Visitor numbers to stately homes are in decline. The perception of 'seen one seen them all' is a key factor, while prohibitive insurance costs are stopping hosts enhancing the experience, writes Hugh Maguire.
Historic house museums form a distinctive component in our cultural landscape. There are a growing number of historic houses open to the public, so much so that there is now a crisis, acknowledged internationally if not here in Ireland. In the US there are more than 6,000 houses open to the public. And yet the numbers visiting continue to decline, if not dramatically, then incrementally, slowly but surely.
Houses with fine gardens are bucking this trend, no doubt reflecting the current vogue for gardening. Elsewhere house museums are at their full capacity - notably the Georgian House, Bath, which with around 40,000 visitors annually cannot accommodate any more. That the Ann Frank House Museum, Amsterdam, manages nearly one million visitors is something of a logistical nightmare, especially given the very purposefully cramped conditions of its "secret" spaces.
If anything, with a number of exceptions, Ireland presents the opposite problem - too few visitors. And yet as Pat Cooke has addressed more widely in his The Containment of Heritage (2002), there may already be too many properties for the limited market and limited resources. This is particularly pronounced with National Trust-owned houses in Northern Ireland, which are effectively being subsidised by sister properties in England.
In the Republic, slack visitor numbers are compounded by the demands of astounding insurance premiums and the inconsistencies, and contradictory demands, of tax-relief schemes create a climate in which house-opening is almost pointless, at least from a financial point of view. But the calls continue for houses to be opened. It was alluded to with Ballyfin, Co Laois, and was most pronounced over Lissadell House, Co Sligo. Ironically this was one "grand house" in the country for which there appeared to be some groundswell of public support, even if based on a romantic interpretation of its past, it was not taken into public ownership. Self-appointed interpreters of that past were swift to say the State had no interest in purchasing the property. Perhaps the fact that it was popular was just too unpalatable for some.
There are many reasons for the decline in visitor numbers internationally. The sameness of experience in each house is high on the list of factors. "Seen one seen them all." Only the trained and expert eye may derive some pleasure from the subtle changes between one early Neo-Palladian villa and another. How many portraits of great uncle Field Marshall whatever can the visitor take? The quality of visitor experience and expectation has also shifted from the initial wave of house openings in the 1950s and 1960s. Visitors want to be engaged with rather than spoken at. Shifts in social perception and the demise of deference means that visitors are no longer particularly in awe of this being the home of so and so, even less so given that the average visitor may now have more "spondooligs" than the historic-house owner. For parents with children in tow, the roped off dining room display, with precious family heirloom porcelain so tantalisingly touchable, can prove more stressful than relaxing. The failure, or inability, of houses to engage with contemporary museum practice and pedagogy can also hasten the departure of paying visitors. And herein lie dilemmas for the curator/house owner.
It may be taken as given that the average visitor prefers to come upon various historic rooms presented to the viewer as though the family have momentarily moved out. At the same time the average visitor has come to expect a wide, and sometimes dazzling, array of touch-screens, narrative panels and so forth. Clearly their placement in a fine historic room, or in the access rooms of what otherwise may be a family home is disruptive and inappropriate. If there are no suitable outbuildings conveniently placed, the contradictory problems cannot be reconciled. These problems are even more pronounced at historic house museums in towns and cities. There is no additional space. And what space may be available in basement or attic is either cramped and dingy or completely incompatible with contemporary health and safety regulations.
Visitor expectations and conservation best practice are also incompatible. We expect our rooms to be light-filled, warm and airy. And yet such conditions may destroy the actual objects and contents upon which we gaze. Staircases designed for the pitter-patter of satin bootees are not equipped for the mountain boots of the rucksacked visitor. Heavy expensive fabrics designed to be appreciated by the delicate light of evening candles cannot withstand the sunlight glare of unshuttered windows.
Occasionally it may be possible to present such a darkened room as part of the visitor's experience as is currently done at Muckross House, Killarney. But a whole series of interiors presented in this way would frighten the visitor away.
The debate in Ireland, and it is a limited debate, has tended to focus on historic houses only in reference to grand country seats, the ubiquitous "big house", the focus of much architectural history and a surfeit of literary effort. Here the focus has been on the maintenance of the building fabric and occasionally the historic collection, without any long-term realistic, and sustainable, strategy. There is virtually no consideration of the presentation of these houses as "museums". Nor is there acknowledgement of the diversity of historic house museums, which includes Pearse's Cottage near Rosmuc, Michael Dwyer's cottage in Wicklow and the Pearse town house in Pearse Street, Dublin, among others. Despite reflecting diverse and often contradictory political traditions and cultures their concerns are also comparable and need to be addressed as such.
Acknowledging the shared concerns for historic house museums the Paris-based International Council of Museums (ICOM) established an international committee for Historic House Museums (DEMHIST) in 1999. DEMHIST now has a global membership ranging from former royal palaces in Berlin to the homes of revolutionaries in Bolivia.
It exists as a forum for dialogue between those with comparable concerns and an ongoing series of international conferences has highlighted the shared nature of these challenges. With the support of the Heritage Council and the ESB a one-day seminar was hosted last summer at No 29 Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin. On a practical level such meetings encourage dialogue . The next international conference will be in Berlin from September 2ndto 4th.
Dr Hugh Maguire is secretary/treasurer of DEMHIST: secretarytreasurer@ demhist.icom.museum or hfmaguire@eircom.net
This article appeared in Heritage Outlook published by the Heritage Council