The Queer Museum: Radical Inclusion and Western Museology, by Erica Robenalt. Routledge, 2024.
REVIEWED BY KAL DEMAREE
Authored by Erica Robenalt, The Queer Museum: Radical Inclusion and Western Museology delves into the role of LGBTQ+ representation and queer theory in museums. Through ideas of queer utopia and futurity, the book combines queer theory and museology by exhibition and programming analysis. According to Robenalt, museums can be transformed through utilizing queer theory to create “radically inclusive” spaces. She argued that by challenging traditional, heteronormative and colonial frameworks, institutions can “queer” their practices. Museums can re-think their exhibitions, programming, and institutional relationships to generate a sense of community and belonging for diverse identities. In this idealized museum space, queer utopia is practiced, both as a noun – an envisioned future or imagined space where queerness is embraced and celebrated outside of heteronormativity – and as a verb – radical inclusivity beyond society’s current limitations and frameworks.
In the introduction of the book (chapters one and two), the author establishes a baseline vocabulary and explores the basics of queer theory while also exploring its inherent paradox of how to explore non-normativity without normalization. Robenalt separated the term “queer” into three blurred categories: theory, identity, and politics. She also explains that the definition of queer museology is fluid, and that the term “queer” itself comes with many caveats and emotions from the LGBTQ+ community.
Throughout the internal chapters of the book, Robenalt explores the prevailing practical methods, the hierarchies of power involved in the production of exhibition and programming, and the challenges facing museums when it comes to community engagement with the LGBTQ+ community through various case studies in Anglophone museology. These case studies include exhibitions titled Queer British Art 1861-1967 at the Tate Britain – she argued it is a less queer project due to its traditional organization and display, lack of experimentation, and the definite lack of engagement with the LGBTQ+ community. In contrast, Coming Out: Sexuality, Gender & Identity at the Walker Art Gallery in Liverpool is queer-er due to its collaborative community engagement in content development. In chapter five, the efforts made at the VAM, in Eindhoven, in decolonizing and de-modernizing and their relation to queering the museum are analyzed. In this section, Robenalt both questions and analyzes the institution’s understanding of queerness, and how this is related to their content they create. The final case study, in chapter six, looks at the LGBTQ+ oriented SMU in Germany. It serves as an art gallery, community center, archive, library, and social history museum. She reviews the history of the organization, and how it redesigned itself from being created via grassroots organizing by and for white, German gay men, and became more queer, feminist, and intersectional.
The final two chapters of the book reflect on the information gathered in the case studies and present an argument for what a queer utopic museum can be defined as. Furthermore, the author highlights the need for the importance of queer community work and engagement within museums as a key step to queering said museum(s). She also mentions the importance of having queer bodies physically in the museum space, and how the prioritization and inclusion of queer lived experiences can broaden the knowledge authority that the museum offers. Lastly, the author points out that these steps will not guarantee a true queer utopic museum but can lead to spaces of utopic horizons – horizons that “brush against visions of a queer future”. Due to the innate paradox of the celebration of the non-normality causing normalization, and due to the long legacies of harm done by museums to marginalized groups, when queer theory is applied to museums, it is not creating a clean, “cookie cutter” plan of action. Rather, Robenalt argues that institutional knowledge, effort, and radical inclusion and invitation to the museum’s space can create progress in queering a museum, but that act of queering is never actually completed.
A critique I had for Robenalt’s work is that the introductory chapters rely heavily on the assumption of the audience being well informed on scholarly work and language. The book’s heavy reliance on theoretical language, particularly around “queer utopia” and “futurity” can potentially alienate less scholarly audiences. I see a definite possibility of readers from non-academic backgrounds struggling with the introductory chapters due to the heavy focus on theory. It is also possible that non-queer audiences may be confused by the broad expansion of the term “queer”, and its liberal use in this book. Yes, the title includes the words “radical inclusion”, yet the author does not expand – in lay terms – what such solidarity truly looks like for heteronormative allies. Solidarity, and “queering” institutions is uncomfortable, because change and non-normativity are often culturally connotated as negative. There are battles to fight against old regimes within institutions that need to be fought to truly, and non-performatively queer a museum. Robenalt does not touch upon this fact. Robenalt’s vision of “the queer museum” is a vision of perfected progress, absent are the practical challenges institutions face, such traditional governance structures and budget constraints. Another critique I had was the lack of mention of the importance of LGBTQ+ allies. The survival of LGBTQ+ people – since they are a minority – heavily relies on the work of allies. LGBTQ+ allies should not be alienated from “radical inclusion”. While Robenalt is arguing for radical inclusion, she is simultaneously advocating for additional labor from LGBTQ+ people. While LGBTQ+ people exist everywhere, it is not practical to think that those in marginalized groups would want or have the capacity to actively engage with museums. Due to this, allies have historically stepped up to fill the gap. I believe Robenalt aimed to focus on the ideal collaboration with the LGBTQ+ community, forgetting that allies are also part of said community.
Overall, The Queer Museum is a well-researched examination of how museums can be reimaged. The book’s uniqueness is in its call for a radical shift in how institutions engage with and represent marginalized groups. This book is a must read for those invested in museum practices, social justice, and LGBTQ+ representation.
Kal Demaree is a first year MA student in the IU Indianapolis Museum Studies Program.
