AHRC Connected Communities Heritage Network Symposium Proceedings 2016 Based on the AHRC Connected Communities Heritage Network Symposium held at University of Lincoln on January 14 th -15 th 2016 Chief Editor: Nick Higgett, Associate Professor Digital Design De Montfort University Assisstant Editor: Nuntamon Kutalad, De Montfort University Review Committee: Nick Higgett, De Montfort University Dr Emily Baines, De Montfort University Dr Philip Riden, University of Nottingham Published by the Connected Communities Heritage Network www.hertitagenetwork.dmu.ac.uk Email: Nick Higgett at nph@dmu.ac.uk
38
Embed
AHRC Connected Communities Heritage Network ......AHRC Connected Communities Heritage Network Symposium Proceedings 2016 Based on the AHRC Connected Communities Heritage Network Symposium
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
AHRC Connected Communities Heritage Network
Symposium Proceedings 2016
Based on the AHRC Connected Communities Heritage Network
Symposium held at University of Lincoln on January 14th-15th 2016
Chief Editor: Nick Higgett, Associate Professor Digital Design
De Montfort University
Assisstant Editor: Nuntamon Kutalad, De Montfort University
Review Committee: Nick Higgett, De Montfort University
Dr Emily Baines, De Montfort University
Dr Philip Riden, University of Nottingham
Published by the Connected Communities Heritage Network
ABSTRACT This paper presents a case study of co-production from the
perspective of a small community- based organization 1
which was one of three partners in the project alongside an
academic institution and a city museum and archives service.
“West End Stories” is based in the multiply deprived
community of Benwell in Newcastle upon Tyne and is part
of a larger community- university research project called
Imagine North East. The “West End Stories” project uses
objects to tell stories about the local area and its changing
community, developing from a museum- based exhibition
into a series of outreach exhibitions across local community
venues, and thence into a permanent online exhibition. The
paper describes the benefits and problems encountered,
arguing that the strength of the “West End Stories” project is
largely attributable to the fact that it grew out of a pre-
existing working relationship between the museum and the
community organisation which had created a partnership of
trust and mutual respect. The university’s facilitating and
supportive role is identified as a key factor in its success.
Keywords: Co-production, Benwell,
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, there has been a growth of interest in ideas
of co- production within a number of areas of academic
inquiry, notably social, heritage and cultural studies, fuelled
by funding available from sources such as the Connected
Communities programme for work carried out in partnership
with external organisations. The notion of co-production is
1 The author was a participant in a Connected Communities project
– Imagine – Connecting communities through research, funded by
the Economic and Social Research Council, Grant Reference
ES/K002686/1. 2 Durose,C., Beebeejaun, Y., Rees,J., Richardson,J. And
Richardson,L. (2011) Towards Co-Production in Research with
Communities.Swindon: AHRC.
deceptively simple but in practice, as with community
development with which it shares common roots, it is not just
a technical method of working but can have varying
objectives and impacts depending on the values and aims of
the participants.23
In consequence, despite the rhetoric of equal partnerships, there can at times be a mismatch between theory and
practice. 4 Organisations working at the community level
have found themselves often in demand as “partners” in
diverse projects led by local universities aiming to engage them in researching a particular topic, in creating an
exhibition or event, or improving their skills in some way. At
the end of the particular project the academics go away
armed with material for use in publications and conference presentations, and hopefully a valuable contribution to
knowledge is achieved along the way. For the community
partners the benefits are variable. There are undoubtedly
good examples where the experience of coworking can be
positive, bringing enjoyment, opportunities for learning and
acquiring new skills, and valuable resources. In contrast there
are cases where involvement in such a project has had a
detrimental effect on the local organisation by undermining
its own work through belittling its skills and knowledge,
frightening off volunteers with excessive demands or off-putting specialist language, or diverting the organization
from its core work with consequent loss to the community,
while meanwhile promises made at the outset of the
partnership remain unfulfilled. Somewhere in-between there
are many examples of projects where both partners gain
some benefit, although this is not always within a framework
of mutual understanding and agreement about the overall
mission. As one key participant in a recent community-university research partnership project responded to an
evaluation question asking what benefits he had obtained
from working with a local university for two years:
3 Meade,R., Shaw,M. and Banks,S. (2016) Politics, Power and
Community Development. Bristol: Policy Press. 4 Gilchrist, P., Holmes,C., Lee,A., Moore,N. and Ravenscroft,N. (2015) eprints.brighton.ac.uk.
4
‘Mild amusement and bafflement. I haven’t an idea what they
got out of this whole exercise’.
This paper describes “West End Stories”, a case study of
coproduction in progress, which embodies a model that is more akin to a “mixed economy” model without necessarily
the implicit assumption of consensus which is arguably the
holy grail of co-production.
THE PARTNERS “West End Stories” is the co- product of a three- way
partnership, supported by Connected Communities as part of
a larger ESRC- funded research project called “Imagine”
looking at civic participation and involving multiple
universities and community partners across the UK. The
academic partner for “West End Stories” is Durham
University’s Centre for Social Justice and Community
Action, responsible for coordinating the “Imagine North
East” strand of the programme. 5 The university research
team had identified the west end of Newcastle - an area with
a long history of social deprivation and community action - as a site for a research project, part of which would involve
investigating how local communities understand and
evaluate their history and imagine their future. The Centre
had a pre- existing commitment to the co- production of
research in a way that does not privilege one type of
knowledge over another, as well as a belief in the importance
of building on existing relationships.6 During the planning
phase of the project, following discussions with a number of
key informants working within the community, they
recognised that this area already had a strong and vibrant community and voluntary sector infrastructure and agreed to
build on this by engaging as community partners seven
diverse community-based organisations in addition to
Newcastle’s museums and archives service. This was not the
easiest route to have taken from a management and
coordination point of view but it worked in practice because
the organisations involved were well established and well
networked and shared a culture of practical partnership
working across the area. Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums service ( TWAM) was identified as a community partner at the outset. TWAM
serves the geographical area of the former Tyne and Wear County Council, and operates seven museums and art
galleries and two Roman forts as well as the county archives
service.7 Whilst the specific project that TWAM was to work
on as part of Imagine North East had the support of senior management, the role of actually working on it was
5 https://www.dur.ac.uk/beacon/socialjustice/imagine/ 6 Centre for Social Justice and Community Action, Durham
University (2011) Community-based Participatory Research: Ethical Challenge. https://www.dur.ac.uk/beacon/socialjustice/researchprojects/cbpr/ 7 https://twmuseums.org.uk
delegated to the small outreach team based at Newcastle’s
Discovery Museum. This was fortuitous as the outreach team
had already forged effective working relationships with
some of the west end organisations, notably the St James’
Heritage and Environment Group. St James’ Heritage and Environment Group is a wholly
volunteer-run community-based organisation. This makes it,
while not unique, at least atypical in the environment of
formal research partnerships where the status of a “community partner” may be given to any external
organisation that is not an academic institution. While
accepting that the term “community” is notoriously slippery,
it could fairly be argued that the Heritage and Environment
Group is nearer the real thing than many partners. The Group
became a heritage organisation almost by accident, having
started off as an informal collection of local residents and
volunteers who came together to clear up and map the
historic graveyard of St James’ in Benwell. They came to
realise that the graveyard encapsulated the story of the West
Newcastle communities over almost two centuries during
which the area was transformed from a largely rural area housing some of the most powerful and wealthy families in
the region. In the second half of the 19th century the rapid
development of heavy industry along the riverside turned it
into an industrial powerhouse, home to one of the world’s leading armaments manufacturers among others, and
concomitantly thousands of homes were built for the
workers who flooded in to staff not only the local industries
but also the commercial development of the booming town
of Newcastle. By the late 20th century however it had become
a classic post- industrial area, experiencing multiple social
and economic deprivation and attracting the attentions of
almost every major national “urban”, “inner city” and “regeneration” initiative designed to halt its decline and
stimulate a new era of local prosperity8. Currently the area is
undergoing major physical transformation following the
demolition of large areas of housing and the beginning of a
long-term programme of redevelopment, although at present
this mainly manifests itself in the form of empty sites
signaling what has been lost9 rather than a vision for the
future. The Heritage and Environment Group’s aim is to encourage
people to explore and celebrate the history of the area. As
well as continuing to maintain and improve the graveyard,
the Group runs projects, mounts exhibitions, produces publications and offers activities and resources for people of
all ages.10 As the physical landscape of its history is stripped
away from the community, it becomes more vital than ever
to preserve and share this history in as many other ways as
8 Benwell Community Project (1981) West Newcastle in Growth
and Decline. Newcastle upon Tyne: Benwell Community Project
9 Imagining Benwell: Past, Present and Future (2015). Centre for
Social Justice and Community Action, Durham University, UK. 10 http://stjameschurchnewcastle.wordpress.
5
possible. Melvyn Bragg has recently described museums as
“our national memories”11: the Heritage and Environment
Group’s role is, in partnership with others, to be the local
memory of the west end community. Beyond this, the
Group’s work can be seen as an example of action-research,
using heritage as a means of exploring issues of identity and supporting community activism in an area ravaged by
economic and social change.12
ORIGINS OF “WEST END STORIES” One significant difference between many projects led by academic or heritage institutions projects and those
underpinned by a community development approach is that
the latter tend to have a pre- history and a continuing but
unpredictable future life, and therefore can be more rooted in and responsive to the local community.13
This is not a
criticism of academia or museums: it is merely a
consequence of the fact that funding often comes in one-off
slabs of money for clearly defined projects with pre-determined outcomes and fixed timescales. However it is
important that the institutions who hold the money and status
recognise that such community partners bring added value in
terms of local expertise and knowledge, as well as a network
of relationships and connections, and also that they have their own agendas and needs which cannot simply be
subsumed under the requirements of an external organisation
with a different culture and priorities. “West End Stories” has been an evolving project which has
gone through several major phases, able to respond flexibly
to local interest and need rather without having to abide by a
predefined plan with specified outputs laid down at the
outset. It initially came out of an ongoing working
relationship between the Heritage and Environment Group
and TWAM, a relationship which has been developed and
maintained over several years and reflects sustained and frequently difficult efforts to negotiate ways of
accommodating the diverse priorities and interests of the
institution and the community within a coherent framework
of planning and delivering effective projects. Despite the
inequalities in prestige, power and resources of the two
partners, this can fairly lay claim to being a genuinely equal
partnership. The process is described from the perspective of
the TWAM outreach team: ‘When we set out in 2012 to meet people and
groups in the west end, we slowly realised that we
( Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums) need the
“community” more than they need us. We wanted
to create long term, genuine partnerships, built on
1121.2.16 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes 12
Smith,L., Shackel,P. and Campbell,G. (2011) Heritage, Labour
and the Working Classes. Abingdon: Routledge. 13 Green,J.(2016 forthcoming) ‘Bringing it Back Home: Community- Driven Engagement with Heritage in the West End of
Newcastle upon Tyne’ in Social History in Museums, 40, pp. 47-56.
understanding and respect, that would be mutually
beneficial to all parties. The plan wasn't set down
by a “top down” agenda and a big budget with a
short term aims. We had a window of opportunity
in the light of funding changes and cuts to create
something that would be useful and have real value to the delicate community networks in the
West End. What has evolved from the process now
forms the basis of our community exhibition
programme. The projects and partnerships are
ongoing and, from these, greater links and
partnerships have been made with the museum.’14
For the Heritage and Environment Group, the initial phases of the relationship were governed by caution and suspicion,
informed by previous bad experiences: ‘We’ve had years of external organisations
parachuting into the area with their resources and
connections and top-down plans, and trampling all
over the local organisations that have been
working away for years in the face of so many
difficulties and doing the same sort of work but without attracting the same publicity and
attention.’15
Despite this, the Group was always willing to try out new
possibilities that might benefit the local community. The
working relationship with TWAM started with a number of
modest joint activities aimed at pooling their separate
strengths and resources for mutual benefit. A series of
successful study visits for local residents to explore TWAM’s collections were followed by a joint oral history
project which built on an existing exhibition mounted in
Benwell by the Heritage and Environment Group. The Group
provided the contacts and background information and the local venue, the task of interviewing participants was shared
between the two organisations, and TWAM edited the
material and provided sound equipment so that visitors could
listen to the interviews. These and other experiences over a
period of time persuaded the Heritage and Environment
Group that TWAM was interested in building a long- term
supportive working relationship with local groups,
responding to local needs and interests rather than imposing their own expert ideas, in contrast to earlier experiences of
partnerships with large institutions where communities are
invited to participate in large externally funded projects with
a walk- on part in order to tick the box of ‘community
participation’ and feature colourfully on PowerPoint
presentations at conferences.
The next significant step was the decision to mount a major
14 Written statement by Michael McHugh (Assistant Outreach
Officer,Community Exhibition Programme, Tyne and Wear
Archives and Museums) produced for presentation at Connected
Communities Conference, 2016. 15 Interview with St James’ Heritage & Environment Group
volunteers, 2015.
6
joint exhibition. A number of ideas were debated. New digital
platforms were appearing on the scene at this time, and there
was discussion of creating an interactive digital experience. In the event, the inspiration for “West End Stories” was the
British Museum and Radio 4 series “The World in 100
Objects”. This prompted the idea of a much simpler model - mounting an exhibition of the history of the west end which
would eschew overviews, timelines and expert
interpretation, and would comprise a variety of objects,
images and voices that in some way told a story about the
area. The idea of wrapping the exhibition in an imposed
narrative about the development and decline of the west end
was rejected, among other reasons, because the more recent
history of the area, with large-scale demolition and ambitious
but barely realised regeneration plans, has involved some
measure of painful division and conflict within local
communities and the stories told to interpret these events are
still contested. The task of healing divisions was ongoing,
and it was recognised that the museum needed to be sensitive
to the fact that even a casual phrase could be potentially
damaging to fragile community relationships. It was decided
that in “West End Stories” the objects, images and voices would speak for themselves, and interpretation would take
place through a process of interaction rather than a fixed
“expert” view. “West End Stories” was on display at the People’s Gallery
in the Discovery Museum in Newcastle for several months
during 2013. It comprised an eclectic range of objects linked
to the west end, some of which came from the collections held by TWAM’s museums, galleries and archives, and the
rest were contributed by people and groups from the local
communities. They ranged from priceless wood carvings and
Roman artefacts to a hand-knitted tower block.16 “West End
Stories” in the museum was a genuinely joint exhibition, its contents planned by the two organisations, although all the
technical curation tasks of preparing exhibits and creating
displays were carried out by TWAM Alongside the
exhibition, TWAM ran a varied programme of public events and activities to bring people in to the museum and get them
talking to each other and to the organisers, including a talk
and debate about the experience of regeneration in the west
end.
“WEST END STORIES IN THE COMMUNITY” Even before the official launch had taken place, the process
of planning and preparing the exhibition in the museum had
prompted further discussions about future developments, the conclusion of which was that the next move should be to take
16 Ord,J. (2013) ‘Many Stories: One West End: A suburb in the
spotlight at Newcastle’s Discovery Museum’ in Social History in
Museums, Vol 37, pp. 78-80. 17 Watson, S. (2007) ‘History museums, community identities and a
sense of place: rewriting histories’, in Knell, S., MacLeod, S. And
“West End Stories” out of the museum and into the
community. The outreach team had undertaken a search of
the collections housed in their various museums, archives
and galleries in order to identify material connected to the
west end. The search revealed a large number of objects and
documents, most of which had never been on display and whose existence was often hidden behind TWAM’s
complicated cataloguing system. The outreach team felt
strongly that such material should be shared with the
communities to whose history it relates, rather than kept out
of sight in locked basements. They were also aware that the
socio- economic characteristics of the west end, which
includes some of the most deprived neighbourhoods in the
country, mean that most residents are not consumers of
heritage in traditional ways such as visiting museums.
These concerns accorded with the Heritage and Environment
Group’s aim of “doing heritage” within the community and trying to integrate it into everyday life rather than making it
a specialised activity. Thus “West End Stories in the
Community” was devised as a follow- up to “West End
Stories” in the museum. The plan was to take small-scale and
roving exhibitions around public and community venues across the area, with different venues displaying different
exhibitions simultaneously, and the contents of each
changing from time to time. The contents included items
from the previous exhibition in the museum with the addition of a considerable amount of new material. Again this
comprised objects from the TWAM collections, including a
variety of products manufactured on West Newcastle’s once
thriving riverside industrial area, and objects contributed by
local residents and group. This time however the locally
sourced material comprised the greater proportion of the
exhibits. There is considerable evidence of the value, both to
the growth of heritage knowledge and for the participants
themselves, of facilitating people to tell their own stories.1718
Collecting objects locally of personal or community
significance, together with the stories attached to them,
offered a means of doing this. An important part of the
project therefore was a process of appealing, mainly by word
of mouth and personal contact, for people to loan or donate
objects that in some way told a story about the area’s history. These voluntary contributions were supplemented by focused efforts by the Group’s volunteers to find objects to
illustrate particular aspects of that history (such as a stone
furtively removed from the remains of a boundary wall of a
former grand mansion) . One of the lessons learnt was that
objects do not have to be intrinsically interesting or attractive
to tell an interesting and important story about specific local
places and people or to be salient to a community’s sense of
identity today. For a local audience with their personal
memories and nexus of relationships, it is often the
Watson, S. (eds) Museum Revolutions, London: Routledge, pp. 160- 172. 18 Crooke, E. (2012) ‘Community biographies: character, rationale
and significance’, in Museums and Biographies (eds Hill, K.). Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, pp. 307-318.
7
individual and family stories evoked by objects that matters
rather than their wider historical or artistic interest. A cobble
from the pavements of the Lower Scotswood Estate, now
completely demolished but home to many thousands of
people over the years. A piece of coal from the coal seam
next to the last pit to be closed in Benwell, revealed by chance for a few weeks in 2013 during the building of some
new bungalows. A membership card for allotments created
during the First World War to help feed the home population,
disappearing 50 years later as part of a mass slum clearance
programme. A school tie and cap belonging to a former pupil
of a secondary school closed in the 1960s as part of the move
to comprehensive education in the city. An old record book
belonging to a tenants association serving one of the city’s oldest council estates, built in the aftermath of the First
World War to provide homes fit for heroes. All of these
objects evoked memories for thousands of current and
former residents and, by illustrating specific elements of the changes experienced by individuals, described a wider
historical process without any need to lecture or interpret . The information provided next to each object comprised a
short explanation of what it was, its location and context, and the link with particular people if that object was part of their
personal story. Again there was a programme of activities
and events running alongside the first year of the exhibition
in order to stimulate discussion locally and provide opportunities for interactive learning and sharing memories
and experiences.
“West End Stories in the Community” has been displayed in five venues – the parish church, the shopfront of a
community project in the main shopping street and three
local libraries – and is still in progress. It has enabled many
thousands of people who are not normally consumers of
heritage to “do heritage” as part of their daily life, while shopping, paying their council tax or changing a library
book, rather than requiring a special visit to a museum. Taking the museum out into the community was such a
simple idea, but it would be misleading not to mention some
of the practical difficulties encountered along the way. The
practicalities of locating exhibitions in community venues
produced a range of new challenges over the course of the
project. Museums and galleries offer a relatively stable and
predictable environment for mounting exhibitions, but this is
not necessarily the case out in communities. The dominant
culture of museums and archives is understandably
concerned with the preservation and security of objects. This
meant that potential venues had to be checked for humidity
and temperature, security arrangements vetted and insurance
organised. In some cases objects were deemed too valuable
to be allowed outside the museum. The logistics of delivering
and installing museum objects can be difficult, requiring as
it does the use of specialist movers and confronting access
arrangements not designed for museum display cases . Sharing a space with other users with different needs and
priorities, while offering significant benefits in terms of accessing new audiences, created many unforeseen practical
problems requiring delicate negotiation to resolve. Even the
libraries proved problematic as two of the three local
libraries temporarily closed as a result of public expenditure cuts and later reopened following conversion to dual use
facilities, necessitating urgent removal of the exhibitions and
later partial reinstallation, causing havoc to the carefully
planned timetable. To their credit the museum staff have embraced this experience as a valuable learning opportunity
that would contribute to improving their practice within the
community.
“WEST END STORIES”: THE MOVIE
Durham University’s involvement with the “West End
Stories” project began in 2013 when the university was developing the detailed proposal for the “Imagine”
Connected Communities project together with a consortium
of academic and community partners. TWAM had already
been identified as a community partner for the Imagine North East strand of work which would focus on the
historical dimensions of civic engagement. The university’s
Centre for Social Justice and Community Action already had
a track record of working with diverse community partners across the region, and also had expertise in the field of
community development. The research team was therefore
predisposed to be sympathetic to a model of identifying and
working with community partners that recognised the importance of acknowledging the existing community and
voluntary sector relationships that obtained in particular
areas and the benefits to both researchers and community
partners of building on existing work within communities rather than parachuting into an area with a supposedly
innovative project that replicates and potentially undermines
the work of small community- based organisations. The
TWAM outreach team, for their part, were keen to use their involvement in Imagine to develop and extend their
partnership work in the west end. The outcome of a detailed
process of negotiation was a proposal that TWAM, in
addition to offering general support and resources to the
other Imagine North East community partners including access to TWAM’s collections and practical advice on
mounting exhibitions, would work with the Heritage and
Environment Group to produce digital versions of the
objects already collected for the “West End Stories” project . A “West End Stories” website would be created initially to
house this collection of images of objects relating to the west
end, together with photographic images, maps and stories
that would provide a local context for each object. This
website could be added to by the partner organisations on an
ongoing basis after the end of the two-year Imagine North
East project and would represent a legacy of partnership
working in practice. In the words of the Imagine North East
coordinator, Professor Sarah Banks of Durham University’s
Centre for Social Justice and Community Action: ‘I think the combination of the Heritage
and Environment Group and TWAM as an already existing partnership was a
huge asset to Imagine NE – developing
the understanding of university partners
and people from other community organisations about the importance of
8
heritage for communities and the role of local groups in documenting and
reclaiming the past – particularly the
lives of ordinary people.’19
The “West End Stories” website will always be a work in
progress. It is not in fact a movie but a set of images. The
principles behind the website are similar to the community
exhibitions: namely, to make available to a wider audience a
range of objects and other material relating to the west end within TWAM’s collections that generally was difficult to
access, to exhibit items contributed by past and present
residents that linked with people’s personal stories, to be
image- led but provide accompanying contextualizing
information such as map extracts and archive photographs,
and to facilitate sharing of information and debate about the
area’s history without seeking to impose an over- arching
narrative. As with the community exhibitions, the practical
process of creating the website has been a genuinely joint
exercise. TWAM chose to use the technical and design
expertise within its outreach team rather than bringing in
website design specialists for the project. This meant that the
process of creating the website was informed as much by an
understanding of the practice of heritage learning and the
priorities and needs of the community as by technical and
design issues. It enabled the Group to be involved throughout
in discussions about design and content on an equal basis,
trusting that the outreach team were genuinely listening and
wanting to achieve an agreed outcome without the suspicion
that they were being blinded by technical jargon. This has
strengthened the final product although the process has not
been without dissension and difficulties, reflecting the desire
to accommodate the needs of all partners with their often
differing cultures and priorities.
CONCLUSION This paper has described one case study of co-production
between three partners from different sectors of the heritage
and research world: a university, a museum and archives
institution, and a community partner from the cheapest and
least professionalised end of the community and voluntary
sector. This example has not been put forward as a particular
model of good practice for others to follow, but it does
illustrate some characteristics of what we would regard as
one successful model of co-production. Perhaps chief among these is the recognition by the more
powerful partners that, as Raphael Samuel has put it, history
is an activity rather than a profession20, with the associated
willingness to abandon the assumption of a hierarchy of
research and knowledge in the field of heritage. Linked to
this is the recognition by the more powerful partners that
they can learn from the process of co-production in ways that
influence their core practice, and a genuine commitment to
changing entrenched assumptions and taking risks.
Just as significant is the importance of building long- term
relationships of trust, honesty and mutual respect as a basis
for genuinely equal working partnerships. This is difficult to
achieve in a period of diminishing resources when funding
is much more readily available for short- term, one- off
projects rather than sustained collaborations and core work. It is not, however, necessarily expensive and it is an
investment that repays generously over the longer term.
Another key feature in the success of this partnership is the
awareness of the social and political context of heritage work
in specific localities. This is partly about understanding that
historical knowledge is not neutral in its impact, in the sense
that the facts that are presented and the stories told about
particular geographical areas and their communities can influence in important ways how people think about the
options open to them to accept or change their situations. It is also about being aware of the complex and fragile
character of local community infrastructures, especially in poorer areas subject to major social and economic changes,
and being sensitive to the risks of damaging these by careless
or unthinking actions.
It is not accidental that, despite the fact that Imagine North
East is a university- led partnership, this case study has said
little about the role of the university in the West End Stories
project. This reflects the way in which the university has
given all its community partners considerable autonomy in running their projects within an initially agreed framework,
producing a patchwork of varied projects designed to
illuminate different aspects of the core research questions . The university’s role throughout the “West End Stories”
project has been to facilitate rather than manage or monitor. It has been flexible and pragmatic in its approach,
recognising the value of learning through trial and error and
leaving space for debate and dissension rather than trying to impose a consensus which would owe more to convenience
than reality.
Underpinning the development of “West End Stories” has been a recognition that academic institutions do not have a
monopoly of research expertise and knowledge. The working
relationship between the three partners has been developed
and strengthened over the two years of the Imagine North East research project by ongoing informal reporting and
discussion as well as through the formal meetings of all
community partners. At the heart of the process has been the
relationship of trust that has been formed – a relationship
based on the ability to co-work on a joint project without any
of the partners sacrificing their own priorities and needs in
the interests of an assumed consensus which in reality is
often defined and imposed by the most powerful partner.
19 Private communication 20 Samuel, R. (2012) Theatres of Memory: Past and Present in
Contemporary Culture. London: Verso.
9
CIRCULAR STORYTELLING: REIMAGINING STORIES
AS A MEANS OF DOING COMMUNITY HISTORIES
Abstract
Storytelling, and oral histories more generally, have been
widely used as a means of understanding communities and
their (often multiple) heritages. However, few conventional
projects approach difficult questions about who sets the
agenda, who is - and is not - present, and who ‘owns’ the
outputs. As a result, many communities become
disenfranchised from their own histories. The Collaborative
Stories Spiral (CSS) offers the potential for a new ‘circular’
approach, based on a recursive process of situating,
generating, analysing and remediating stories. The idea of
circularity reflects the multiple movements and
transformations of data and outputs that happen when stories
are told and retold, particularly once community stories are
remediated in a range of forms. This is very much a work in
progress, with some pilot data from an earlier AHRC
Connected Communities Programme grant used to offer
insights into the potential of the CSS to foster ‘interpretative
flexibility’ in the way that stories are generated and used.
Introduction
Since the inception of the AHRC’s Connected Communities
Programme, many researchers have sought to address two
fundamental questions: how can we develop and undertake
a genuinely co- co- operative and co- designed approach to
community research and data generation; and to what extent
might such an approach allow us to rework conventional
academic/community practice boundaries? The focus of our
attention to these questions has reflected the four themes of
community research identified by Mah and Crow ( 2011) -
connection, difference, boundaries and development - in an
experience of communities as dynamic, porous and
contingent learning environments. For us, there is little to be
gained by conceptualising community as a singular or fixed
referent that can be researched, but instead viewing
communities as complex, fluid and evolving phenomena that
can be engaged in a reflexive learning process. In addressing
these questions, therefore, we have worked with co-
production ( Gilchrist, et al, 2015) within a broader
participatory turn ( Jasanoff, 2004) , through which it has
become clear to us that to be engaged in participatory
research is already to be entangled in a series of knots and
chains of complicated histories and their contemporary
manifestations – including now participatory practice and
research.
This conjunction is important to us, for it reflects the
potential for co- designed research practice at the
convergence between community- based facilitation
practice( s) and an academy that is faced with the challenge
of finding new methodologies that address contemporary
society. In this context we understand co- production as a
methodological stance that seeks user involvement in stages
of a design process and draws upon the principle that users
become active in the creative development of a product by
interacting directly with design and research teams. It thus
foregrounds the creative capacities of participants as experts
of their own experiences and, in this case, also skills drawn
from the fields of facilitation and youth work. This focussed
reworking of boundaries reframes questions of power that
operate in an ‘information commons’ (Bruns, 2008), calling
attention to how interests are promoted through collaborative
interaction, how knowledge is generated and used amongst
participants, and how contributions can be coordinated and
integrated.
Neil Ravenscroft and Paul Gilchrist (University of Brighton) Becky Taylor (University of Brighton and Plumpton College)
Niamh Moore (University of Edinburgh) Claire Holmes and Amelia Lee (LGBT Youth North West)
15 In addition to the 5-hour performance event, the company
delivered follow up workshop in participating schools the
week of their visit to Papplewick and published an extensive Online Education Resource for teachers through
the Museum’s website 6.
A framework for the immersive heritage
experience
A number of principles were brought to bear in the
development and delivery of this programme of work.
1. Many of Dragon Breath’s previous theatre programmes
have researched the efficacy of theatre in communicating
complex ideas to young people, using performance as a
stimulus for generating sophisticated understanding and
debate about ideas many pedagogues might consider too
advanced for the target audiences we were working for. E.g.
The scientific and moral dimensions of advances in stem
cell nuclear transfer (The Icarus Project 2005-7, age 13 and
above) , and the nature and dynamics of the universe
(Cosmos 2008-10, aged 4 and above) 7.
These programmes are distinctive in their use of R&D
phases, where artists work alongside children,
undergraduates, schoolteachers, scientists and pedagogues
to develop work reflecting young peoples’ authentic
voices and grounded in pedagogical excellence.
The theatrical principles that underpinned these
productions and schemes of work were:
• Epic, large scale visual theatre;
• Sophisticated poetic text;
• The use of empathy to engage both the emotions and
the intellect;
• and the use of multimedia, music, puppets and
choreography synchronised within a live, narrative
performance event.
These performance principles were brought to bear in A
Crack in Time, and were consciously deployed to create
experiences that went far beyond the ( very legitimate)
delivery of ‘costumed interpretation’ that many museums
and heritage sites employ.
2. As artist-researchers in the 2011- 13 Get Wet project,
the lead artists in A Crack in Time drew on the
pedagogical principles developed by the University of Nottingham team, all of which chime with Dragon
Breath’s methodology, including:
• Connecting with the everyday experiences of
young people, making direct connections between
the past and the present through performance, and inviting children to make local and the global
connections when considering the geopolitics of
water management.
• Developing an interdisciplinary curriculum
inspired by the questions that children have about
water, and, interpreting them in a performance
sphere.
• Developing creative approaches that generate
interest and to help make connections between
areas of knowledge.
• Artists working in partnership with teachers to
develop activities that meet overall curriculum
goals.
In detail, A Crack in Time also drew on core Get Wet
ideas such as:
• The importance of the Papplewick Pumping
Station site visit being built into the curriculum
so that children understand what it is, and why it
is there.
• Specific curriculum ideas, such as virtual water and the urban water cycle to help students explain
things that they see around them, challenge their
understanding of the world, how it works and
should be managed.
These performance and pedagogical principles were
equally important in the whole day immersive event,
the subsequent workshops, and the online education
resources.
The performance interpretation itself investigates how
empathy ( with a character) can firstly, engage and
secondly, enhance a learning experience which might
otherwise remain inaccessible, too complex, or difficult
to understand. This empathetic core is supported by
examination of different approaches to multimodal
learning ( such as kinaesthetic and verbal activities,
singing, walking and reflection) which takes place
during the visit to Papplewick.
The performance sat within a context articulated by
authors such as Black ( 2011) 8 and Jackson and Kidd (2012) 9. As Black observes in “Evaluating the impact of
museum learning”, measuring learning outside a formal
pedagogical setting is never simple. In this context, he
quotes the 1998 Campaign for Learning definition of
learning as “a process of active engagement with
experience. It is what people do when they want to make
sense of the world. It may involve increase in or deepening
of skills, knowledge, understanding, values, feelings,
attitudes and the capacity to reflect. Effective learning
leads to change, development and the desire to learn
more.” Such a philosophy underpinned all aspects of the
Crack in Time project
Sources for interpretation:
The characters, dramatic content, and narrative sweep and
design concepts for the performance were researched from
a number of sources - existing archival sources held on site;
those held at the University of Nottingham Archive; and
material in the public domain. Key to further development
of the piece was oral history undertaken by the team with
the Olifent family, inhabitants of the site who had lived at
Papplewick as children in the 1930s to 1950s, and who
16 uncovered previously hidden material detailing aspects of
Papplewick’s living social heritage. This oral history fed
into the development of the script, site design, and filmic
elements.
In addition, the impact of 3 years’ previous project
delivery and research was considerable. Firstly, the wider
scientific, political and educational elements underpinning
and driving the visitors’ experience at Papplewick were
drawn from the extensive action research undertaken in the
Get Wet project. Secondly, the R&D pilot performance
project in 2013 not only scoped narrative content and the
considerable logistical challenges of the project, but also
enabled young people to feed their responses and
evaluations into the process of developing the final content
( e. g. responding to their desire for more engineering
knowledge; and greater participation of female characters
in the narrative)
The immersive performance event:
The performance was delivered by a team of professional
actor/ musicians and stage managers, supported by the
Musuem Director in role, and by Papplewick volunteers. It took place across all of Papplewick’s locations,
including the empty underground reservoir, abandoned in
1902 due to the eponymous “crack” in its walls.
Each visitor was immersed in a range of experiences – performative, hands on and visual. All these were later
evaluated by the audience to test their efficacy fostering
learning and engagement). These experiences included:
• Structured journeys through the varied locations and
vistas of the site, enhanced through design elements;
• Empathetic engagement with the dramatic narratives
of costumed historical characters ( factual and
fictional); • Hands on examination of the site’s elements and
objects, with interpretation support by characters;
• Singing (including participatory song) and music;
• Film interpretation on both micro and macro scale;
• Periods of reflection and discussion at different
points in the day.
Papplewick Pumping Station itself was constructed to pipe
fresh, clean water, pumped by gravitational forces to
Nottingham 9 miles away. It was part of a mission to
eradicate the waterborne diseases that had created such
misery and havoc during the preceding century. During
the day the audience witness - and become involved in - the
dramatisation of events that inspired the building of the
Pumping Station in the1880s.
The journey through the site and its narratives:
On arrival at the site, the audience of 70 discover a
contemporary, indigenous Bolivian water activist camped
outside the museum gates. She raises their awareness of
current global water management issues through song, and
then invites them to step “into the past” by entering
through Papplewick’s gates with her. Once inside the gates, and within the museum landscape,
the visitor becomes part of a variegated story. It is told at
one moment on an epic scale, with vistas populated with
characters, or topographical and engineering features. At
the next moment, there are detailed interactions with both
site and character.
Initially, the Museum’s grounds are populated with unexplained Victorian characters who may have lived or
worked at Papplewick. This invites the viewers to
construct, as they walk through the site, their own
narratives for who the characters be. Several of the
characters, including Mr Montagu the Superintendent and
his wife Mrs Montagu act as guides and interpreters.
Arriving at the cooling pond, the children see Jenny
Sparrow being rowed across the lake. She sings a lament
for her small children, who were victims of the cholera. Jenny inspires Nottingham engineer Thomas Hawksley to
take action. The children engage with Hawksley’s moral
and utilitarian crusade, both to change attitudes, and to engineer viable systems for the supply of fresh water to the
town, Papplewick being the prime surviving example. The
conflict between Hawksley and the nay-sayers and vested
interests he encounters is interrupted by Mr and Mrs Montagu, giving the audience an opportunity to participate
and articulate their understanding of the dramatic conflicts
they are witnessing. The use empathy with the characters
draws the viewers into the story and makes it of
importance to them.
After investigating the Engine House, the audience are
divided into smaller groups for the rest of the day, visiting four characters in separate performance locations in a
round robin sequence - Hawksley ( Engine House) , Mrs
Montagu (Scullery) , Seth the Gardener (Greenhouse) , and
Wilf the Boiler Boy and Jenny Sparrow (Boiler House) . Each location is designed to enhance the original architectural, engineering, domestic or agricultural
features, and enable them to be brought to life by the
characters and the audience themselves.
Each 20 minute scene, (repeated and adapted four times
with different groups), offers the visitor
• Character narrative to empathise with;
• Kinaesthetic activities to deepen understanding of
how the Pumping Station worked (e.g. the pumping
system; the functioning of the great boilers; the
growing of food; the running of the home) • Music/song to give a lyricism to the performance,
engage the emotions, and help memorise learning;
• Discussion between the actors and audience, which could depart completely from script at times in
response to the children’s responses and interests.
The morning ends with the urgent message that there is a problem with Papplewick’s underground reservoir one
mile up the track, a “crack” in the wall, and a promise to
investigate after lunch.
17 In the afternoon, after reflecting with the team on the
experience of the day so far, the audience walks up to the
reservoir that used to supply Nottingham with water.
This beautiful 20-minute walk (and return journey) afford
opportunities for 1:1 conversations with the
characters/ interpreters, and a chance for each visitor to
construct their own narrative for what they will encounter
when they reach the end of the trail
When they reach the summit, the audience splits into two
in order to visit two distinct sites:
1. They journey down into the empty, mystical, damp,
abandoned underground reservoir. Here they;
• Respond to the location through looking, listening and discussion;
• Witness installations responding to the aesthetics of
the underground architecture;
• Encounter Hawksley singing by the eponymous crack
in the wall. This ‘crack in time’ caused the reservoir to
drain 100 years ago. Hawksley’s ghost connects
Papplewick’s past with the present, and urges the
audience to take action addressing the environmental
impacts of water management in the modern world
‘above ground’;
• View a large triptych projection containing original films of water as a natural phenomenon; used
spiritually and culturally by human kind; and degraded
through our misuse in the modern era. These interactions bring the purpose of Papplewick, clean
water supply, up to date in a modern global context.
2. At the upper site, the audience also visit a large bell tent. Here they witness a resolution of dramatic elements from
the morning, focussing on female characters who are not
usually visible in ‘written’ history ( Jenny and Mrs
Montagu).
The audience take part in role- play with the actors,
developing their characters from the narratives that they
found of most interest, and engaging empathetically once
again with the stories they have encountered on their
journey through the site.
Once the audience has experienced both these locations,
the day resolves with an invitation by the contemporary
Water Guardian ( who had first drawn the audience into
Papplewick’s ‘past’) . Discussing how she has to carry
water for hours each day to survive, and explaining how
much ‘virtual water’ we use on a daily basis ourselves, she reveals her purpose in inviting the children to become
water guardians themselves, as global citizens in the
future.
Contextual activities:
In the post- performance workshops, which included
roleplay, visual art, singing, dance and ritualised
discussion, participants were encouraged to revisit aspects
of the performance narrative and characters, and articulate their own responses to both Papplewick’s engineering
history, and to the contemporary issues raised by the
performance and the site itself.
Teachers were able to follow up these interventions by
utilising on the Online Resources to embed the Papplewick
work within a water- focussed curriculum embracing
science, geography, history, mathematics and literacy.
Evaluation methodology:
The company performed to and worked in depth with 1127
children from 20 East Midlands schools, over a period of
7 weeks. 1120 children were involved in 38 half-day follow
up workshops delivered in the week of their visit to
Papplewick.
The project targeted young people who may not normally have the opportunity to experience cultural events of this
kind.
The effectiveness of the project was evaluated with:
(i) Focus groups of 50 children and their teachers in 6
selected schools representing a wide range of
demographic and geographic circumstances. (ii) A wider sample of 350 children giving written
feedback;
(iii) In-depth written feedback from 10 teachers (iv) Oral responses of teachers, family visitors and
museum and heritage professionals, and the onsite
team including Papplewick’s volunteer
participants.
(v) Videoed feedback by 12 children and 2 teachers,
and 18 other adults including team members, volunteers, the Museum Director and a funding
representative.
In the focus groups totalling 50 children, the evaluation
sessions lasted between 1 and 2 hours, and asked:
• 7 general questions about children’s responses to the experience and what they had learned from it,
providing qualitative data;
• 44 questions about what they had learned about each
specific element in the days’ proceedings, providing
both qualitative and quantitative data.
Evaluation results:
Ways of learning:
The study ascertained that the main way in which children
learned about Papplewick’s heritage was through their
interactions with characters, encountered in varied locations during a geographical journey through the day.
When asked in detail which elements of the day enabled
children to learn (‘discover’) most, the research data shows
the following scored mostly highly in pupil responses: • interaction with the characters and their personal
stories;
• singing songs;
• doing practical physical/practical activities
. The audience’s understanding of the heritage was reinforced and deepened because children engaged with
18 the characters’ emotional predicaments, rather than simply
having facts explained to them by costumed interpreters.
e.g. from ‘Wilf the boiler boy’ and ‘Jenny Sparrow’ they
learned through interactive drama and song how hard and
dangerous life was in the C19th.
Empathy for these and other character narratives meant the
children were highly motivated to learn more, to ask the
characters questions, and to piece together their own
understanding of Papplewick’s history and importance.
e.g. Mr Hawksley telling his family story - and debating
with the childrenabout ‘right and wrong’ in the world - was
“very interesting and emotionally and deeply explained” (Child) , enabling the audience to understand “how water
was delivered to Nottingham” (Child).
The audience were sufficiently motivated by their interest
in this character to discover complex engineering and scientific concepts, learned through assisting Hawksley
with kinaesthetic activities explaining, for example, Papplewick’s pumping system.
“[ These were] difficult concepts…showing how
Papplewick worked. . . The little one liners and snippets
about [Hawksley’s] father were picked up by the children.”
(Teacher, Lowdham)
e. g. From Mrs Montagu’s physical work/ singing in the
Scullery“[ We learned] how to wash in Victorian times” ( Child) , and that life was hard for C19th women - “No
electricity. No relaxation. . . hard work cooking and
cleaning” (Child).
e. g. Engagement with Seth the gardener helped the
audience connect Papplewick with the necessity for water
in the natural and human ecology. In the Greenhouse, they
learned about the concept of ‘virtual’ ( hidden) water
consumption by eating apples and drinking water
themselves. (This important concept was reinforced in the
bell tent next to the Reservoir and in the subsequent School
Workshops)
The audience could also change the course of some scenes
through questioning and challenging of the characters. As
the day progressed, their reactions to one micro site
influenced their responses to other locations ( e. g. after
meeting and empathising with Wilf in the Boiler House
they often challenged his ‘employer’ Mr Hawksley in the
Engine House about Wilf’s working conditions and
poverty).
In this immersive experience, the empathetic response to
characters, and the moral questions these interactions raised, made the learning of engineering, historical facts or
scientific principles much more embedded.
Sample Focus group responses:
50% of focus group children gave learning through
character interaction 10/10 for effectiveness.
The majority of respondents felt seeing and doing activities
was very effective in their learning.
Singing was considered very helpful to learning by most,
if not all, children.
Understanding the heritage: Both teacher and pupil feedback indicated that children
gained an understanding that “clean water led to life
longevity” (Teacher) , that “dirty water spread diseases” ( Teacher) , and “that they clearly understood life before
and after Papplewick was built” (Teacher) . Focus group
evaluations showed that children understood the main
engineering and scientific principles through which clean
water was first pumped from the Papplewick well; then stored in the underground reservoir; and finally piped from
Papplewick to Nottingham through the use of gravitational
forces. They understood why this enterprise was crucial to
improving living conditions and public health by reducing
incidents of cholera and other water borne diseases.
This knowledge was enshrined and reinforced through the
conversations children had with the characters during the
day, and the songs they learned along the way. The use of
original songs, sung by both characters and by the
audience at different times further intensified the learning
experiences and reinforced memory of them. ( This was
attested to in the workshop programme, where the
facilitators were often greeted spontaneously through song
by the children as they arrived at school).
“They answered all your questions – but gave you questions to think about – in small groups you found out
the answer…The films and singing were really good – they
gave you a feel for what they did other than just talking
19 about it…when they sang it lifted the scene, even if it was
a sad scene.” (Child) Through these interactions at Papplewick children
understood, not only the significance of the Museum in
terms of engineering and public health, but also that such
enterprises represented a significant undertaking in
political, economic and social terms in Victorian times. Coupled with their appreciation of the aesthetics and
functions of the museum buildings, the children therefore
gained a much deeper understanding of Victorian society,
its living conditions and aspirations.
Making connections - contemporary water issues: By supporting this immersive performative experience, in
which the child felt ownership of the action, rather than
simply being the recipient of it, the follow up workshop
programme was key to embedding the learning experienced in the museum setting, and to supporting
interdisciplinary learning in the school subsequently.
The emphasis of the workshop team – who responded to all kinds of learning styles through the varied activities
they undertook - was to enable the children to be proactive
in recalling and understanding their visit to Papplewick. In
the workshop, the team were able to tease out and extend
the implications of the Papplewick heritage for today.
Water management and conservation is an urgent, global
issue. The performance invited children to understand their
industrial and water heritage, and consider their
custodianship of water as global citizens.
The local dimension of the programme was strongly
emphasised. In the final scene, played out after the visit to
the underground reservoir, the audience were invited to consider the impact of Papplewick and its infrastructure on
their own lives. Children from Nottingham became aware
of Papplewick’s contemporary significance to their daily
lives in terms of accessing fresh water. Children from
further afield were alerted to similar schemes in their area
that still affect their lives (e.g. Thomas Hawksley’s water
and gas engineering feats in Leicester and Derby). “You spoke about the reservoir supplying water to Bulwell
and to their homes. This made it relevant and ‘real’ to
them” (Teacher, Nottingham)
“The session in the reservoir and the tent helped them see
the significance of water and its value…Talking to [Boiler
Boy] Wilf, they understood life was very different for
children their age in those days” (Teacher, Leicester)
Through their engagement with character and stories from
the past, the audience made connections between
Papplewick’s legacy, and its importance to them today.
Global learning
Through the character of the Water Guardian, they were
also able to understand Papplewick’s water heritage in the context of contemporary global water issues, such as the
importance of water to life, its conservation and
management. This aspect of learning is fundamental to
Papplewick’s purpose as a site for learning.
The audience were also able to compare the lives of child
characters from the Papplewick story to their own experiences, and compare both with the lives of other
children across the world today…those who have to walk
daily to find water, or who are denied an education because
of poverty or water management issues. This was
reinforced and deepened in the school workshops.
The event and workshop gave the children an
understanding of “how fortunate they are to have clean
water on tap, how many countries do not have this, [and] that water is precious…and ways of saving water” (Teacher)
“They made the connection between Nepal now, and the
problems in Nottingham [ in the past]…they were able to
make connections between the impact of natural
phenomena such as earthquakes on water born diseases
[ by understanding] Papplewick’s importance to
eradicating cholera in the C19th.” (Teacher) “They are more aware of their role as citizens of the world and how they could make a difference through the choices
they make” (Teacher)
“I liked the reservoir. …How interesting and strange it
was…and when Mr Hawksley, he stood up for what he
believed in, for Nottingham to have clean water and enough dying…because he promised Jenny, who lost her
two children because of the Higgler, who gave dirty water
out…and he succeeded…and I’ve discovered that water is
a huge meaning to life and everybody will need it! (Child)
All the children talked about how their perceptions and
attitudes had changed due to the project. Some felt they
were already aware of water issues through work they had
already done in school ( linked to the project or otherwise) and through television campaigns by water charities.
Most felt they had changed their attitude to how they used
water themselves. Most had not encountered the concept
of virtual water before, except through project-linked work.
“[My attitude has changed] because I learned about the
Victorians” (Child) “My attitude has changed because people around the
world don’t have clean water.” (Child)
“Yes, treat water like drinkable diamonds” (Child)
“It has had a lasting, memorable effect on the children.” (Teacher)
Summary
A Crack in Time 2015 succeeded in bringing Victorian
Papplewick to life, and raising important questions about
water management across the world today, which is the
purpose of Papplewick’s Water Education Trust.
The responses of all audiences and participants in the
project indicate that an immersive, character and narrative
based, interactive experience is a powerful way to engage all audiences with Papplewick Pumping Station, and that
this model should be advocated across the museum sector.
20 Through this approach, the Museum was able to increase
its public profile with a much younger audience, and set
up opportunities for further audience development in the
future. Most schools stated that their visit to Papplewick
was the best educational visit they had ever brought
children on, in terms of the beauty and heritage of the site,
and the way in which it was interpreted by the team in an
educational context. All the schools indicated that they
were much more likely to return to visit Papplewick if it
was interpreted through performance rather than through
other means.
The project succeeded in engaging children from a wide
demographic range – it successfully targeted a high
proportion of young people who had never visited a
heritage site or museum such as Papplewick before, and A Crack in Time represented a significant and unusual
cultural experience for these audiences in particular.
This approach to museum interpretation has implications
for Papplewick and its funding of future education work; managing it; and for the support and management of
volunteers who may be involved in the interpretation
process. Following the project Dragon Breath and
Papplewick Pumping Station trust are working on the sustainabilitybof perofrmacne work, and its role in
stimultting and developing the museum’s future education
programmes.
“I’m fantastically impressed…I go to lots of heritage sites, often with children in attendance, and rarely have I seen a
group of children actually engage so completely with a
place as they have done here. This seems to me to be an
enormously impressive example of engaging young people
in heritage and history…so it looks to me as if this project,
is Papplewick reaching out to embrace other audiences through presenting itself in rather a different way from the
way it normally presents itself, and that’s good from
Papplewick and impressive again, it’s a novel approach,
it would be good to see many trusts that run these sort of sites taking up these sort of challenges ad trying to engage
these broader audiences through this innovative work with
school children” (Prof David Stocker, HLF Committee for
the East Midland)
A Crack in Time 2015 was funded by Arts Council
England, Heritage Lottery Fund, Garfield Weston
Foundation & East Midlands Museum Development Fund. It was supported by Lakeside Arts Centre, Spark Arts
festival Leicester, the university of Nottingham and