Read comments supporting good curatorship from the 100’s of members of the public and museum professionals that have signed our petition on The petition is still open, so please sign it and show your support!

Read some of the comments we’ve received below:

“Good curatorship is the foundation of the excellent museum experiences that our users have come to expect. We need to protect the principle, and celebrate what good curators to do to help open up their institutions and their knowledge for society.”

“Without skilled specialist curators, knowledge is lost & collections die – simple as that. Without collections you cannot work in natural sciences.”

“Appropriate knowledge expertise is needed to care for our national collections, and facilitate their use. without curators we don’t have this.”

“The curator’s knowledge and understanding of the collections creates the value which can then be intereprted for the enjoyment and benefit of the museum visitors and the wider public. Without curators this link is lost and the perceived value of the collection goes with it.”

“We need good curators, because without them you can’t communicate a good ‘story’ to the general public and new specialists have no sound foundation of truth to build on.”

Read more inspiring comments and show your support on

4 thoughts on “Petition

  1. Good curatorship goes beyond subject specialist knowledge or a research background. You have to be a museologist, designer, communicator, public speaker, educator, fund raiser, social media guru, manager, conservator, developer, historian, scholar, politician, advocate and networker all at once. A good curator needs to be all of these in balance and should be accordingly supported for doing so.

    1. Hi Mark,

      I like and agree with your comment. However, the campaign is trying to pick apart the bits of curation which are unique to curators and which other job roles do not cover. But, you are right that in organisations with less staff, the number of expectations and responsibilities which falls to curators can dramatically increase, as you list! This may leave very little time for the uniquely curatorial roles. However, this is the point of the campaign. Unless curators are given the time to gain expertise on the collections they are responsible for, then museums will not function effectively. There is currently little advocacy for this area of vital work, hence why the campaign is focusing on it.

  2. Thanks for the reply. I’m all for what is laid out in the campaign here but when this has been discussed (and oh it has been discussed) amongst curators at conferences and in subject specialist networks, there seems to be a yearning for the subject specialist roles of yesteryear. Although, curators of the past achieved an awful lot, a focus on research to the exclusion of all else has left us with the difficult collections backlog many museums are still catching up with 200 years later. i don’t think anyone would deny that there are still appointments where research expertise inevitably trumps the broad suite of aptitudes and knowledge that this campaign lays out so I guess my comment was more a call for a balance and not a shift the other way.

    1. Hi Mark,

      Again I agree. This is what the campaign is seeking to do. That is, to move the heritage sector (and perhaps some curators) to a more balance approach where curatorial expertise is adequately resourced and valued but properly integrated within museum work/priorities. It is not seeking to turn the clock back, or claim that museums should only employ experts or that expertise is more important than any other curatorial work. Instead, it seeks to bang the drum for integrated curatorial work/expertise to make the case that it must continue to be done, and done well, so that museum work, including “demonstrable impact”, is effective and not just a passing distraction or a lacklustre nod to “heritage engagement”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *