Progressivist Museums: Louvre, Pitt Rivers & Smithsonian
This paper examines how three of the world's most prominent museums — the Louvre in Paris, the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford, and the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. — employ progressivist philosophies in their modes of display. Drawing on the work of Andrew McClellan and Annie E. Coombs, the paper argues that each museum uses a distinct variant of progressivism to unite diverse publics under a shared cultural or national identity. The Louvre emphasizes multicultural inclusivity alongside European artistic prestige, the Pitt Rivers reflects British imperial nationalism while preserving indigenous cultures, and the Smithsonian celebrates ethnic diversity as a foundation of American identity and technological achievement.
- Introduction: Progressivism and Museum Display: Defines progressivism and introduces three museum case studies
- The Louvre: Multicultural Progressivism in Paris: Louvre's multicultural collections under one European roof
- The Pitt Rivers Museum: Nationalism and Colonial Legacy: Pitt Rivers as British nationalist and imperial institution
- The Smithsonian: Diversity and American Identity: Smithsonian unites ethnic diversity under American ideals
- Conclusion: Synthesizes progressivist variants across all three museums
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper establishes a clear theoretical framework — progressivist philosophy — in its opening paragraph and applies it consistently across three distinct case studies.
- It draws a meaningful contrast between the Louvre's cosmopolitan multiculturalism, the Pitt Rivers' imperial nationalism, and the Smithsonian's ethnic pluralism, showing that "progressivism" is not monolithic.
- The conclusion synthesizes all three cases efficiently, reinforcing the central argument without simply restating the introduction.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative case study analysis: each museum is examined through the same conceptual lens (progressivist ideology), allowing the writer to reveal both shared patterns and important distinctions. Quoting McClellan to frame the audience problem and then showing how each museum solves it differently is a strong analytical move that gives the comparison intellectual coherence.
Structure breakdown
The essay opens with a definition of progressivism and a thesis identifying three museums as exemplars. Each body paragraph addresses one museum in turn, with its own variant of progressivist display. The conclusion mirrors the introduction by restating each museum's defining characteristic. At roughly 450 words, the paper is a concise analytical essay, appropriate for an undergraduate art history or museum studies context.
Introduction: Progressivism and Museum Display
The progressivist philosophy of culture posits that advancements in science, technology, and social and economic development are crucial to the growth of advanced societies, and that societies advance from a state of barbarism toward a more civilized state. This philosophy is evident in the modes of display of some of the most popular museums in the world. The Louvre in Paris, the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford, and the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. each use progressivist ideology to promote both a cultural theory and a strident nationalism rooted in the belief that citizens are advancing toward the promise of a better tomorrow. This paper examines how each museum does so.
The Louvre: Multicultural Progressivism in Paris
As Andrew McClellan states, "the public for art is diverse and divided by interests and levels of knowledge." Appealing to and uniting these diverse interests is what a progressivist museum must do in order to guide its public toward a cultural goal. One sees this at work in the Louvre, which presents a multicultural display of artwork that reaches across ethnic boundaries and draws its diverse public to a single focus under one roof. From its Greek treasures from Rhodes to its classical European masterpieces of painting to its collection of Islamic art and Near-Eastern antiquities, the Louvre offers something for everyone.
While the museum highlights its distinctly Parisian place among the world's stages of cultural elitism — it holds some of the greatest European works of art in existence — it does not dismiss the multicultural dimension of progressivism. Because the culture of Paris is dynamic and changing with the free migration of different ethnicities in the twenty-first century, the museum's progressivist mode of display is as fluid and dynamic as the world around it.
The Pitt Rivers Museum: Nationalism and Colonial Legacy
This sense of progressivism is distinct from what Henry Balfour wished to cultivate in 1904 at the Pitt Rivers Museum, where he "laid plans for what he called a museum of national culture." Balfour understood progressivism as a nationalist movement that viewed the world from a British perspective and identified persons and places in terms of British interests. It was progressive in the sense that it rallied Britons around the celebration of the arts, crafts, ideas, and beliefs of peoples whose lands had been colonized by Britain. The museum was one part recognition of British achievements and one part preservation of cultures of different backgrounds, ethnicities, and customs — a combination that made the Pitt Rivers genuinely progressive in character.
Conclusion
The three popular museums of the Louvre, the Pitt Rivers, and the Smithsonian each embody progressivist ideals through their respective modes of display. The Louvre celebrates its European artistic elitism while demonstrating multicultural sensitivity. The Pitt Rivers honors British imperialism while promoting and preserving indigenous works. The Smithsonian draws on the various ethnicities and cultures that contributed to American history and presents each one's art and beliefs in a spirit of unity under the American ideal of freedom. Together, these institutions illustrate that progressivism in the museum context is not a single fixed ideology but a flexible framework adapted to the distinct national and cultural narratives each institution seeks to advance.
Bibliography
Coombs, Annie E. "Museums and the Formation of National and Cultural Identities." Oxford Art Journal, vol. 11, no. 2 (1988): 57–68.
McClellan, Andrew. "A Brief History of the Art Museum Public." Art and Its Publics. Oxford: Blackwell, 2003.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.