilsen organizing prom.”
Chicago Social Service Network. 17 May 2005. http://cssn.chicago.vc/f
orum/viewtopic.php?p=89 article (2 July 2005).
Beith, Malcolm. “It’s a Hip-Hop World; How a Movement Shaped and
Absorbed Global Culture.” Newsweek, 10 November 2003, 58.
Bennefield, Robin M. “The Studio Museum Celebrates 30 Years of
Uplifting Black Art,” The New Crisis 105 (February/March 1998): 42
45.
Chew, Ron. “Community Roots.” In Mastering Civic Engagement: A
Challenge to Museums, 63-64. Washington D.C.: American
Association of Museums, 2002.
Chew, Ron. “Taking Action! Advocates? Or Curators of Advocacy?,”
Museum News 83, no. 2 (March/April 2004): 38-43.
Cunningham, Brent “The Latino Puzzle: Challenges in the Heartland.”
Columbia Journalism Review 20, no. 6 (March/April 2002): 34-39.
Darder, Antonia and Rodolfo D. Torres. “Mapping Latino Studies: Critical
Reflections on Class and Social Theory,” Latino Studies 1 (2003): 303
324.
Davalos, Karen Mary. Exhibiting Mestizaje: Mexican (American)
Museums in the Diaspora. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico
Press, 2001.
Davila, Arlene. “Latinizing Culture: Art, Museums, and the Politics of
Multicultural Encompassment,” Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 2 (May
1999): 180-202.
Davis Ruffins, Fath. “Mythos Memory, and History: African American
Preservation Efforts, 1820-1990.” In Museums and Communities: The
Politics of Public Culture, ed. Ivan Karp, Christine Mullen Kreamer,
126
and Steven D. Lavine, 506-611.Washington and London: Smithsonian
Institution Press, 1992.
_________. “Culture Wars Won and Lost: Ethnic Museums on
the Mall, Part I: The National Holocaust Museum and the National
Museum of the American Indian.” Radical History Review 68 (Spring
1997): 79-100.
Duany, Jorge. “Nation, Migration, Identity: The Case of Puerto Ricans,”
Latino Studies 1 (2003): 424-444.
Fish, Stanley. “Boutique Multiculturalism, or Why Liberals Are Incapable
of Thinking about Hate Speech,” Critical Inquiry 23 (Winter 1997):
378-395.
Fleming, John E. “African-American Museums, History, and the
American Ideal.” Journal of American History 81 no. 3 (December
1994): 1020-1026.
Fuller, Nancy. “The Museum as a Vehicle for Community Empowerment:
The Ak-Chin Indian Community Ecomuseum Project.” In Museums
and Communities: The Politics of Public Culture, ed. Ivan Karp,
Christine Mullen Kreamer, and Steven D. Lavine, 327-365.
Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992.
Gable, Eric. “Maintaining Boundaries, or ‘Mainstreaming’ Black History
in a White Museum.” In Theorizing Museums: Representing Identity
and Diversity in a Changing World, ed. Sharon Macdonald and Gordon
Fyfe, 177-202. Cambridge: Blackwell, 1996.
Gaither, Edmund Barry. “‘Hey, That’s Mine’: Thoughts on Pluralism and
American Museums.” In Museums and Communities: The Politics of
Public Culture, ed. Ivan Karp, Christine Mullen Kreamer, and Steven
D. Lavine, 60-60. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press,
1992.
Garfield, Donald and Jane Lusaka. “Museum News Interview: Kinshasha
Holman Conwill,” Museum News (May/June 1996): 38-41.
Guevara, Ruben, Boyle Heights Project Advisory Committee Member,
Japanese American National Museum. Interview by author, 10 July
127
2005, via phone.
Guzman, Juana, Associate Executive Director, Mexican Fine Art Center
Museum. Interview by author, 11 May 2005, via phone.
Hanami, Clement. “Self-Creation: Defining Cultural Identity Within
Museum Exhibitions.” In Common Ground: The Japanese American
National Museum and the Culture of Collaborations, eds. Akemi
Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A. Hirabayashi,
17-23. Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005.
_________. Production Manager/Art Director, Japanese American
National Museum. Interview by the author, 13 May 2005, via phone.
Harder+Company Community Research. “Evaluation of the Boyle
Heights Project prepared for the Japanese American National
Museum.” March 2003, Photocopied.
Hirano, Irene Y. “Changing Public Expectations of Museums.” In
Museums for the New Millennium: A Symposium for the Museum
Community, in Washington, D.C., September 5-7 1996, by the Center
for Museum Studies, Smithsonian Institution in association with the
American Association of Museums, 33-50. Washington D.C.:
Smithsonian Institution, 1997.
_________. “Introduction: Commitment to Community.” In Common
Ground: The Japanese American National Museum and the Politics of
Collaborations, ed. Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi,
and James A. Hirabayashi, 1-12. Boulder: University of Colorado
Press, 2005.
Hirzy, Ellen. “Mastering Civic Engagement: A Report from the American
Association of Museums.” In Mastering Civic Engagement: A
Challenge to Museums, American Association of Museums 9-20.
Washington, D.C.: American Association of Museums, 2002.
Jackson, Maria-Rosario. “Coming to the Center of Community Life.” In
Mastering Civic Engagement: A Challenge to Museums, 29-37.
Washington, D.C.: American Association of Museums, 2002.
Jackson, Sandra D. “Did you know?” SMHARTS, Summer 2004: 16.
128
_________. Director of Education and Public Programs, Studio
Museum in Harlem. Interview by author, 26 April 2005, via phone.
Karp, Ivan and Steven D. Lavine. Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetics and
Politics of Museum Display. Washington and London: Smithsonian
Institution Press, 1991.
_________. “Introduction: Museums and Communities: The Politics of
Public Culture.” In Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public
Culture, ed. Ivan Karp, Christine Mullen Kreamer, and Steven D.
Lavine, 1-17. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992.
_________, Christine Mullen Kreamer, and Steven D. Levine. Museums
and Communities: the Politics of Public Culture. Washington and
London: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1993.
_________ and Steven D. Levine. “Museums and Communities: Partners \
in Crisis,” Museum News (May/June 1993): 44-45, 79-84.
Kikumura-Yano, Akemi. “The National Partnership Program: A Model for
Community Collaborations.” In Common Ground: The Japanese
American National Museum and the Culture of Collaborations, eds.
Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A.
Hirabayashi, 89-99. Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005.
Kim, Sojin, Curator, Japanese American National Museum. Interview by
author, day month 2005, via phone.
_________. “All Roads Lead to Boyle Heights.” In Common Ground: The
Japanese American National Museum and the Culture of
Collaborations, eds. Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi,
and James A. Hirabayashi, 149-166. Boulder: University of Colorado
Press, 2005.
Kleinschmidt, Meredith. “After the Activism, What Comes Next?:
Examining the Development of Culturally Specific Museums Since the
1960s.” Master’s Project, John F. Kennedy University, 2000.
Komatsuka, Carol M. “Expanding the Museum Audience Through Visitor
Research.” In Common Ground: The Japanese American National
129
Museum and the Culture of Collaborations, eds. Akemi Kikumura
Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A. Hirabayashi, 51-64.
Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005.
Larmer, Brook. “Latin U.S.A.: How Young Hispanics are Changing
America.” Newsweek, 12 July 1999, 48.
Lehoczky, Etelka. “Radio free homo: Chicago-based Homofrecuencia is
bringing gay outreach to teenagers and around the globe.” The
Advocate, 10 December 2002, 65.
McCarthy, Kevin F. and Kimberly Jinnett. A New Framework for Building
Participation in the Arts. Santa Monica: Rand, 2001.
Mendell, David. “Changing Faces and Places.” Planning 68, no. 1 (2002):
4-10.
Moore, Darrel. “White Men Can’t Program: The Contradictions of
Multiculturalism.” In Art, Activism, and Oppositionality: Essays from
Afterimage, ed. Grant H. Kester, 51-59. Durham and London: Duke
University Press, 1998.
Moreno, María-José. “Art Museums and Socioeconomic Forces: The Case
of a Community Museum.” Review of Radical Political Economics 36,
no. 4 (2004): 506-527.
Nakamoto, Allyson, Educator, Japanese American National Museum.
Interview by author 18 May 2005, via phone.
Negron-Muntaner, Frances. “Barbie’s Hair, Selling Out Puerto Rican
Identity in the Global Market.” In Latino/a Popular Culture, ed.
Michelle Habell-Pallan and Mary Romero, 38-60. New York: New
York University Press, 2002.
Ngin, ChorSwang and Rodolfo D. Torres. “Racialized Metropolis:
Theorizing Asian Americans and Latino Identities and Ethnicities in
Southern California.” In Asian and Latino Immigrants in a
Restructuring Economy: The Metamorphosis of Southern California,
eds. Marta C. Lopez-Garza and David. R. Diaz, 368-390. Stanford:
Stanford University Press, 2001.
130
Ninomiya, Masato. “International Exchanges at Museu Histórico da
Imigração Japonesa no Brasil.” In Common Ground: The Japanese
American National Museum and the Culture of Collaborations, eds.
Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A.
Hirabayashi, 179-187. Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005.
Orozco, Gisela. “Celebracion Alternativa.” La Raza, 19 May 2005.
http://www.laraza.com/news.php?nid=22611 article (2 July 2005).
Translation by author.
Perdomo, Yolanda. “Marisol in the Middle: A new doll is causing
controversy in Chicago’s Mexican community,” Hispanic, April 2005,
12.
Pierce Erikson, Patricia. “A-whaling We Will Go: Encounters of
Knowledge and Memory at the Makah Cultural and Resource Center,”
Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 4 (November 1999): 556-583.
Proulx, Marie-Jo. “Latino Queer Prom is a Hit.” Windy City Media Group,
1 June 2005. http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/
ARTICLE.hph?AID=8403 article (2 July 2005).
Ramirez, Yasmin. “Passing on Latinidad: An Analysis of Critical
Responses to El Museo del Barrio’s Pan-Latino Mission Statements.”
Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, Center for Latino Studies,
2002. http://latino.si.edu/researchandmuseums/presentations/ramirez_p
apers.html paper presented at the Interpretation and Representation of
Latino Cultures: Research and Museums National Conference,
Washington D.C. November 20-23, 2002. (25 April 2005).
Ramos-Zayas, Ana Y. National Performances: The Politics of Class,
Race, and Space in Puerto Rican Chicago. University of Chicago
Press: Chicago and London, 2003.
Report of the Smithsonian Institution Task Force on Latino Issues. By
Raúl Yzaguirre, chair. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution,
1994.
Ryo Hirabayashi, Lane, Akemi Kikumura-Yano, and James A.
Hirabayashi “Conclusion,” in Common Ground: The Japanese
American National Museum and the Culture of Collaborations, eds.
131
Akemi Kikumura-Yano, Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, and James A.
Hirabayashi, 207-211. Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 2005.
Saldivar, Ramon. “Transnational Migrations and Border Identities:
Immigration and Postmodern Culture,” The South Atlantic Quarterly
98 (Winter 1999).
Sanchez, Casey. “Pilsen Tiene Baile de Graduacion de Adolescentes
Gay,” Extra News, 2 June 2005. http://extranews.hdnweb.com/news/ph
p?nid=924 article. (2 July 2005). Translation by author.
Sanchez, George. “Working at the Crossroads: American Studies for the
21st Century,” American Quarterly 54, no.1 (March 2002): 1-5.
_________. “ ‘What’s Good for Boyle Heights is Good for the Jews’:
Creating Multiculturalism on the Eastside during the 1950s,” American
Quarterly 56 (September 2004): 633-661.
Sarat, Austin. “The Micropolitics of Identity/Difference: Recognition and
Accommodation in Everyday Life,” Daedalus 129, no. 4 (Fall 2002):
147-168.
Shore, Bill. “The Power to Bear Witness,” Museum News (May/June
2005): 52-58.
Sims, Lowery S. “From the Executive Director.” SMHARTS, Fall 2003: 2.
Skramstad, Harold and Susan Skramstad. “Dreaming the Museum,”
Museum News (March/April 2005): 52-55.
Smith, Robert. “‘Mexicanness’ in New York: Migrants Seek New Place in
Old Racial Order,” NACLA Report on the Americas 35, no. 2
(September/October 2001): 14-18.
Sullivan, Robert. “Lessons for the Ruling Class,” Museum News
(May/June 1993): 54-55, 70-71.
Torruella Leval, Susana. “El Museo del Barrio.” In Museum Mission
Statements: Building a Distinct Identity, ed. Gail Anderson, 70-101.
Washington D.C.: American Association of Museums Technical
Information Service, 1998.
132
_________. “Coming of Age with the Muses: Change in the
Age of Multiculturalism.” In The Andy Warhol Foundation for the
Visual Arts: Paper Series on the Arts, Culture, and Society, 1995. http:/
/www.warholfoundation.org/paperseries/article5.htm essay (25 April
2005).
Tortolero, Carlos. “Museums, Racism, Inclusiveness Chasm,” Museum
News (November/December 2000): 31-35.
_________. Executive Director, Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum
Museum. Interview by author, 19 April 2005, via phone.
Unzueta, Tania, Senior Producer, Radio Arte/WRTE, Mexican Fine Arts
Center Museum Museum. Interview by author, 7 June 2005.
Valdivia, Jorge, General Manager, Radio Arte/WRTE, Mexican Fine Arts
Center Museum Museum. Interview by author, 10 May 2005, via
phone.
Villafranca, Nancy. Director of Education, Mexican Fine Arts Center
Museum. Interview with author, 18 May 2005, via phone.
Weil, Stephen E. “Introduction.” In Museums for the New Millennium: A
Symposium for the Museum Community, in Washington, D.C.,
September 5-7 1996, by the Center for Museum Studies, Smithsonian
Institution in association with the American Association of Museums,
12-15. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1997.
Williams, Arlene. “Museums in Crisis: A Strong Sense of Mission Helps
Many Survive,” American Visions 7, no. 1 (February 1992): 22-25.
Zamora, Herlinda. “Identity and Community: A Look at Four Latino
Museums.” Museum News (May/June 2002): 37-41.
133
APPENDIX A
ABOUT THE MUSEUMS
Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum
The Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum evolved out of a commitment to
stimulate and preserve the appreciation of the richness and beauty of the
Mexican culture in the city-s large Mexican community, as well as to
educate the City of Chicago to the wealth and breadth of the Mexican
culture. The Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum is the nation's largest
Latino arts institution and the only Latino museum accredited by the
American Association of Museums.
The Museum has the following goals:
To sponsor special events and exhibits that exemplify the rich variety in
visual and performing arts found in the Mexican culture;
To develop, preserve, and conserve a significant permanent collection of
Mexican art;
To encourage the professional development of local Mexican artists; and
To offer arts education programs.
The Museum defines the Mexican culture as "sin fronteras" (without
borders) and presents the Mexican culture from ancient times to the
present and how it has manifested itself on both sides of the border.
The Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum has become a national leader and
mentor for culturally grounded institutions and community based arts
organizations; for its advocacy of "First Voice" and cultural
equity issues; and has been in the forefront of defining the role of
museums in the 21st Century. The Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum
serves as a cultural focus for the more than million and a half Mexicans
residing in the Chicago area. The Museum also serves as a cultural ally to
other Latino cultural groups in the City of Chicago.
134
Japanese American National Museum
We share the story of Japanese Americans because we honor our nation’s
diversity. We believe in the importance of remembering our history to
better guard against the prejudice that threatens liberty and equality in a
democratic society. We strive as a world-class museum to provide a voice
for Japanese Americans and a forum that enables all people to explore
their own heritage and culture.
We promote continual exploration of the meaning and value of ethnicity in
our country through programs that preserve individual dignity, strengthen
our communities, and increase respect among all people. We believe that
our work will transform lives, create a more just America and, ultimately,
a better world.
135
APPENDIX B
DRAFT INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum
Museum Staff Questions
1. The MFACM has been as having broad appeal. How would you
describe the museum’s audience?
2. Speaking specifically about the MFACM’s audience, how do you
approach issues of “diversity” and “multiculturalism”?
3. Which programs would you say reach the most diverse audience at
the museum?
4. Can you tell me about a recent program at the museum that
involved direct community participation?
5. Día del Niño happened recently, tell me about that program:
How did it come about?
Please describe the event.
What is the strategy for implementing the event happen?
How is Día del Niño connected to the mission of the museum?
6. Tell me more about the 21st Century Learners program that the
museum does at neighborhood schools.
How did the program start?
What are the goals of this project?
How were schools/families selected?
Which other agencies work on this project?
136
Radio Arte/WRTE and Homofrecuencia Staff Questions
1. How did you get involved with Radio Arte?
2. What is the radio station’s relationship to the Mexican Fine Arts
Center Museum?
3. Who is the target audience for WRTE?
4. Tell me about some of the programming at the radio station,
particularly how the station reaches a diverse audience.
5. Tell me about the origins of Homofrecuencia: what is the goal of
the show and how have listeners reacted?
6. How did the Homofrecuencia team come up with the idea for
Noche de Arco Iris/Queer Prom? What was the role of the museum
in the event?
7. What have been some of the challenges and rewards of working at
a community-based youth radio station?
137
Japanese American National Museum
Boyle Heights Project Staff Questions
1. How would you describe the Japanese American National Museum
audience?
2. How did the Boyle Heights Project come about?
3. What was the intended purpose for the Boyle Heights Project?
4. What were some of the goals of public programs of the project?
5. Can you describe the strategies for meeting those goals? What
were the steps for implementing programs?
6. How did the project engage a broad cross-section of the local
community?
7. What was the result of the project?
8. What were some of the challenges and rewards of working on the
Boyle Heights Project?
Boyle Heights Project Participant Questions
1. How did you get involved with the Boyle Heights Project at the
JANM?
2. What is your perception of the goals the museum had in mind for
the project?
3. Please describe your participation in programs related to the
project.
4. What do you think was the result of the Boyle Heights Project: for
the museums? For the Boyle Heights neighborhood?
5. Have you been to the museum JANM lately?
138
APPENDIX C
ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1
Figure 2
139
Figure 3
Figure 4
140
Figure 5
141
Figure 6
Figure 7
142
Figure 8
143
Figure 9
144
AAM Annual Meeting
Boston, MA
April 27 - May 1, 2006
SESSION PROPOSAL APPLICATION FORM
Submission Requirements
YOUR SESSION SUBMISSION MUST:
1. Be completed fully (You may indicate if a section is not applicable but
do not leave any sections blank)
2. Include a session chair
3. Confirm participation of all presenters
4. Contain at least one presenter who is currently working in a museum
5. Not be handwritten
6. Agree to the terms in the Session Chair Agreement
7. Adhere to the word limit specifications
Proposals that fail to meet any of these requirements will not be
considered for SPC endorsement or reviewed by the National
Program Committee.
I. SESSION TITLE (No more than seven to 10 words)
Latino Participation: Engaging New Constituencies in Museums
II. SESSION OVERVIEW (100 words or less for each section)
A. AUDIENCE
The intended audience for this session is museum professionals
who want to learn about meeting the challenge of programming for
new constituencies, namely Latino populations. The session will be
appropriate for staff in various roles in museums from
management to visitor service personnel. It will be particularly
useful, perhaps to educators, exhibition developers, visitor studies
personnel and others who develop and implement public programs
for new audiences in museums. The lessons that will be shared by
leaders in the field apply to all museums.
145
B. FOCUS
The proposed session will share multiple strategies employed
recently at museums across the country to increase Latino
participation to diversify their patronage and redefine their
constituency. Session participants will discuss how they respond to
their contemporary, changing communities, provide lessons
learned in enlisting the participation of Latinos from their local
communities, and discuss successful methods for expanding their
base of core constituents. The session will highlight the value of
audience research, an exhibition revisioning project, and program
development initiatives.
C. OUTCOMES
Attendees will learn about current work taking place at different
institutions and develop an understanding of the museums’ efforts
to serve Latinos who have various and multiple needs. Members of
the audience will gain a more nuanced understanding of the work
that needs to be done to become more relevant to potential
constituencies. In attending the session, museum staff will become
familiar with the process of redefining who their museum’s
stakeholders are, identifying community needs, and developing
methods for partnering with other organizations. The session will
offer examples of efforts to increase museum’s relevance to their
diverse contemporary Latino communities.
D. RELEVANCE
As museums nationwide seek to “actively address the growing
diversity of national and local populations,” this session – which
will present strategies for increasing Latino participation in
museums – is timely.175 The presenters will share lessons learned
in evaluating and serving this complex and diverse population
across the U.S., adding to the increasing knowledge of and
practices in engaging communities which have been historically
underserved and marginalized by cultural organizations.
Furthermore, the session will address the field’s need to learn from
culturally specific museums, which have “set the standard by
175
AAM Strategic Issues, November 2003.
146
establishing deep and meaningful civic involvement as their
founding principle.”176
III. SESSION SUMMARY
A. Description for the AAM website and final program (not to exceed
three sentences):
Strategies employed to involve diverse Latino constituencies, and
lessons learned in engaging these new stakeholders will be shared.
Presenters will discuss efforts to increase Latino involvement
including program development for local youth and educators at the
Japanese American National Museum’s National Center for the
Preservation of Democracy, and the formation of advisory committees
to revision the Contemporary Hispanic Changing Gallery and the
Hispanic Heritage Wing at the Museum of International Folk Art. The
critical role of culturally responsive evaluation to meaningfully
involve diverse communities will also be discussed.
B. Description for the AAM preliminary program (one sentence):
Museums projects that collaborate with diverse Latino constituents
will be discussed including program development for local youth and
educators at the Japanese American National Museum’s National
Center for the Preservation of Democracy; the formation of advisory
committees to revision the Contemporary Hispanic Changing Gallery
and the Hispanic Heritage Wing at the Museum of International Folk
Art; and the critical role of culturally responsive evaluation to
meaningfully involve diverse communities.
C. Confirmed SPC or affiliate organization endorsement if applicable
(see Endorsement section on Session Proposal Instructions):
Standing Professional Committee for Diversity in Museums.
IV. CHAIRPERSON
First Name:
Last Name:
Margaret
Kadoyama
176
Ellen Hirzy “Mastering Civic Engagement: A Report to the American Association of
Museums,” in Mastering Civic Engagement: A Challenge to Museums, American
Association of Museums (Washington D.C.: AAM, 2002), 10.
147
Title:
Institution:
Address:
City/State/Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Principal/Faculty
Margaret Kadoyama Consulting/John F. Kennedy
University
7 Sherman Court
Fairfax, CA 94930-1321
(415) 454-7344
(415) 454-7344
[email protected]
Qualifications (100 words or less):
Margaret Kadoyama has over twenty-five years in the museum profession
with extensive experience in audience development, community
involvement and education strategic planning. Her roles have included
museum director, audience developer, educator, consultant and curator.
Mrs. Kadoyama’s consulting practice specializes in program assessment,
audience development plans, community involvement plans, and strategic
education plans, with an emphasis on audience and community centered
approaches. She teaches Museums and Communities at John F. Kennedy
University and has served as chair of sessions at AAM, WMA and ASTC
meetings.
Major points to be covered (100 words or less):
During this session, which will be presented in a “forum” format, three
major points will be covered: culturally specific museum’s efforts to
expand their audience; strategies for meeting the needs of new Latino
constituents; and lessons learned in conducting this challenging work.
Mrs. Kadoyama will moderate a discussion amongst staff from the
Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum (MFACM) and the Japanese American
National Museum (JANM) to address these three points while drawing on
specific examples related to public programs at the institutions including
the MFACM’s Sor Juana (women’s performance art) Festival and
JANM’s National Center for the Preservation of Democracy.
V. PRESENTERS All presenters must be confirmed, and all information
complete. Please photocopy this page if you have additional presenters.
Total number of presenters, excluding chairperson(s): __3__
First Name:
Last Name:
Tey Marianna
Nunn
148
o Confirmed
Title:
Institution:
Address:
City/State/Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Curator of Contemporary Hispano and Latino
Collections
Museum of International Folk Art
P.O. Box 2087
Santa Fe, NM 87504-2087
(505) 476-1219
(505) 476-1300
[email protected]
Qualifications (100 words or less):
Tey Marianna Nunn is the curator of Contemporary Hispano and Latino
Collections at the Museum of International Folk Art in Santa Fe. She is
Vice Chair of the American Association of Museums Latino Professional
Interest Committee and is on the National Educational Advisory
Committee for the Smithsonian Institution Center for Latino Initiatives
Latino Virtual Gallery. In 2004 she was selected to participate in the
Getty’s Museum Leaders: Next Generation Program. Voted “Santa Fe
Arts Person and Woman of the Year” in 2001, Nunn is an award-winning
author, recently published “Latinos and Museums” for the Oxford
Encyclopedia of Latinas and Latinos.
Major points to be covered (100 words or less):
Ms. Nunn, one of the few Latina curators working in non culturally
specific museums, will present on the intricacies involved in working with
a community of which she is a member, specifically how over the next
two years she will be forming advisory committees to help shape and
guide the revisioning of the her museum’s Contemporary Hispanic
Changing Gallery and the Hispanic Heritage Wing. She will also address
issues involved in working with longstanding Hispano communities that
trace their ancestry back hundreds of years and the newly arrived
Mexicanos and El Salvadoreños in Santa Fe.
First Name:
Last Name:
Title:
Institution:
Address:
City/State/Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
Clement
o Confirmed
Hanami
Production Manager/Art Director
Japanese American National Museum
369 East First Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
(310) 415-0513
(213) 625-1770
149
E-mail:
[email protected]
Qualifications (100 words or less):
Clement Hanami is the Production Manager of the Japanese American
National Museum. In cooperation with Latino constituents, Hanami codesigned the museum’s permanent exhibition Common Ground: The
Heart of Community; participated in the Boyle Height Project, a
community history project of the East L.A. neighborhood where he grew
up; and co-organized the collaborative arts partnership project “finding
family stories.” A recipient of a J. Paul Getty Midcareer Visual Artist
Fellowship, and contributor to the anthology Common Ground: The
Japanese American National Museum and the Culture of Collaborations,
Hanami is currently the program developer at the National Center for the
Preservation of Democracy.
Major points to be covered (100 words or less):
Mr. Hanami will discuss intentional efforts to involve Los Angeles
Latinos in programs at the Japanese American National Museum.
Specifically, the process of collaborating with Adobe L.A. in designing
exhibitions; coordinating youth art activities in the region with the highest
concentration of Latinos in the country; and developing programs for local
teens and educators to learn about different experiences and perspectives
of American history and democracy. He will speak to working in
partnership with cultural organizations, local educators, and other
community stakeholders to involve Mexican Americans, Chicanos, and
Latin American immigrants while remaining true to the mission of the
museum.
First Name:
Last Name:
Title:
Institution:
Address:
City/State/Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Cecilia
o Confirmed
Garibay
Principal
Garibay Group
1401 W. Elmdale, Suite 1E
Chicago, Illinois 60660
(773) 271-5843
(773) 506-2055
[email protected]
Qualifications (100 words or less):
150
Cecilia Garibay specializes in culturally responsive and contextually
relevant evaluation approaches, often conducting audience research and
evaluation of initiatives that seek to reach underserved
audiences/multicultural communities. She regularly consults on serving
Latinos and making exhibitions and programming accessible to diverse
communities. Recent projects include consultation on audience research
and audience development of Latinos and other underserved communities
with The Exploratorium (San Francisco), the Smithsonian Institution
National Museum of American History, Chicago Children’s Museum, and
the Conservation Trust of Puerto Rico. Her 15 years of research and
evaluation experience also includes working with a diverse range of nonprofit organizations, foundations, and corporations.
Major points to be covered (100 words or less):
This presentation will frame part of the conversation on Latino
engagement by bringing an evaluation perspective to the discussion. Ms.
Garibay will discuss the principles of culturally responsive evaluation
approaches and how they can serve to more meaningfully involve diverse
communities. Drawing on examples from several audience development
research and evaluation projects with Latino communities, she will
address the various ways in which culturally appropriate and responsive
evaluation practices can deepen a team’s understanding of Latino
audiences, strengthen their audience development efforts, and often
broaden perspectives about inclusion and diversity.
VI. CONTENT
(Check only one in each category)
A. LENGTH
X
Single Session (75 min.)
…
Double Session (150 min.)
B. FORMAT
…
Ask the Specialist(s)
…
Case Study
X
Forum
…
Interactive
…
Panel Discussion
…
Point/Counterpoint
151
C. TYPE
…
Best Practice
…
CEO/Director
X
Discourse/Dialogue
…
New Ideas
…
Nuts & Bolts
…
Research
…
Theme
D. LOGISTICAL SET-UP
…
Theater-style
…
Other (Please describe alternate room set-up and convincingly
articulate a need for it.)
N/A
E. SUBJECT (Check only one)
…
Administration
…
Collections Stewardship
…
Communications
X
Diversity
…
Ethics/Legal
…
Evaluation
…
Globalization
…
Governance
…
Interpretation
…
Leadership
…
Planning
…
Technology
X
(Please check) By submitting a session proposal, I agree to
fulfill the expectations in the Session Chairperson Agreement.
Failure to fulfill these expectations will jeopardize your
acceptance as a session chairperson or presenter at future
AAM annual meetings.T
152