A blind visitor to the British Museum has decided to sue the London museum because, as his lawyers argue, the museum is violating equality laws by failing to provide guided tours with audio description for theBayeux Tapestry exhibition. The famous embroidery, nearly seventy meters long, which depicts William I’s conquest of England in 1066, can in fact be viewed by visitors only for a limited time and from a raised platform, due to restrictions on its exposure to light. But the very measures designed to protect the artwork have raised a question about the exhibition’s accessibility: how can a blind person have the same experience if an audio-described tour is not made available to them?
This question lies at the heart of the legal action brought in the United Kingdom by Dr. Yusuf Ali Osman, the blind visitor who contacted the British Museum ahead of the exhibition dedicated to the Bayeux Tapestry. His attorneys argue that the museum’s decision to prioritize self-guided tours—driven in part by the need to limit the number of people in front of the artifact—may constitute a violation of the obligations set forth in the Equality Act.
The case therefore concerns one of the exhibitions most eagerly anticipated by the British public and, at the same time, a very concrete issue: how a museum can balance the preservation of an extremely delicate artifact with the right of visitors with disabilities to learn about and experience it.
Osman had asked the British Museum whether in-person tours with audio descriptions would be organized. According to his attorneys, the initial response did not include an option specifically designed for blind visitors. This led to the complaint. “I want to be able to visit the Bayeux Tapestry and see it in person,” Osman said. “I understand that there are significant restrictions on how the tapestry is displayed, but it is disappointing to find that blind visitors are not offered the opportunity to experience it through an audio description.”
The British Museum’s position, however, has changed—or at least been clarified—as the situation has unfolded. A spokesperson for the institution stated that the museum is planning special tours that will include a dedicated audio description. The possibility of incorporating a separate audio-described tour into the exhibition’s audio guide—available via app—is also being considered.
However, the issue therefore concerns not only the presence or absence of an audio guide, but the very way in which access to a work is conceived—a work that, due to its physical and conservation requirements, cannot be treated like a standard exhibit. The Bayeux Tapestry is, in fact, an artifact approximately seventy meters long, and its display requires special conditions. Ticket holders are allowed to view it for forty minutes from a raised platform. The limit on the amount of light to which it can be exposed also makes it necessary to control the number of visitors and the ways in which the public interacts with the artwork. It is precisely these restrictions that have contributed to the high demand for the exhibition. The first batch of tickets sold out and generated nearly 2.5 million pounds, equivalent to nearly 3 million euros. Public interest was thus evident even before the exhibition could be visited under its intended conditions.
However, the issue raised by Osman highlights a contradiction that pertains more generally to the design of the museum experience. Conservation imposes limits on access, but those limits do not eliminate the need to consider the diverse needs of the public. In the case of the Bayeux Tapestry, the issue becomes particularly evident because the very way the artwork is presented constitutes an essential part of the experience.
According to Kate Egerton, an attorney at the law firm Leigh Day representing Osman, the issue stems from the obligations under British equality legislation. “The Equality Act requires service providers to anticipate the needs of people with disabilities and to take reasonable steps to avoid substantial disadvantages. Our client is asking to have the same opportunity as sighted visitors to enjoy this exhibition.” The visitor’s goal, therefore, is not to obtain different conditions from those provided for other visitors, but to be able to access the experience through a tool suited to his visual impairment.
|
| Blind visitor sues the British Museum: The Bayeux Tapestry lacks an audio guide |
Warning: the translation into English of the original Italian article was created using automatic tools. We undertake to review all articles, but we do not guarantee the total absence of inaccuracies in the translation due to the program. You can find the original by clicking on the ITA button. If you find any mistake,please contact us.
IT
FR
DE
ES
CN
