(R)EVOLUTION OF MUSEUM EDUCATION DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

In the paper the results of research titled Cultural Institutions during COVID-19. Museum Strategies for Reaching the Public are presented. It was conducted by the Forum of Museum Educators as commissioned by the National Institute for Museums and Public Collections (NIMOZ). The main purpose was to show the impact of the pandemic on the operations of museums after 12 March 2020 when the decision was made in Poland to close the culture sector to the public; the aim was also to diagnose and analyse problems that the pandemic caused, and to point to the directions of impact on cultural institutions possible in the future, namely after restoring ‘normality’. The perspective adopted in the research, i.e., institutional and individual one, enables a multifaceted analysis of the processes initiated by museums in response to unclear and often complicated mechanisms of the new pandemic reality, which still today, some dozen months since its outbreak, continues for museums the source of challenges as far as logistics and financing issues are concerned.

WIELKOPOLSKA (GREATER POLAND) MILITARY MUSEUM: HISTORY OF AN UNUSUAL MUSEUM

The beginning of historical-military museology in Poznan dates back to the mid-19th century when the Poznan Society of Friends of Learning assumed the responsibility to save historic monuments, and began to establish the Museum of Polish and Slavic Antiquities in the Grand Duchy of Posen (Poznan). The task was to collect archival, library, and museum materials, including militaria. As a result of these efforts, in 1882, the Mielżynski Museum was established which boasted an exquisite painting gallery, containing historical painting, a rich archaeological and military collection, and a sizeable collection of so-called historical mementoes: weapons, orders, decorations, etc. In the aftermath of the Greater Poland Uprising 1918 –1919, the Hindenburg Museum founded in 1916–1918 was transformed into a Military Museum. The ceremonial opening was held on 27 October 1919 by Józef Piłsudski, Poland’s Chief of State. The quickly growing collection was moved from Marcinkowskiego Avenue to the barracks in Bukowska Street, and subsequently to a new seat at 1 Artyleryjska Street in Poznan. The solemn opening of the Wielkopolska Military Museum was held on 22 April 1923 by the Commander of the 7th Corps District Major-General Kazimierz Raszewski. In 1939, anticipating the threat of war, the most precious objects were evacuated eastwards, and looted there. The items which stayed behind ended up in German museums. The mementoes connected with the history of the Polish military were destroyed, and the Museum was wound up. The first attempts at reactivating the Museum following WW II failed. It was only with the 1956 revolt that civil and military authorities changed their approach, The National Museum in Poznan undertook the first efforts. The Museum did not go back to its pre-WW II seat, but found home in a modern building in the Old Market Square in Poznan, to be ceremoniously launched on 22 February 1963 by the Commander of the Operational Air Force in Poznan Brigadier General Pilot Jan Raczkowski. Having recreated its collection, the Wielkopolska Military Museum, already as a Branch of the National Museum in Poznan, has held many exhibitions and shows. Moreover, it has released many publications, and run a broad range of educational activities. Among other projects, it has also made reference to the pre-WW II Museum. On 27 December 2019, a new jubilee exhibition ‘Wielkopolska Military Museum 1919–2019’ recording the 100-years’ history of the oldest historical-military museum in Poland was inaugurated.

TWO PERSPECTIVES ON THE ACT ON MUSEUMS

In the paper the analysis of two newly published commentaries (2021) on the Act on Museums is conducted: the first commentary by A. Barbasiewicz, a lawyer specializing in cultural heritage, and the other by a team of scholars: Z. Cieślik, I. Gredka-Ligarska, P. Gwoździewicz- -Matan, I. Lipowicz, A. Matan, K. Zeidler specializing in administrative proceedings and legal protection of historic monuments. Both publications represent various perspectives on the same issue, thus complementing one another. The difference in the approach makes them both useful to experienced practitioners on the one hand and those who happen to confront these topics for the first time one the other. Importantly, both have been written in a clear language comprehensible to non-lawyers. Their high-rating cannot be diminished by the few critical remarks formulated in the paper.

SPECIFICITY OF THE COLLECTIONS AT MUSEUM BRANCHES OF THE RACZYŃSKI LIBRARY IN POZNAN

Two theses are formulated by the paper’s authors. The first speaks of the mission of making culture products available to the public, which was precisely the one Count Raczyński followed at the moment of founding the Library in 1829, and of the validity of this mission in the operations of the museum branches of the Raczyński Library: the Literary Museum of Henryk Sienkiewicz (MLHS) and the Flat-Studio of Kazimiera Iłłakowiczówna (MPKI). The second thesis claims that the book collections of both institutions are very special: they contain exceptional books and their book collections as such can become the object of research for literary scholars and linguists. Furthermore, information on the creation of the Raczyński Library and on the foundation of its museum branches is provided. In their analyses the authors classify the book collections into three basic categories: donated items, books that stand out as for their appearance, works created by the institutions’ donors, and an additional category for MPKI: books serving as tools for writers. The most interesting items within each category have been distinguished and described.

‘NATIONAL COLLECTIONS OF CONTEMPORARY ART’: PROGRAMME OF THE MINISTER OF CULTURE AND NATIONAL HERITAGE TO FINANCE PURCHASES OF CONTEMPORARY ART WORKS IN 2011–2019 PART 1. HISTORY: FINANCING

The ‘National Collections of Contemporary Art’ Programme run by the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage (MKiDN) in 2011–2019 constituted the most important since 1989 financing scheme for purchasing works of contemporary art to create and develop museum collections. Almost PLN 57 million from the MKiDN budget were allocated by means of a competition to purchasing works for such institutions as the Museum of Modern Art in Warsaw (MSN), Museum of Art in Lodz (MSŁ), Wroclaw Contemporary Museum (MNW), Museum of Contemporary Art in Cracow (MOCAK), or the Centre of Polish Sculpture in Orońsko (CRP). The programme in question and the one called ‘Signs of the Times’ that had preceded it were to fulfil the following overall goal: to create and develop contemporary art collections meant for the already existing museums in Poland, but particularly for newly-established autonomous museums of the 20th and 21st century. The analysis of respective editions of the programmes and financing of museums as part of their implementation confirms that the genuine purpose of the Ministry’s ‘National Contemporary Art Collections’ Programme has been fulfilled.

A FORGOTTEN HERO: JAN MORAWIŃSKI (1907–1949)

Notes of a Curator at the National Museum published in 1970 in the second volume of the book Struggle for Cultural Goods is the only generally available testimony to saving the Wilanów historic monuments by Jan Morawiński, a forgotten hero from the times of WW II. Additionally priceless because of Morawiński documenting the looting of 137 paintings belonging to the pre-WW II Branicki collection at Wilanów. The above-mentioned Notes were published by the Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy after the manuscript kept in the private archive of the author’s daughter Agnieszka Morawińska. The notes, however, resemble pieces of paper torn from a notebook in which an earlier chapter is missing. The missing chapter does exist, yet for unknown reasons was omitted in the two-volume Struggle for Cultural Goods. Warsaw 1939–1945 edited by Prof. Stanisław Lorentz. The present paper is based on Morawiński’s hand-written testimony, supported by archival sources and recollections of his colleagues from the National Museum in Warsaw (MNW). From August 1939 to August 1944, Jan Morawiński, together with others, was involved in saving precious museum exhibits in the Museum building, but also throughout Warsaw. He was involved in packing the historic monuments into crates which were to help them survive the toughest times, and he helped to put out fires at the Museum, risking his own life. Moreover, he rescued the Royal Castle collections during the hardest bombing of Warsaw, transporting them to the storages in Warsaw’s Jerozolimskie Avenue. For his dedication he was awarded the Virtuti Militari Cross of the 5th class by Gen. Juliusz Rómmel. After Warsaw’s surrender, he was assigned Head of MNW’s storerooms and inventories: when Director Lorentz was absent, he acted as his deputy. In the first period of the Nazi occupation he courageously faced German officials. Furthermore, he headed the clandestine action of inventorying and documenting German destructions and plundering. The knowledge amassed in this way was extremely helpful in the restitution of the looted historic monuments, not only museum ones. He also contributed to documenting the destruction of the Warsaw Castle. Imprisoned by the Nazis, he went through Gestapo’s hands at Daniłowiczowska Street in Warsaw. Later on, he became manager of the Museum of Old Warsaw in the Old Town, at the same time acting as a guardian of the Wilanów collection. Following the defeat of the Warsaw Uprising, he participated in the so-called Pruszków Action in whose course he was badly injured.

THE ENGLISH VOYAGE OF MICHAŁ JERZY WANDALIN MNISZECH AND PLAN TO FOUND THE POLISH MUSEUM

It is the plan to found the Polish Museum declared in 1775 by Michał Jerzy Wandalin Mniszech (1748–1806) that is tackled in the paper. Argumentation is presented that the major impulse for the idea to establish a museum in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was felt by Mniszech following his visit to the British Museum in 1766. It is from the inspiration by that Museum that the overall structural scheme of the Polish Museum, adjusted to the Polish potential and conditions was conceived. Just like the latter, the Polish Museum was to be funded with public financing and opened to the general public, while its main raison d’être, similarly as that of the London museum, was benefit understood as supporting and popularizing knowledge, since Mniszech’s museum first of all was to be an educational institution targeted mainly at young people and calculated to yield future advantages. Next to the reformed general public system and the academy of sciences, it was to become an essential element of the coherent system of science and education which M.J. Mniszech considered a condition and basis of the wealth and success of the state and nation. The ambitious and unaccomplished plan to found the Polish Museum formed part of the committed programme of the revival and civilizational promotion of the state suffering at the time the process of degradation.

SUPERVISION OF MUSEUM ACTIVITY

Supervision of museums should be perceived taking into account both specific regulations: addressed directly to museums, particularly in the Act on Museums, as well as general regulations assuming supervision mechanisms in different respects, e.g., construction process or HR. This complex perspective: systemic and normative, is essential not only with respect to the supervision in a narrow basic meaning of the term, associated in the first place with an inspection of the supervised entity and application of respective executive actions, e.g., undertaken in the form of administrative decisions, but also the supervision in a broader perspective, understood as a whole range of support provided to a museum, including issuing recommendations, evaluations, and opinions important for its operation. In the context of ‘external’ supervision implemented by appropriate organs and entities, the following are of basic importance: the museum’s organiser (founder) supervision, constituting one of the organiser’s basic statutory responsibilities, as well as the supervision of the minister responsible for culture and preservation of national heritage, with respect to e.g., the preservation and care of historic monuments and museum operations; additionally, it is the matter of conservation supervision performed by Voivodeship Conservators of Historic Monuments as organs specialized in the preservation and care of historic monuments, the latter constituting, e.g., museum collections. As for the ‘internal’ supervision aspects, the role of museum councils, obligatory in public museums (state ones or organised by local governments), needs to be emphasized. Their statutory responsibility is to e.g., supervise how museums fulfil their responsibilities with respect to the collection and the public, in particular how they fulfil the goals as specified in Art.1 of the Act on Museums. The questions of supervision are also important for non-public museums (their founders) which in the event of violating either the Act’s provisions or their own charter have to be prepared that supervisory activities might be applied to them, up to the ban on their further operations.

PARTICIPATION OF THE PUBLIC IN POLISH MUSEUMS

In the 21^st century, participation is one of the key words related to the operations of museums and debate around them. The public are encouraged to co-create museum projects: exhibitions, programmes that accompany exhibitions, studies; they play the role of consultants and advisors (youth councils, clubs, consultancy teams). Museums are more and more widely ‘opening’ to embrace the public. Never before has the position of visitors been as significant. An overview of participatory programmes in Polish museums is provided. They are classified and characterized by the Author who places them within the philosophy of museum operations, particularly with respect to the altering role of museums, currently debated over within ICOM, with the context of the new museum definition in mind; furthermore, she presents the initial conclusions drawn from the implementation of such projects for museums. In the paper the material from interviews conducted as part of the Atlas of Museum Participation Project implemented with a grant from the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage has been used.

REGULATIONS WITH RESPECT TO CIVIL TURNOVER IN THE ACT ON THE RESTITUTION OF POLISH HERITAGE ASSETS AND THEIR APPLICATION TO MUSEUMS’ OPERATION

It is the legal regulations related to civil turnover specified in the Act of 25 May 2017 on the Restitution of Polish Heritage Assets (consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2019, Item 1591) in the context of the activity of museums and other institutions running a museum activity that is the topic of the paper. They speak of legal activities including ownership transfer or charge on Poland’s heritage assets pertaining to public collections, or the ban on acquiring assets from a person unauthorized to dispose of them or manage them by prescription, as well as of the non-limitation of claims for their release. The Author analyses the central concept of the quoted Act: that of the <u>national heritage assets of the Polish Republic</u> pertaining to public collections, while discussing in detail both criteria that are related to it: subject- and ownership-related ones. He points to the fact that the definition of public collections it contains is extremely broad, covering not only public collections in the colloquial meaning of the term, but also the collections of the majority of private museums, as well as non-museum collections of private entities and persons, as long as they have applied public financing. In the further part of the paper, the civil-law regulations specified in the Act are discussed, with special emphasis on the requested form of the legal actions including the transfer of ownership or burden (in writing with a certified date) suggesting that this can apply also to deposit or lending contracts. He also discusses the praxis and judicature with respect to the in writing with a certified date pointing to the possible lack of the awareness of the contract parties that the object of the contract pertains to a public collection in compliance with the provisions of the Act, and that the special contract format should be kept. In this context the Author presents some practical solutions allowing to avoid certain negative consequences. In the conclusion it is emphasized that the regulation contains certain concepts which might inspire essential interpretative doubts having impact on the application of the discussed regulations.