Ceramic Points of View: Video Interviews, the Internet and the Interpretation of Museum Objects
University of the West of England, Bristol
E-mail: matthew.partington{at}uwe.ac.uk
 |
Abstract |
|---|
This paper will look at a web-based oral history project at the V&A Museum, ‘Ceramic Points of View’, which used video as the recording medium. It will demonstrate how video can offer new ways of looking at museum objects that widen the scope and ambition of museum interpretation. Concentrating on the delivery of moving image or video oral history via the Internet, it will show how text, narrative and image can be brought together to interpret museum objects in a way which is designed to engage, educate and entertain actual and virtual museum visitors. The importance of visual indicators in oral communication is highlighted and a case made for the use of video in oral history recordings in order that these visual indicators are preserved alongside the aural record. It will highlight the importance of handling objects in furthering our understanding of them and demonstrate ways in which new media can be used to add value to a museum collection and give a voice to people other than the curator.
Key Words: ceramics • crafts • Internet • museums • oral history • video
1 Apart from a Chinese twelfth-century Chun glazed pot, the pots were all from the museum's twentieth-century British studio pottery collection.
2 Funding of £6000 was received from the University of the West of England, Bristol's Faculty of Art Media and Design's Research Committee.
3 Bernard Leach earthenware slip decorated cup and saucer, c.1920–24 (c.84 & a-1972)*
A large vase called ‘Madonna’, by William Staite-Murray, c.1930 (c.60–1976)*
Lucie Rie teapot and jug, made in Vienna, c.1936 (c.34–1982)*
Large slipware cider jar by Michael Cardew, made at Winchcombe, c.1938 (c.319–1938)*
William Newland, ‘Bull’, 1954 (c.57–1954)
Hans Coper, ‘Pot on Foot’, 1975 (c.398–1976)*
Elizabeth Fritsch, ‘Optical Pot’, 1980 (c.13–1981)
Richard Slee, ‘Cornucopia’, 1983 (c.253–1983)
Gillian Lowndes, ‘Cup on base’, 1986 (c.39–1987)
Alison Britton, ‘Big White Jug’, 1987 (c.233–1987)
*These pots were discussed in the previous interviews with Colin Pearson and Julian Stair.
4 http://www.vam.ac.uk/ceramicpointsofview
5 E. Hooper-Greenhill (ed.) Museum, Media, Message, Routledge, 1995, p. 11.
6 Minutes of a V&A Museum Management Board Meeting, 22 January 2002.
7 Victoria and Albert Museum, V&A Strategic Plan 2005–2010, 2005. The four objectives were:
- to provide optimum access to collections and services for diverse audiences, now and in the future
- to be acknowledged and respected as the world's leading museum of art and design
- to promote, support and develop creativity in individuals and in the economy
- to operate with the greatest possible financial and organizational efficiency.
8 Given the overwhelmingly visual focus of the project it is perhaps surprising that the most recent outcome of the ‘Ceramic Points of View’ project was a series of ten podcasts—an almost entirely aural form of media delivery. These podcasts were the very first undertaken ‘in-house’ by the V&A's Web team, and represent a new approach to museum interpretation and delivery. Aimed primarily at individual owners of iPods, the concept began in the late 1990s and is only now being embraced by large organizations. Because the users of iPods are typically aged fourteen to forty, the release of ‘Ceramic Points of View’ as a series of podcasts is part of the V&A's strategy to reach as wide an audience as possible. The interviews were recorded on video with the expectation that they would be consumed visually and aurally. If the user cannot access the Internet or iPod album art to see the object under discussion, then the podcasts may be somewhat confusing. Their purpose in this context was to expand the potential audience for ‘Ceramic Points of View’ as a whole but it was an unexpected outcome for a visually conceived project.
9 E. Hooper-Greenhill, Museums and the Interpretation of Visual Culture, Routledge, 2000, p. xi.
10 Minutes of the V&A op. cit.
11 A. Green, ‘The Exhibition that Speaks for Itself, Oral History and Museums’ in Perks, R. & Thomson, A. (eds.) The Oral History Reader, Routledge, 1998, p. 449.
12 The interviews were conducted by Matthew Partington in his role as Director of the National Electronic and Video Archive of the Crafts, www.media.uwe.ac.uk/nevac
13 Quoted in D. Sipe, ‘The Future of Oral History and Moving Images’ in Perks, R. & Thomson, A. (eds.) The Oral History Reader, Routledge, 1998, pp 379–88 see p. 380.
14 R. Cándida Smith, Circuits of Subjectivity: Oral History and the Art Object. University of California, Berkeley, 2003, p. 9. Published online at http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/education/docs/circuits_revised.doc.
15 The videos were eventually delivered using streaming software, which meant the video clips could have been longer but it was felt that the shorter clips would have a wider appeal.
16 The problem with using clips from within longer responses is that the only complete version is in the text of the transcript on screen. It could therefore be argued that but for the video clips the site is a modern delivery of a very traditional type of oral history which includes the transcripts and some images to help give context. However, the inclusion of the video and the opportunity to access it, watch the person speak and see them handle the object is the unique selling point which encourages the user to interact with the site, even if they then go on to engage with the site primarily through the transcripts. The video is the hook whereby the user is drawn in to the site.
18 NEVAC collection, CD 714, 3 of 5 (00:19:30 onwards), Colin Pearson interviewed by Walter Keeler at the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, 19.08.1998.
20 ‘Turning’ is the process whereby a partially dried clay pot is placed on the wheel and excess clay is removed using a metal tool as the pot turns on the wheel. Turning is seen by some pottery purists as a process used by potters who are not skilled enough to produce a finished pot by throwing on the wheel alone.
21 In order to look at the issues raised by this project, this article will focus on this item rather than trying to cover each object discussed by each interviewee.
22 P. Thompson, The Voice of the Past, Oral History, 2nd edn., Oxford University Press, 1988, p. 101.
23 Hooper-Greenhill, op. cit., p. 103.
24 NEVAC collection, CD 795, 3 of 4 (00:13:08 onwards), Julian Stair interviewed by Walter Keeler at the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, 01.12.1999.
25 Harrod was unaware of Pearson's comments about the Coper pot but she is part of a crafts cognoscenti who ‘know’ that potters such as Person and Cardew disliked Coper's work. Quotations from Harrod, Britton, Curneer, and Brownsword can be found at http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/ceramics/points_of_view/transcripts/haco.
26 P. Johnson, ‘Fellow to fellow’, Crafts, July/August 1999, p. 50.
27 If the primary purpose of the interview had been a traditional life story interview rather than the discussion of particular objects then the cameraman would have received different directions. Of course, a broadcast video crew could have used two cameras at different angles to allow footage to be edited together to show Cooper's whole face as well as his hands and the pot but with just one camera compromises have to be made.
28 P. Johnson, ‘Out of Touch: The Meaning of Making in the Digital Age’ in Harrod, T. (ed.), Obscure Objects of Desire, Reviewing the Crafts in the Twentieth Century, Crafts Council, 1997, p. 293.
29 R. Cándida Smith, op. cit., p. 5.
30 The gallery label, ‘Pot on Foot’ implies a degree of separation in the two parts of the object, which is itself a reflection of the way that the pot appears to be a vase sitting on a base.
32 R. Cándida Smith, op. cit., p. 8.