There are serious problems facing Jewish museums and galleries in Britain today. Some problems are practical: the wrong location, small numbers of visitors, not enough money. Others are more about the state of Jewish culture and identity. Should Jewish museums be about the past, tradition and religion (Judaica), or the Holocaust which so dominated Jewish identity in the 1980s and 90s, or a positive story about migration, assimilation and rising prosperity? In other words, who do Britain's Jews think they are today and what kind of story do we want to tell ourselves (and others) about Jewish culture?
The best international Jewish museums seem to find this more straightforward. The Jewish Museum in Berlin, for example, had enough state and city support to get one of the world's most exciting and innovative architects, Daniel Libeskind, to design the Holocaust extension which instantly became a huge tourist attraction. Polin, Warsaw's new Jewish history museum, has been a huge success because it was bold, ambitious and like Libeskind's Berlin Museum told a compelling and tragic story which again has attracted tourists. The Jewish Museum in New York is set in a wonderful town-house on the Upper East Side and has sufficient space to combine traditional exhibits with more contemporary art, photography and film. All three museums have big financial backing, great locations, big tourist footfall and are must-see places. Above all, they have a strong sense of identity and purpose. None of this applies to Britain's Jewish museums.
These international Jewish museums have several things in common. They all have excellent central locations. The best of all, of course, is New York's Jewish Museum off 5th Avenue, at the heart of the Upper East Side's famous Museum Mile, just a short walk from the Met, the Guggenheim and the Frick. Polin is the most evocative location of all, on the site of the former Warsaw Ghetto, facing the monument to the Warsaw Ghetto Heroes.
They all have excellent exhibitions obviously. The New York Museum is currently showing three different exhibitions: Andy Warhol's famous portraits of Elizabeth Taylor and Marilyn Monroe, Stieglitz's great immigration photograph, The Steerage (1907), and an exhibition of Soviet film and photography. Last year Vienna's Jewish Museum had a superb exhibition about the history of the Ringstrasse, the heart of fin de siècle Vienna and home to many of Vienna's most famous Jewish families.
Above all, these museums all have a strong sense of Jewish identity. It is absolutely clear what they are there for and they are all huge success stories. One reason for this is the Holocaust. Look at the Berlin Museum's Holocaust exhibition and the location of Polin, never mind the success of the many Holocaust museums around the world, including the Imperial War Museum's Holocaust exhibit. The Holocaust continues to matter to people, Jews and non-Jews. But there is a downside for Jewish museums. Take away the Holocaust and what is left of Jewish identity today? Does it matter, even to Jews, in the same way?
Contrast the success of these international Jewish museums with what's happening in Britain. The most obvious problem is location. The Jewish Museum is in Camden Town, nowhere particularly close to any other major Jewish or other cultural institutions. If you go there what are you going to do next? Any other exhibitions or tourist sights within easy access? Forget it. The same is true of Ben Uri, hidden away on Boundary Road, off Abbey Road, far from any Jewish landmarks. Not so long ago Boundary Road was also home to the Saatchi collection and the Boundary Gallery. Now both have gone so there is no footfall to speak of. This isn't just a problem for Jewish museums, of course. It helped kill off the London Jewish Cultural Centre and poses a significant problem for JW3 on the Finchley Road. Good once you get there but that's the point.
The result is too few visitors. Both the Jewish Museum and the Ben Uri are run by dynamic people, with first-rate curators and museum staff. I should declare an interest here. Until recently I was on the Board of the Ben Uri and have written for several recent catalogues. However, any neutral observer would agree that despite the best efforts of both wonderful institutions not enough people are going to either.
All of this is relevant to the discussion of the proposed Holocaust Centre (which the government is going to fund to the tune of up to £50million). Should it be near the Imperial War Museum at Elephant and Castle or a more central location?
The location problem is tied to two other crucial problems. First, money. Second, identity. Polin in Warsaw was funded by a private-public partnership: the Polish Ministry of Culture and National Heritage and the City of Warsaw paid nearly half. It was seen as part of the revival of Poland. Polin is just the kind of prestige museum that could play a central role in the new Warsaw. Similarly, it is no coincidence that construction on Libeskind's new extension to the Berlin Museum began in November 1992, just three years after the Wall came down. Again, public money poured in as part of the reconstruction of Berlin's revival like the new Reichstag building.
Despite the great generosity of the Heritage Lottery Fund which largely paid for Ben Uri's acclaimed centenary exhibition, "Out of Chaos", at Somerset House last year, Ben Uri - like the Jewish Museum - largely relies on private support and there isn't enough of that for either organisation. The Ben Uri has ambitious plans to move to central London. Chief executive David Glasser and his board are clear about the lessons from "Out of Chaos". More than 25,000 visitors came because of the buzz created by terrific reviews but also because it was in the West End. The Jewish Museum too will inevitably have to move to a central location but that will cost tens of millions.
This takes us to the second central problem, identity. What are Jewish museums for in the 21st century? Should they be in north London, close to the post-war Jewish heartland? No, for one simple reason. North London Jews, from Hendon to Radlett, are not supporting their core cultural institutions.
Philistinism? Perhaps. The contrast between the history of Anglo-Jewish culture and Jewish-American culture points that way. Jewish-American culture has been a huge success story for 70 years. Britain has always been American Jewry's poor cousin.
However, the continued success of Jewish Book Week and Limmud suggest that it's not simply about philistinism. These show a huge appetite for the discussion of books and ideas. Go to Kings Place later this month and you'll see one event after another sold out. Perhaps we are the people of the book not the people of art. Give us Simon Schama and Jonathan Freedland any day. Bomberg and Gertler? We don't seem so sure.
So if it's not philistinism, why are our Jewish museums struggling to draw in crowds? There might be a clue in the title of the recent Rothenstein show at Ben Uri, "Rothenstein's Relevance". Jewish art and Judaica just don't feel relevant today, especially to young museum-goers. Books, klezmer, Ottolenghi and the Holocaust are another matter. But museums?
The Jewish Museum and Ben Uri are trying to find different solutions to the same problem. They are trying to learn from one of the great museum success stories in Britain - the Imperial War Museum. Can you imagine two words less likely to appeal to today's museum-goers than Imperial or War? Think of the fuss at Oxford about Cecil Rhodes. And yet the IWM has transformed its brand and become one of the most popular museums in the country.
The Jewish Museum is looking to a more populist agenda - exhibitions about Judith Kerr, Jewish entertainers and footballers, and exciting topics like "Blood" - from circumcision to Shylock. Ben Uri is looking in a different direction. Its collection of over 1,300 works was largely produced by two generations of migrants: immigrants and their children from the Russian Pale like Kramer, Gertler and Rosenberg, and then Jewish refugees from Nazi Europe in the 1930s and 40s like Frank Auerbach and Eva Frankfurther. So the Ben Uri is looking to make connections with artists from more recent immigrant and refugee communities. Its new slogan is Art, Identity and Migration - The Art Museum for Everyone and that includes Koreans, Nigerians and Indians.
But both Abigail Morris at the Jewish Museum and David Glasser at Ben Uri know that these imaginative ideas will not work without a new home and more support from the Jewish public, and not just financial. Jewish institutions need to exude confidence about their sense of Jewish identity. But that needs a Jewish community that is more positive about its own identity, that believes their Jewishness matters and includes art and museums as well as bagels, klezmer and Howard Jacobson.
David Herman will be taking part in a panel discussion on The Role of Jewish Museums in the 21st Century at Manchester Limmud this Sunday. Adam Taub contributed additional research
