Mu(seu) em linhas e entrelinhas: vozes disputando a nova definição de museu e a educação museal

Abstract

In 2019, the definition of Museum began to be discussed in the global context. This movement allows us to understand that the word Museum constitutes an arena of sign disputes and, therefore, ideological ones. In this context and based on the disputes that arise in it, this research proposes, as a general objective, to understand the voices that have been constituting the Museum sign and its relationship with discursive disputes and with the field of public policies, especially educational ones. Therefore, I present the following specific objectives: a) to analyze and contextualize the discussions about the museum sign; b) researching museum education with emphasis on the official discourse of the National Policy on Museum Education and c) investigating how the museum sign potentially gains different understandings during a museum education practice. The set of data used to achieve the objectives presented here consists of official documents, which include both the text of the National Policy on Museum Education booklet, and the reports from ICOM Brazil in the stages of choosing the new definition of museum; in addition, the reports of an educational practice carried out at the Museu Antonio Selistre de Campos and at the Museu de História e Arte de Chapecó, which was the action “Building the Museum I want”, are also part of the data. As a theoretical and methodological basis, in discourse, word, sign, centripetal forces and centrifugal forces, I use: Bakhtin, Voloshinov, Ponzio, Faraco and Caracelli Scherma, for educational policies, education and museum education: Freire, Chagas, Marandino, Gohn and for Museum: Oliveira, Gabre, Chagas and Mairesse. This dissertation, “MU (SEU) IN LINES AND BETWEEN LINES: VOICES DISPUTEING THE NEW DEFINITION OF MUSEUM AND MUSEUM EDUCATION”, brought as results: evidence of the performance of centripetal and centrifugal forces, during all stages of the dispute for the redefinition of the museum sign, making clear the importance of the words found in the definition of the museum sign, as each one of them is the result of a choice and every choice is permeated with intention and this act is ideological; shed light on the power relations established in museums and how museum educators are often on the sidelines, as if they were not part of museum professionals but a separate category, as well as reaffirming the importance of museum education and how it can and should save people from ignorance, bringing up phrases from a head of state, being crucial for a remarkable moment in the history of Brazilian museums to never be forgotten and the realization that the museum sign is neither ready nor finished, showing the intriguing and an interesting educational trajectory in which the sign gains new symbolic layers through the perspective of each child, a perspective that is unique, singular and unrepeatable.