The Auckland War Memorial Museum has enjoyed five years of much-needed stability following the brief but turbulent directorship of Vanda Vitali. Decisions taken by its trust board have tallied, by and large, with what most Aucklanders wanted. But that period of calm has come to an end with the imminent closure of Auckland 1866, an exhibition providing a cross-section of the city's shops, bars and homes, furnishings and merchandise in colonial times. Many people are justifiably unhappy.
Most point to the exhibition's popularity with children. For many youngsters, it has for the past 48 years provided a fascinating and instructive insight into life in early Auckland. Much of its attraction stems from an unequivocal authenticity, the product of its gifting to the museum by pioneering Queen St department store Milne & Choyce. On that hallmark, museums stand and fall. And for that reason alone, it is regrettable Auckland 1866 is to make way for a new World War I commemorative centre.
At the moment, centenary commemorations mean the first great global conflict is on everybody's mind. Solely on that ground, a new centre makes sense. The issue is whether it should be at the expense of Auckland 1866. Museums should have exhibits devoted to the widest possible range of their region's history, not focus unduly on whatever happens to be topical.
This is especially the case when that subject already enjoys considerable attention. Auckland's museum is a war memorial, and its acclaimed Scars on the Heart exhibition already ensures a strong focus on New Zealand's part in overseas wars. This has been further underlined by special programmes, not least the projecting of Sir Peter Jackson's restored film Heroes of Gallipoli on the front of the building several years ago.
Before deciding to dismantle Auckland 1866, the museum must have surveyed visitors. If some were relatively uninterested in it, that would not have been surprising. Almost half of those visitors are overseas tourists. The attraction for them is the museum's unique Pacific treasures. In their eyes, an exhibition of colonial Auckland would not compete with these. But it is highly likely that a greater interest, and far more positivity, would be voiced by Aucklanders and visitors from the rest of New Zealand. There is nothing to match Auckland 1866 in other museums around the country.
Responding to the criticism, museum director Roy Clare said: "Auckland 1866 will live on as a virtual exhibition which will be available for all to view and explore online." But seeing something online does not come close to viewing it in person. And if his argument were taken to its logical conclusion, there would be no need for museums. Auckland's could be redeveloped into apartments and its surrounds covered in high-rise housing.
Running a museum in the modern world is challenging. Any number of sensible balances must be struck. In this instance, the museum has erred. It should think again about the value of Auckland 1866 before its dismantling begins.