Abstract
Cultural heritage professionals are becoming increasingly concerned about the lack of care being taken by municipalities for their cultural heritage objects which include works of art in public places. They have therefore begun to ask the public to help take care of “their” cultural heritage through so-called public participation projects. Cultural heritage professionals tacitly assume that if they “teach” the public to treasure such objects of “their” heritage, the public will become more proactive in helping to conserve them. However, research being conducted by the authors is showing that a majority of the general public often has a completely different awareness and/or feeling about cultural heritage objects in their neighborhoods than the cultural heritage professionals think they have, or think they should have. Three recent case studies carried out by the authors show that these differences are most noticeable during so-called “value moments” at the beginning and at the perceived end of an object’s life. These are the two moments when decisions are made, usually by cultural heritage professionals, to place an object in a neighborhood or have it significantly changed or removed, often to the surprise and disagreement of the residents. Between these two moments lay many moments when an object is taken for granted, grudgingly accepted, or not even noticed. Given the fact that cultural heritage professionals often make the ultimate decisions and do not always consider or outright ignore public opinion, it should not be surprising that there is an increasingly negative public perception of what they do. The results of the case studies illustrate the need for professionals to consider and accept as valid, public feelings about cultural heritage objects in their neighborhoods.
Highlights
Cultural heritage institutions including museums and historic sites are looking for ways to attract more visitors to their exhibitions and increase financing for their projects
They were considered to be typical cultural heritage objects each of which has been at its current location for at least a quarter of a century, and is continuously exposed to the general public
The project to preserve concrete sculptures by Jaap van der Meij, which are perfectly visible to the public, was started in large part by cultural heritage professionals because of the perceived neglect of their conservation
Summary
Cultural heritage institutions including museums and historic sites are looking for ways to attract more visitors to their exhibitions and increase financing for their projects. The development of so-called public participation programs has become an important part of that work in recent years. Such programs include education programs for various age groups, the development of on-line catalogues, and activities such as having the public design their own collections. Similar pressures to engage the public are being placed on objects of cultural heritage in public places. We define “objects of cultural heritage” in the broadest physical sense of the term, and include works of art, statues and other monuments, historic/registered buildings and other structures, and historic landscapes such as parks or historic city centers. Cultural heritage professionals including (art) historians, conservators, curators and artists themselves are concerned about the real or perceived lack of care being taken by municipalities for such objects. Most have been arguably installed without consideration for their long-term maintenance
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
