Materiality and digitization in the Museum of the History of Polish Jews

Barbara Kirschenblatt Gimblett, NYU Performance Studies and the Museum of the History of Polish Jews
The Museum of the History of Polish Jews is being created in Warsaw on the site of the former Warsaw Ghetto and facing the Monument to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. At the heart of this educational and cultural center is a multimedia narrative museum presenting a millenium of Jewish presence on Polish soil. While we will show original historical objects, we do not depend primarily on them to tell this rich story.
There is a general perception that if we are not basing the exhibition on objects we must be a “virtual” museum–and that is generally taken to mean a museum that lacks materiality. I offer one example here of our work as a challenge to the generally accepted dichotomy between
virtual and–take your pick–actual, digital, material.
836b00ab.jpg
Source: The Museum of the History of Polish Jews
I call the problem the materiality fallacy: what constitutes an “original” or “actual” or “authentic” object. The 18th-century wooden synagogue of Gwoździec that we will feature in the 18th-century gallery offers a fine case for exploring this issue. We intend to reconstruct the timber-framed roof and polychrome ceiling of this spectacular synagogue. Now we could go to a theater prop maker, give him the dimensions and some pictures, and say to him “Make it!” The result would look pretty much like the original, but it would be a theatrical prop. That is not what we want to do. What we want to do goes to the heart of the issue of actual and virtual. We want to work with a studio in Massachusetts, whose motto is “learn by building.”
These beautiful 18th-century wooden synagogues no longer exist; the Germans burned to the ground those still standing in 1939. We can however recover the knowledge of how to build them by actually building one. What is actual about that artifact resides therefore not in the original 18th-century wood, not in the original painted interior, but in the knowledge that we recovered for how to build it.
It’s a completely different concept of the object. This approach is related to a completely different tradition of thinking about what constitutes an object.
a51f6ca8.jpg
The best example I can think of is the Jingu Shrine in Ise, Japan. This is a shrine that is 800 years old and never older than 20 years because for 800 years they have been tearing it down every 20 years in order to rebuild it. The only way to maintain the embodied knowledge of how to build it is to build it, and to make it necessary to build it, they tear it down and then must build it again. The value is in maintaining the knowledge of how to build it, not in preserving the original materials. The result is not a replica or simulation of the Jingu shrine; it is the Jingu shrine. This is a completely different way of defining what is “actual” about such an object.
This posting is adapted from my interview with Obieg, Poland’s leading online contemporary art magazine. An English translation of the complete interview appears here:
ttp://www.jewishmuseum.org.pl/news_archive.php?miId=120&lang=en&nId=1744