Emotions in the Museum of Medicine. An investigation of how museum educators employ emotions and what these emotions do

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to explore how museum educators employ emotions when they are doing guided tours and to investigate what these emotions do. The paper explores five guided tours in the Museum of Medical History (Uppsala, Sweden) located in the former Ulleråker psychiatric hospital and asylum. The guided tours take place in the exhibitions focusing on surgery, nursing and mental care, but this paper focuses on guided tour in the exhibition displaying mental care. The guided tours were filmed and documented using participant observation. The material is analysed with the help of Sara Ahmed's queer-feminist phenomenological approach to emotions. The paper shows that the museum educators used a multitude of emotions to orient the students' emotional experiences and their knowledge about mental care and mental illness. Emotional restraint, fear, antipathy and sympathy were expressed in relation to patients, and this contributed to an othering of patients. The depiction of patients was used to express empathy in relation to caretakers. The study reveals that the appropriation of emotions works along sanist norms that largely contribute to a further marginalisation of patients. The paper, therefore, calls for a further examination of sanist norms in cultural heritage productions.

Långbro Hospital, Sweden—From Psychiatric Institution to Digital Museum: A Critical Discourse Analysis

“…This might be a way to hold a comfortable distance to distressing narratives, objects, and sites, and assure that the visitors have a pleasant and amusing experience. The result is a non-reflected presentation that follows the usual “script” 5 for psychiatric museums, with exhibited bathtubs, ECT machines, and the standard narrative stating that “ medicines revolutionized mental care ” (Coleborne, 2011; Rodéhn, 2020). It should be noted that this information is not trustworthy, since many patients suffered/suffer severe adverse effects of medicines and other treatments, and other were/are not helped at all (Bentall, 2009; Breggin, 2006).…”

“…I consider it valuable to digitize information about the heritage of psychiatry and make it available, if the information is produced or co-produced by people with lived experience, since this counteracts mentalism 4 (Yahm, 2014). Digital museums can be specifically suitable for presenting immaterial heritage (Karp, 2014), including narratives of persons concerned but they are not immune to the risks of sensationalism or "othering" of psychiatric patients that infiltrate traditional museums (Coleborne, 2003;Rodéhn, 2020). The tendency to prioritize digitization on a national level therefore needs to be reflected on.…”

“…One might wonder why the creators of Långbro Hospital established a museum that is so out of touch with current awareness of the risks of othering groups of people (Rodéhn, 2020). One could hypothesize that they want to invoke positive feelings in the visitor since words such as beauty, opportunity, and develop are repeated.…”

“…The fact that physical strength, surveillance, and the view of patients as violent and in need of control, might be a breeding ground for oppression and abuse is not reflected. This is an example of how a museum contributes to continuous objectification and sensationalism vis-à-vis patients (Rodéhn, 2020;Yahm, 2014). Since patients are not permitted to speak for themselves, and since their position is not reflected on, Långbro Hospital perpetuates injustice and prejudice toward patients.…”

“…These small museums were not part of professional collections of objects even though some grassroot museums, such as Lillhagen Museum , Sweden (https://www.sahlgrenska.se/medicinhistoriska-museet/om-museet/museets-historia/), and the Porirua Hospital Museum , New Zealand, later became attached to formal museums, universities, and/or hospitals (Coleborne, 2011). Despite good intentions, both grassroot museums and established ones may contribute to objectification and sensationalism vis-à-vis patients (Rodéhn, 2020; Yahm, 2014). Patients were seldom permitted to speak for themselves and psychiatry was often presented as a story of success.…”