A while back I was talking with a museum professional about this sense that I have and I know others share, to do with Cypriot Museums (state museums especially) ‘not moving with the times’, and I was trying to understand how people who work in these museums feel about this. It was put to me that there may be value in the fact that some exhibits (if not entire museums) have remained more or less the same as when they were initially put together, sometimes as far back as 40 or so years ago. So in a sense, the fact that these museums have remained the same (without change, without money, without technology) now allows us valuable insight regarding the early days of Cypriot archaeology and museology among other things, and so it’s conceivable that ‘upgrading’ by some definition may actually be the non-scientific thing to do..
There’s a wonderful paradox here I think, which I understand is already being talked about, and it would be great to see how to raise it formally, if it hasn’t already been raised, and to see whether there is previous work on this that may help us better deal with these issues in Cyprus.
Hi, I am interested in museum upgrades but have to admit this is new perspective you are offering. It can be the case that the situation as it is in Cypriot state museums can provide the ground for scientific research on the background of Cypriot archaeology and museology. This creates tension on whether upgrading our museums is merely a positive turn. Perhaps moving forward is actually not only a matter of technology and before any steps are undertaken to modernise to keep up with the times we should take a deeper look t what it is hidden under the dust in our museums…