In many ways museums have been required to wear many hats for a while now. They have found themselves in precarious places, needing to get a piece of that proverbial cash pie, necessitating competition with movies, sporting events, zoos and other, much flashier leisure time attractions. This unfamiliar and uncomfortable competition led to horrible things like the invention of the word “edu-tainment.” As a museum educator turned new media super-star I have seen this scenario from a couple of angles. One was the need to tie everything a museum did to some educational goal that had to do with something more obviously valuable than “art.” Art and science, art and math: boy, were art museums thankful for da Vinci! Of course, for many of us, a more enlightened 21^st century point of view has evolved and now we are comfortable asserting that art is valuable, all by itself. Learning about art and how people make it is a worthwhile endeavor for every man, woman and child, and sometimes by chance, or even on purpose, art actually relates to those other things that kids learn in school.

But even after this realization, we are still multi-tasking, still trying to find a variety of angles that will allow us to pitch our work to the world. You’ve read IMA blog posts about social networking, seen us on iTunes U, and we have engaged in other technological exploits. These are examples of how IMA is trying to insert itself into the lives of unsuspecting internet users all over the world by using the same tools gimmicky (and successful) companies use. As a member of the new media team, I can honestly say that all we do is multi-task, sometimes to the point of exhaustion. But it is definitely a different variety of juggling from the previous thematic exploits of many museums. These days we look at an exhibition, a program, a topic and think about all the potential audiences and ask, who are they really and what do we want them to know? Why would they care about Roman art, or contemporary art or any kind of art? In order to get answers that matter, new media talks to marketing and both of them talk to education and curatorial reps. We struggle to keep up with all this communicating, but we work really hard at it in the hopes that if we can pull it all together we might find the best way to tell you about what we’re all doing at IMA. Thus we blog, maintain a Facebook page, create web content, edit videos, and we have those galleries full of art, too. We have trouble figuring it all out and keeping it all straight. What is marketing’s job? What does new media do exactly? How should we divide it all up? The short answer, I think, is we shouldn’t. Instead we should do what we’ve been doing, rolling with the punches, talking a lot and trying not to be fussy about who does what until someone does nothing. Daniel is best at this, but I am trying hard to get up to speed.

Under Daniel’s leadership we (the royal we) have taken these ideas to heart, as a cross-departmental team, and created firm plans with great ambition that combine the best of many worlds. Collaboration on many levels is the thing that makes us genre-defying. You might find new media poking around in conservation (supervised and with permission, of course) or in the greenhouse shooting a video about that. We work with education to coordinate video for guest lecturers and talk to artists when they visit IMA thanks to tip-offs from the contemporary department. All of this internal networking results in all the stuff you see from us on the web.

Now that technology has a hold on all of us, it is essential that museums understand how to harness it. And IMA is working hard. Watch for some big things this year. We might still be students in some regard, but at least we show up for class. So when 2008 wraps, don’t be surprised to find that IMA is listed among all the other genre-defying juggernauts out there. And if we’re not…well, then you’re not reading the right blogs.

P.S. – I tried really hard to work in a reference to Aerosmith and RUN DMC being genre-defying, and I am really sad I couldn’t, thus the existence of this pathetic add-on.