5 CIENCIA DE LO SOCIAL Y LO SOCIAL DE LA CIENCIA
5.1 DISCIPLINAS DIVIDIDAS, CONOCIMIENTOS FRAGMENTADOS:
Confronted visitors, or those who did not possess the emotional and cognitive skills to think through the difficult material, more typically did not attempt to explicitly
disengage. Often they did not identify their feelings of distress or had difficulty
codes associated with being emotionally confronted, disinterested or unengaged when looking at their entire interview (that is, Neutral or Information-Based,Basic Emotional Statements, Distressed or Frustrated). They made uncritical or banal statements that were not elaborated upon (for example, ‘it was sad’ or ‘it was interesting’). Such responses, taken in the context of the entire interview, indicated they had thought little about what the exhibition was trying to portray, namely the difficult realities of living with a mental health issue, or that they were uncomfortable, unable or uninterested in discussing these issues in depth. As demonstrated in the following table 7.15, these visitors made up 17.2% of The Wellcome sample, 31.8% at The Mind, 9.5% at The Bethlem, and 22.1% of the overall sample.
Table 7.15: Visitors coded into the category of Basic, Clichéd or Unelaborated engagement
Museum Frequency Valid Percent Total
The Bethlem 9 9.5 95
The Wellcome 16 17.2 93
The Mind26 54 31.8 170
Overall Sample 79 22.1 358
They often struggled to clearly articulate what they would take away from the exhibition and could not identify how it made them feel. When asked ‘Will you take anything away in particular from your visit?’, 73% stated they were either unsure, that the exhibition was just generally interesting, or that they wouldn’t take anything away. An example of the simplistic and unelaborated responses of these visitors to this
question, for example, can be seen in the following excerpts with two separate groups of visitors, where VST 138 and VST 139, and VST 52 seem disinterested and appear to find the notion of taking something away from the exhibition to be humorous:
Will you take anything away in particular from your visit?
[VST 52] Probably take something away but… it’s a museum [laughs] VST 52, male, 18-24 years of age, student, The Mind
Will you take anything away in particular from your visit?
26 This does not include those visitors at The Mind who fit into the Uninterested, Unaware,
Unrelated code for engagement with the mental health themes
[VST 138] I think I’ll just think about it a bit more, [laughs], that’s pretty much about it!
[VST 139] Yeah [both laugh].
VST 138, female, 18-24 years of age, student, The Mind VST 139, male, 18-24 years of age, student, The Mind
Only a small percentage (49.3%) of these visitors were frequent museumgoers when compared with visitors in the other categories for engagement (Assessing Social Consequences 70%, Deep Personal 83.3% and Heritage Pilgrim 83.3%). Many unengaged visitors also had difficulty referring to the content as being anything more than ‘interesting’. This was particularly true when asked to discuss the emotionally confronting elements. A typical example of these visitors can be seen in the following excerpt where basic statements were made about mental health that were rarely elaborated upon:
How did the museum/exhibition make you feel?
[VST 148] After the sound thing [referring to an interactive sound game where the visitor attempts to remember different noises] pretty stupid. She [his partner] was pretty good. I’m still looking for something to better her on! [VST 149] It was good and it was something refreshing. It was good for the memory in terms of what was going on and refreshing what you know. [VST 148] Refreshing, yeah.
What meaning or importance does a museum/exhibition like this have for contemporary society’s understandings of the human mind?
[VST 148] It’s important in every way. [VST 149] Mmmm.
[VST 148] In every way, everyone should check this stuff out all the time.
Could you elaborate on why?
[VST 148] Education, information is power. If you don’t know things I guess you don’t learn anything.
Is there anything you’ve seen, heard, read today that has altered your views on certain issues or topics?
[VST 148] Yes, she has better hearing than me [laughs]. [VST 149] They already told you that!
[VST 148] Yeah, thanks babe [laughs].
Will you take away anything in particular from your visit?
[VST 148] No. Not in general. Like I said, most of the stuff I already knew. I was more interested in the old ways they do things, that was eye-opening.
What about the old stuff was interesting?
[VST 148] It was just shocking to see how the brain has been explored over the decades. That’s all I could really answer.
VST 148: Male, 35-44 years of age, real-estate agent, VST 149: Female, 25-34 years of age, nurse
VST 148 begins by offering a joke when asked how he felt. Psychologists have highlighted the use of humour as a coping mechanism and as a strategy for deflection
(Lanci and Spreng 2008: 275). Nervous laughter was often present in interviews at each of the sites when visitors found the subject matter awkward, unsettling, or when they were asked to discuss the relevance of the material to their lives. VST 148 then offers the answer that the exhibition is ‘important in every way’ when asked about its potential meaning or importance. He reverts to the use of a platitude when pressed to elaborate, noting that ‘education, information is power’. This vague response does little to answer the question in detail and is similar in nature to the types of banal and indifferent responses that confronted visitors offered as a way of distancing themselves in previous studies by Smith (2010, 2011, 2017b). The work of Smith (2010, 2011, 2017b) has demonstrated that visitors at a range of sites have relied upon platitudes when
confronted. These are self-sustaining arguments that appear complex or wholesome on the surface, but that are in fact lacking in depth or clarity. They prevent consequential reflection on difficult topics as they remove the need for substantial thought.
VST 72 again attempts to avoid any serious contemplation by making a joke about one of the hearing activities when next asked if he saw anything that altered his views on certain issues. He notes that ‘Yes, she has better hearing than me [laughs]’. It is only when asked the question ‘Will you take away anything in particular from your visit’? that he demonstrates any significant degree of engagement, with VST 72 noting in relation to the old instruments that ‘It was just shocking to see how the brain has been explored over the decades. That’s all I could really answer’. VST 72 precedes this statement with a platitude, stating that he wouldn’t take away anything from the exhibition as ‘Like I said, most of the stuff I already knew’.
Several visitors in the overall sample repeated the notion that they were already aware of issues pertaining to mental health and illness (24.1%). Highlighting this did not constitute the use of platitude in and of itself. Certain visitors worked in fields related to health care and were knowledgeable about the topic. Yet, some declared not only that they were aware, but also that they knew enough and that there was little for them to take away as a result. This can be seen in the excerpts below taken from three separate interviews where each highlights that they are already well informed about mental health issues:
[VST 28] […]. The dream sequences were interesting. I glanced through the stuff about different treatments of medical illness throughout the ages but, again, I think I know a little bit about that anyway, so it’s okay.
VST 28: female, 55-64 years of age, The Mind
Were there any parts of the exhibition you disliked or found uninteresting?
[VST 60] Maybe where it shows the different parts of the brain because I’ve already learned that in school, so I didn’t have to pay attention to it.
VST 60: female, 17-24 years of age, student, The Mind
Is there anything you’ve seen/heard/read today that has altered your views on certain issues or topics?
[VST 199] A lot of it was a bunch of stuff that I had read before. It’s quite… for me, it's basic psychology.
VST 199: male, 25-34 years of age, peace activist, The Mind,
They dismiss the idea that their views could be altered or that the exhibition has anything to offer in terms of broadening their experience or knowledge about mental health. VST 60 highlights that she is exempt from critical reflection due to her previous study on the topic. Much of their emotional energy and skill is spent maintaining distance from the material and, like those who simply chose to disengage, little emotional room is left for ruminating on the realities that face the mentally ill.
The notion of educating others is another reoccurring theme that arose.27 Although highlighting the educational value of the exhibition for others does not represent an inherent desire to avoid answering the question, many of these educational claims were combined with the notion that there was little left for them to learn on the topic. This can be seen in the following excerpt from an interview with a visitor from The Mind:
What meaning or importance does a museum/exhibition like this have for contemporary society’s understandings of the human mind?
[VST 25] It’s good to educate people. We did a subject and we understand but people just come in and be mind blown about stuff that we learn.
VST 25: female, 17-24 years of age, student, The Mind
27 Interestingly, Smith’s (2017a) study of visitors at various immigration museums in Australia and the US also found that visitors tended to identify that learning was an important aspect of the museum visit for others. Smith (2017a: 73) writes:
Learning was something that could occur during visits, but contra to museological expectations, was not something that most visitors did. Indeed, most visitors at
immigration museums tended to identify the educational value of the museum as being significant to children and/or communities or groups other than the one to which the visitor belonged.
This visitor managed to maintain a degree of emotional separation from the material by shifting the emphasis of the exhibition onto others. They declared that they did not need to learn or reflect upon the historical and contemporary issues surrounding mental health. Instead, the exhibition would provide other less informed individuals with the chance to explore this important, but, for themselves, already known topic. The use of these arguments to distance a person from the material was used most commonly by visitors in the codes for disengagement (91%, compared with 8% of visitors in the
Assessing Social Consequence code who used these arguments in a platitudinal manner).
Interestingly, a significant number of all types of visitors across the case study sites maintained that the benefit of the exhibitions would be in helping to educate the public. When asked the question ‘What meaning or importance does a museum/exhibitionlike this have for contemporary societies understanding of the human mind?’ 66.8% of the overall sample highlighted that it would raise awareness about mental health issues. Responses to this question can be seen in the below tables (7.16 to 7.19). They demonstrate that, although not necessarily a way for sidestepping reflection, raising awareness for others was seen as the importance of the exhibitions by a large number of the overall sample:
Table 7.16: Overall Sample – ‘What meaning or importance does a
museum/exhibition like this have for contemporary society’s understandings of the human mind?’
Frequency Valid %
Valid Visitor stated it would raise peoples’ awareness or educate about mental health and mind
217 66.8
Visitor highlighted a criticism or stated that is had no importance 38 11.7
Visitor was unsure or provided a vague statement 20 6.1
Visitor made a comment about education or self-reflection (non- mental health)
19 5.8
Visitor stated it was just generally interesting or made a basic comment
15 4.6
Visitor stated the historical background of exhibition contextualises mental health
12 3.7
Visitor felt getting public access to asylum grounds would help to empower the mentally ill
4 1.2
Total 325 100
Total 358
Table 7.17: The Bethlem – ‘What meaning or importance does a museum like this have for contemporary society’s understandings of the human mind?’
Frequency Valid %
Valid Visitor stated it would raise peoples’ awareness or educate about mental health and mind
61 71.7
Visitor highlighted a criticism or stated that is had no importance 15 17.6
Visitor felt getting public access to asylum grounds would help to empower the mentally ill
4 4.7
Visitor stated it was just generally interesting or made a basic comment
3 3.6
Visitor was unsure or provided a vague statement 1 1.2
Visitor stated the historical background of exhibition contextualises mental health
1 1.2
Visitor made a comment about education or self-reflection (non- mental health)
0 0
Total 85 100
Missing 10
Total 95
Table 7.18: The Wellcome – ‘What meaning or importance does an exhibition like this have for contemporary society’s understandings of the human mind?’
Frequency Valid %
Valid Visitor stated it would raise peoples’ awareness or educate about mental health and mind
65 70.6
Visitor highlighted a criticism or stated that is had no importance 16 17.4
Visitor stated the historical background of exhibition contextualises mental health
6 6.5
Visitor was unsure or provided a vague statement 3 3.3
Visitor stated it was just generally interesting or made a basic comment
2 2.2
Visitor made a comment about education or self-reflection (non- mental health)
0 0
Visitor felt getting public access to asylum grounds would help to empower the mentally ill
0 0
Total 92 100
Missing 1
Total 93
Table 7.19: The Mind – ‘What meaning or importance does an exhibition like this have for contemporary society’s understandings of the human mind?’
Frequency Valid %
Valid Visitor stated it would raise peoples’ awareness or educate about mental health and mind
91 61.4
Visitor made a comment about education or self-reflection (non- mental health)
19 12.8
Visitor was unsure or provided a vague statement 16 10.8
Visitor stated it was just generally interesting or made a basic comment
10 6.8
Visitor highlighted a criticism or stated that is had no importance 7 4.7
Visitor stated the historical background of exhibition contextualises mental health
5 3.4
Visitor felt getting public access to asylum grounds would help to empower the mentally ill
0 0
Total 148 100
Missing 22
Total 170
Clearly, many visitors in this study continue to maintain traditional views of museums as places of learning. This is unsurprising given the history of museums as educational institutions and the focus within museological literature on the role that museums play in broadening the knowledge and understanding of visitors (see Moore 1997: 19; Falk and Dierking 2000, 2008; Falk 2004). Interestingly, few visitors in this study across the sites felt their views had been altered by the exhibitions. Only 8.7% of the overall sample explicitly indicated that their views had been changed. This is a point taken up further in Chapter Eight. Regardless, it is an interesting observation that visitors’
statements in the overall sample regarding the educational purpose of museums seemed, in this way, to be at odds with the manner in which many sought to utilise their visits to these exhibitions. This, along with findings in this chapter about the tendency of some visitors to distance, raises an interesting question about the goal of such socially oriented mental health exhibitions. Should their purpose be conceptualised in terms of their ability to prompt visitors into questioning attitudes towards normality? Such questions are discussed further in the following chapter.
7.3 Discussion
Comparisons can be drawn between disengaged visitors in this study with visitors in Smith’s (2010, 2011) study of exhibitions in England about slavery and with her
She (2010) found that White-British visitors at slavery exhibitions employed platitudes to distance themselves from the material when they felt a sense of guilt, discomfort or culpability. They chose to highlight that other nations, not just the British, were
involved in the slave trade, or that this history was too far in the past to have importance in the present (Smith 2010). Thus, a sense of implication in British society’s prior decision to participate in slavery, and in some cases a commitment to racist modes of thought, influenced levels of discomfort witnessed by Smith (2010, 2011). Visitors in her study conducted at Old Melbourne Gaol in Australia exhibited a tendency to provide banal and indifferent responses (2017b). These helped to create distance between their own identities and those who could be identified as being part of the Australian criminal class. This distancing occurred when visitors were confronted with complex questions of identity regarding Australia’s convict past (Smith 2017b).
This use of platitudinal and indifferent statements exhibited in Smith’s (2010, 2011, 2017b) studies closed down the need for consideration of issues around race,
incarceration and their relation to social justice, just as banal statements at The Mind,
and to a lesser degree The Wellcome, closed down critical thought on issues of mental health and the treatment of the mentally ill. The discomfort that led visitors at The Mind and The Wellcome to disengage stemmed from a different source. These visitors
appeared to be gripped by a visceral fear of being unhealthy and the loss of control of rationality that being mentally ill implies. It is possible then, that a significant number of disengaged visitors struggled to process the difficult emotional and intellectual realities raised by the material. Bonnell and Simon (2007), Witcomb (2013) and Smith and Campbell (2016) argue that visitors must have a certain degree of imagination and emotional intelligence to effectively participate in processes of emotional reflection. This form of intelligence is central to the critical evaluation of material when effectively undertaken, a point taken up further in Chapter Eight. Witcomb (2013) posits that visits to difficult museums require a degree of intellectual and emotional labour that can be exhausting. She argues that essential to this process is the requirement that visitors do not close off engagement. They must instead:
…engage imaginatively in the space between themselves and the object or the spatial and aesthetic structure of the displays. To do this, visitors require a sense of curiosity, a willingness to engage with a certain opaqueness or to accept that meaning is not reduced to information or instantly available. These exhibitions require emotional and intellectual labor on the part of the visitor
through an in-depth engagement with the design of the display, the content, and the physical qualities of the objects/ installations(Witcomb 2013: 267).
Museums that confront or explore difficult histories may be too demanding on the attentiveness and capabilities of visitors if they raise negative emotions (Bonnell and Simon 2007). Bonnell and Simon (2007) argue that this is true of exhibitions that prompt visitors to feel empathy for others who have previously experienced abuse or immense suffering (as many people with mental illnesses have and do). Feelings of anger, shame, grief or guilt can accompany such unpleasant experiences of abuse or