PROCEEDINGS | Scientific Symposium
it run the risk of trumping the significance of the objects with the stereotyping of reconstruction which is too exhaustive or too intrusive , ( Ruggieri Tricoli , M . C ., 2004 , p . 48 ) let alone to be sadly dominant and characterised by the overwhelming presence of excavation reports ( Ibidem , p . 59 ), which are all types of display which , although based on positions which are conceptually very distant from each other , do not allow the establishment of any type of constructive or educational dialogue even with a visitor who is very attentive and amenable .
On the argument of layouts it should be noted , unfortunately , that most do not take account of the potential contextuality of the archaeological remains and as Andrea Zifferero noted some years ago despite being an exceptional condition for museum purposes … it is rarely taken into consideration ( Zifferero , A ., 1999 , pp . 413-414 ).
It could be interesting to ask ourselves about the reasons which determined and still today , despite the awareness of some professionals in the field , continue to bring that situation about .
Museum education has been defined as intersecting competence for which a valid educational proposal in the museum field … can only be born from the confluence of contributions from different disciplines and , in particular , of the results of the research in the fields of differing disciplines … ( Nardi , E ., 1997 , pp . 47-54 ) and such confluence of competences concerns the field of disciplines of content and that of pedagogical disciplines ( Nardi , E ., 1994 , pp . 24-42 ).
But alas , often an incoherent insufficiency or a paradoxical complexity of the education equipment and also the very unattractive way in which the works are displayed generates dissonance . But still worse there is a feeling of frustration despite the fact that most of the time the visitor is sympathetic given that he “ cherche à etre en consonance avec l ’ oeuvre d ’ art ” ( tries to be in harmony with the work of art ) ( Weltzl-Fairchild , A . and Dubé , L . M ., 1988 , pp . 17-27 ), conflicts of differing natures are unleashed , called cognitive dissonances ( Ibidem . For a deepening on the theory of cognitive dissonance we refer to Festinger , L ., 1957 and to Ham , S . H ., 1994 ). These have been studied and pidgeon-holed according to four distinct typologies and this is in strict relationship and dependence on the type of conflict which is unleashed in the visitor ’ s psychology . These range from the dissonance between previous knowledge , educational equipment and works to that between the expectation of the visitor and the way the visit is conducted to that relative to the museum object itself and in the end to the personal tastes of the visitor .
What systems or strategies could there be to resolve such cognitive dissonance and reduce the pressure caused by the conflicts ? Different ways do exist . These range from the more radical where there is refusal to face the issue and avoid the problem , which in the context of the museum can be explained according to differing modalities , such as abandoning the visit or not giving attention to its contents . Then there are other more constructive types and above all educationally more valid like modifying the cognitive scheme and the conduct of the same visit and using the educational supports and help in museum message interpretation , modulated in relation to the different functional , structural and aesthetic requirements of the collection to the emotional , contemplative , educational , fun , and recreational needs of the users who are most stratified by age , culture , social class , and by geographic origin .
We are dealing with an issue which is not easy to resolve , which the museum professionals each with their own skills and different fields , know they have to deal with , nearly as a challenge , well aware of the importance of what is at stake . This is a greater , easier , and more rapid legibility of the overall content of the museum , whch in other terms means betting on two of the three objectives , relative to the display , the core of the museum , which directly concerns the widest public , as well as education and enjoyment .
Perhaps one of the more conflictual and rooted dissonances , which unfortunately we meet quite often in this museum category , could be caused by what Maria Clara Ruggieri Tricoli identifies as the very invasive tendency to transform all museums with archaeological remains into museums of archaeology ( as a
238