Reflections on Collecting COVID-19: Examining How Museums Have Worked With Communities to Collect And Record The Pandemic

        This past Wednesday, I attended an event on “Collecting COVID-19: Examining How Museums Have Worked With Communities to Collect And Record The Pandemic.” As I was looking through the various events, this one specifically caught my eye due to two reasons. I was specifically interested in the title’s emphasis on communities, and the event’s focus on how public institutions such as museums are working with not only individuals, but also communities. Furthermore, the idea of “recording” the pandemic was very interesting to me because it made me question how the true diversity of experiences of individuals can be fully encapsulated by museums. I was particularly interested in the definition of “record” and what it truly means to “record” the pandemic: what types of information are being recorded and what specific methods are being used? The event featured four different speakers: Andrea Hadley-Johnson and Simon Brown from the National Justice Museum and Imogen Clarke and Stewart Emmens from the Science Museum. 

The event discussed and described various projects and efforts in relation to “recording the pandemic.” Specifically, Johnson and Brown introduced the Letters of Constraint project, a digital project aimed at collecting the experiences of individuals and communities during the pandemic. I remember Johnson speaking about the word “constraint” in much detail. She emphasized that the definition of constraint was unique to each and every individual. In reflecting upon the definition of constraint myself, I have realized that for some, constraint, may mean the difficulties that come with limiting one’s interactions with the public. While for others, constrain may mean something entirely different. For instance, Johnson shared the letter of an individual who wrote that “this constraint is preventing me from participating in family rituals and ceremonies which are an important part of every adult indigenous African male” . Another individual’s letter described a moment during the pandemic when for the first time, she “felt ‘constraint’ and equated it with emptiness.” This project was particularly striking to me because I found myself empathizing with the individuals writing these letters, and ultimately connecting with them. Johnson further describes the letters of constraint as an “invitation to be heard.” This really stuck with me, especially as I feel that the pandemic is drowning out the voices of many individuals. 

Brown further brought up many of the considerations which were made in the ideation and implementation of the project. Brown specifically reflected on some of the main questions which they asked themselves, primarily regarding the use of the letters in the future and how the letters can be shared with many generations to come. His questions regarding how such stories can be best preserved, the medium through which they can be preserved, and the significance that such stories will carry for years to come. As he spoke about the preservation of stories, it made me reflect upon the significance that these stories will hold in a world where COVID-19 may seem as a distant past. It was incredible to witness how our present will very soon be read as history, through the form of such letters and beyond. Brown also highlighted a really interesting point as to how museums can ensure that people and their stories are not excluded. This really resonated with me because often times the stories that are collected are representative of a very small population. 

Furthermore, Clarke and Emmens spoke about the detailed process of collecting objects. They reflected upon how a simple picture taken at a subway of a woman holding a sign on “Virus Update: British Outbreak Has Begun -- Official” would become the first object of the COVID-19 collection. This was a particularly fascinating point because both individuals reflected upon how a picture taken for leisure would soon become an artifact and a momentous object, which may have implications for years to come. In listening to the concluding discussions of the talk, an individual asked the panel: Do you think the pandemic experience will change what people want from a museum going forward? Has it strangely made museums more visible? The speakers responded by saying that individuals may want to take a step back from museums, and “repair and calibrate” before stepping into museums again. The idea of repair and calibrate was particularly interesting to me as it connected the pandemic, and collection of history with the idea of healing and repairing. After the event, I find myself still wondering whether other museums have similar projects meant to collect stories? Furthermore, I wonder about the demographic of the sixty four stories collected and whose voices they represent? Are they truly inclusive, and how can more efforts be made to include more diverse stories?