On the need to make the relationship between culture and technology permanent

Given the importance it has assumed in our individual and collective lives, we are so addicted to the idea that technology acts as an evolutionary lever in any sector that the combination of “application of new technology” – “growth and development” it is no longer a hypothesis subject to proof, but an axiom to which the manifestations of reality can be inclined.

But it is not always there technology it really acted as expected: no doubt communications have been disrupted by digital applications, no doubt traditional industry has benefited from recent innovations.

When it comes to analyzing the relationship between technology and culture, however, the evidence is not so unequivocal: because while on the one hand it is undeniable that the relationship between technology and art has always been an extremely fruitful hybrid and hybrid territory, on the other hand the relationship between museums and technology is certainly more incomplete. . .

Surely there are excellent cases, but considering that one of the basic rules of networks is that they acquire value in proportion to their use (if we are two who have Facebook around the globe, Facebook is worth very, very little.) , because it is not to those practical cases that we have to look, but to the general and wide dimension (the so-called critical mass) of the Museums.

Suffice it to say that even today, in 2022, there is still talk of the fact that social media is important for museums and that it is necessary for our museums to develop skills in this regard to understand that so far, the technology, in the cultural sector, has really affected a lot, a little.

The question is really complexand involves elements of public finances, the necessary renewal of much of the staff, even in the so-called Autonomous Museums, the organizational structure of all institutions and the inability of the technology sector to illustrate the great opportunities it presents the adoption of new technologies.

It is no coincidence, in fact, that many of the “peak” episodes have involved technology as a “communicative” tool: from games to virtual reality, the most “innovative” applications have played an advertising role: making news and broadcasting. this or that institution within the generalist communication channels.

All this, of course, is understandable: initiating processes that adopt technology not as an “external” element, through which to create a product or service and then be delivered to the public, but as an internal element and, therefore, as the enabling tool. , is anything but simple.

Added to this is the great speed that characterizes technological innovation processes today: while this feature is certainly a positive condition in many contexts, it is less so in contexts that, on the other hand, have more time for technological adoption. That is, if the time interval between the choice of a technology product and its full operation at all organizational levels is too high, it is likely that at the time of startup this product is already obsolete and more expensive than what is on the market.

These reflections, however, do not want to state in any way that the accumulated delay in the adoption of innovative services is entirely attributable to a generic mismatch between the demand and supply of technology in the cultural field.

On the contrary.

Rather, they want to emphasize that the issue is much more complex and entrenched than we tend to believe, and that the general scarcity of even the most trivial technological tools is, unfortunately, only a symptom of a systemic and structural difficulty. more complex. which will hardly be fully resolved only with the extraordinary resources put in place by the European Union.

Because extraordinary resources will make it possible to acquire some “self-conclusive” services, fixed-term resources that can understand the alphabet and grammar of new technologies, but it will also be necessary to develop a new way of understanding the relationship between culture and technology to ensure I know that temporary benefits become a permanent association.

Or do we really want to always have that breathless aspect of the one who chases, chases, and chases?

Comment on Facebook

Leave a Comment