A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve: Studia Ethnographica 6. (Szeged, 2008)

Hanneleena Hieta: Ethnographer s and three realities - how agency and institutional tradition intertwine in the museum setting

In my interviews with Antal Juhász, as well as in Edit Felföldi'

s interview with László Felföldi, the interviewees emphasized that this had all been done before, it made sense, it served the purpose. Nonetheless, whenever something new is made, there is an element of creativity. A different museum professional could easily have chosen a different path. Therefore, it seems that the institution presents an individual with a limited number of possible choices. Although the number is limited, they are still choices. It truly matters which particular individual is in the role of the professional and what his or her personal preferences and'tastes are; the institution does not make any random choices without individual input. The generation of mediators is not a generation of mindless puppets in the hands of an anonymous "institution". Although there is a possibility for individual choice in the museum institution, one must still allow for one limiting factor: the third "reality" which plays a role in the process is the material reality, the one reality which is the most tangible one. It is possible through inventiveness and creativity to circumvent some of the material imperatives, but not all of them. In the first place, an open-air museum is still dependent upon some material remains of the peasant material culture. Even if it were possible to recreate some buildings, it would be difficult to recreate all the furnishings, tools, vehicles and other objects which are necessary to create what today is thought of as a complete open-air museum setting. It is also very probable that if for some odd reason life in the Hungarian countryside had continued in exactly same way as it had existed in the early 20th century, no one would have perceived a need to create museums for it. Therefore it is safe to assume that the changes in our material environment have consequences in relation to what we think and how we perceive things - and they therefore affect our institutions. In the light of the above discussion, I think that the Ópusztaszer open-air ethnographical museum is a good example of how institutions evolve and provide both the limits and the freedom for individual creativity. At the same time an institution gives us one of our most humane qualities: a way to make sense of the material reality around us. BIBLIOGRAPHY Unpublished primary sources: University of Turku, Archives of the School of Cultural Research TYKL: SAVOLAINEN [HIETA], Hanneleena Haastattelut ja kenttämuistiinpanot 1996-2000. [Interviews and field-notes 1996-2000.] TYKL/spa/148/u 2005. Museo pustalla. Tapaustutkimus unkarilaisesta museokansatieteestä. Lisensiaatintutkimus. [Museum on the Puszta. A case study on Hungarian museum ethnography. Licentiate thesis.] University of Szeged, Department of Ethnology and Cultural Anthropology: FELFÖLDI Edit 2000 Az Opusztaszeri Szabadtéri Gyűjtemény makói háza.