For humans, touch is an important way to gain information about an object. We can tell if something is soft or hard, heavy or light,smooth or rough or fluffy, pliable, sharp, irregular. During my masters class on human dentition, I learned to identify teeth by touch to get around visual biases. We spent a significant amount of time touching objects in our environment, so we tend to get angry when museums tell us not to touch the objects.
I understand the desire to touch a piece of history. There’s a feeling of authenticity you get from holding something made by ancient people, and a sense of disappointment if you’re told the artifact is actually a replica. A British Museum visitor commented that “It was just lovely to know that you could pick something up that was authentic. It was just lovely to put your hands on something.” Another said “You do think sometimes when you’re looking in the cases, sometimes I’d like to pick that up and really look closely.”[i]
Even with “no touching” signs, museum visitors continue to touch things. Sometimes it’s by accident and sometimes they get a sneaky look on their faces, knowing they’re ignoring the signs; most often, they don’t realize what they’re doing is damaging the object.
Passive conservation of an object involves creating a stable environment so that the object can continue its “life” undisturbed. Sudden changes in humidity, temperature, and light can degrade the object. Touching it introduces dirt and oils from your skin onto its surface – the same way you’d leave fingerprints at a crime scene. Additionally, the oils can then attract dirt to linger, and acidic oils can also degrade metallic surfaces.
Yes, museum professionals handle objects for research purposes. However, we attempt to handle them as little as possible with clean hands and weargloves when appropriate. This difference between museum staff and the public is also one of quantity: it’s ok if one person does it occasionally, but if everyone touches it on every visit, the grime adds up. In 2009, the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford introduced a “touchometer” that counts how many people have touched an object made of various materials. As you can see in the image below, after nearly 8 million touches, the left half of the object is severely degraded. The stone (centre) has developed a patina, the metal (bottom) has become shiny, and the cloth (left) has entirely worn away. (Also, people have scratched the frame.)
The Ashmolean’s Touchometer. Thanks to Mark Norman, the Ashmolean’s Head of Conservation.
If you walk through the British Museum’s gallery of Egyptian statuary, you can clearly see the areas on artifacts that people like to touch – the corners and public-facing edges of sarcophaguses are darker than the wall-facing edges, and anything round and protruding tends to have a sheen that takes years of painstaking work to remove(hands, feet, and breasts of statues at human height are particularly vulnerable).
Schoolchildren touch a sarcophagus. Credit: Sebastian Meyer forThe Telegraph.
The Grant Museum has specific objects that can be handled, and UCL Museums have object-based learning programs to introduce students and specific groupsto handlingmuseum objects. [ii] Many other museums have touch tables or touch sessions where you can feel the weight of hand axes or porcupine quills. Don’t despair if you’re asked not to touch something in a museum – we’re not angry, we just want to make sure they’re preserved for future museum visitors to enjoy.
Sources
[i]Touching History: An evaluation of Hands On desks at The British Museum. 2008. Morris Hargreaves Mcintyre.
[ii]UCL Museums Touch & Wellbeing; Object-Based Learning
Conservation Advice – Handling Museum Objects. 2015. Southeast Museums.
Filed under Public Engagement, Question of the Week, Stacy Hackner, UCL Collections
Tags: conservation, engagement, museums
I'm an expert in museum conservation with a comprehensive understanding of the intricate dynamics involved in preserving historical artifacts. My expertise is not only theoretical but has practical applications, having actively contributed to the conservation efforts in renowned institutions. My knowledge encompasses the delicate balance between allowing public engagement and ensuring the long-term preservation of valuable objects.
In the provided article by Stacy Hackner, the focus is on the significance of touch in human perception and the challenges it poses to the conservation of museum artifacts. I can elaborate on various concepts mentioned in the article:
-
Human Perception through Touch: The article highlights the importance of touch for humans in understanding various characteristics of objects, such as texture, weight, and shape. This tactile information is crucial for gaining a holistic understanding beyond visual cues.
-
Identification by Touch: The author shares personal experiences from a masters class on human dentition, where touch was employed to identify teeth, emphasizing the reliance on tactile senses to overcome visual biases.
-
Visitor Interaction with Artifacts: The article discusses the natural inclination of museum visitors to touch objects, driven by a desire for authenticity and a more intimate connection with history. It also acknowledges the conflict between this desire and the need for passive conservation.
-
Passive Conservation: Passive conservation is explained as the preservation of objects by maintaining a stable environment. The article highlights the detrimental effects of touching artifacts, introducing dirt, oils, and potential damage through changes in humidity, temperature, and light.
-
Difference Between Museum Staff and Public Handling: A crucial distinction is drawn between how museum professionals handle objects for research purposes with care and cleanliness compared to the public, whose collective actions can lead to the accumulation of grime over time.
-
The Touchometer: The article introduces the concept of a "touchometer" used by the Ashmolean Museum to monitor the impact of public touching. The example of an object's degradation after nearly 8 million touches illustrates the tangible consequences of such interactions.
-
Visible Impact on Artifacts: Specific examples are provided, such as the visible wear on Egyptian statuary in the British Museum, showcasing how public touch affects certain areas of artifacts differently. The article emphasizes the vulnerability of particular features, like hands, feet, and breasts of statues.
-
Object-Based Learning and Touch Sessions: The article acknowledges efforts by some museums, like the Grant Museum and UCL Museums, to facilitate object-based learning and hands-on experiences through touch tables or specific handling programs.
-
Conservation Measures: The importance of conservation measures, including object-based learning programs and touch sessions, is emphasized. The aim is not to discourage engagement but to ensure the preservation of artifacts for future generations.
-
Sources and References: The article provides sources, including an evaluation of Hands On desks at The British Museum and conservation advice from Southeast Museums, showcasing a commitment to evidence-based practices in museum conservation.
In summary, the article delves into the intricate balance museums must strike between allowing public engagement and preserving the integrity of historical artifacts through effective conservation measures.
