The Ministry of Culture and Heritage issued a statement, last Saturday, about a note published by this newspaper detailing the process. The Ministry of Culture and Heritage (MyCP) issued last Saturday a statement on the transfer of the pieces of the National Collection of the Anthropological and Contemporary Art Museum (MAAC) from Guayaquil to Quito, which will be part of the permanent sample of what will be the National Museum, whose reopening is scheduled for next May 18.
The statement came about by a note published in this newspaper on January 10, which details the transfer of modern and contemporary art pieces. In the note mentioned above, the statements of Ivette Celi, undersecretary of Social Memory of the MCyP are included. The official said in a telephone interview with this newspaper that there has been no empowerment of citizens regarding the management of the MAAC, which “is news when it has problems, but never when it has been good and are the same people as always, with respect and all the love, but it’s not a place where people get involved with cultural processes”.
The MCyP in that statement called “urgent” says that as a state portfolio “regrets the misrepresentation” of Celi’s statements, however, as recorded in the audio, the official’s appointment is literal and unaltered, as the ministry note assures.
The same points out that these goods will integrate the sample of the National Museum project, which they consider “an emblematic landmark for the country, since it integrates goods from all the repositories of the National Collection and will give impetus to the organization, management and operation of the Network Ecuatoriana de Museos in compliance with the provisions of the Organic Law of Culture “.
In the same interview Celi recognizes that Guayaquil has the largest cultural infrastructure in the country: “That does not mean that I do not do mea culpa in the poor selection of the authorities that have been in front of the MAAC”. Celi says that a museum manager has to know about museums, technical processes and know how to make a national catalog. This, he admits, is what is required in the MAAC.
According to the Organic Law of Culture, technical profiles will be established in the direction of museums, such as MAAC and Manta; once per regulation, they will be constituted as deconcentrated operating entities. These will be chosen, as now, by the Minister of Culture and Heritage
Managers, such as Romina Muñoz, a professor at the University of the Arts, question the idea of the National Museum project when infrastructures, such as the MAAC, have gone through budget lags.
Of her participation in the Workshop Strategies in use of the National Museum, in 2016, Muñoz says: “There, almost everyone who attended, we were many, questioned the idea of a national museum, but also the economic efforts invested in that megaproject when the other museums continue to operate in precarious situations.
The creation of the museum, we know, is a political decision, not a genuine cultural urgency and therefore it has to be done, regardless of the costs, the discussion processes to which it has been subject “. The Milagros artist Óscar Santillán, based in the Netherlands, says that “many years ago they dismantled the original MAAC project, whose initial ambition was successful, becoming a benchmark for contemporary continental art and giving life to the impressive archaeological and modern art heritage there it’s found.
Since then, the MAAC has wandered without a clear program, without a curatorial project, without the MAAC Cinema “. The Guayaquil artist Marco Alvarado, from La Artefactoría, believes that “it is important to know who and with what criteria the custody of the country’s art collections will be delivered.” The mayor of the city, Jaime Nebot, asked for specifications about the works and the time they would be in the capital. “Explain if the removal of the works is only for an exhibition or if is pretended to be permanent,” Nebot said in a public communication. (I)