While I like the optimism of George Y’s answer, ultimately it relies on trusting the source to tell the truth.
However, as well as seeing this in US museums, we see this in US sports venues, where small handbags are allowed, but small backpacks are forbidden. In sports venues, bags are forbidden in order to prevent people from bringing in their own alcohol (and bombs). There are no artworks to protect in a sports stadium, so clearly there must be some other reason why handbags are allowed and backpacks aren’t.
http://www.rosebowlstadium.com/visitor-center/code-of-conduct
Additionally, Australian museums do not draw a distinction between type of bag, but have a clause that covers all backpacks and bags, and is based on size.
Backpacks, umbrellas, and water bottles, and bags and packages larger than 30cm x 40cm, must be checked in.
https://www.mona.net.au/visit/facilities/
So no, the ‘backpacks will destroy the art’ hypothesis does not fit. Places that have no art have the same ‘anti-backpack’ policy, and places with lots of art to break will allow backpacks.
I suspect the answer is a much simpler one. Handbags are generally worn by adults, who pay and donate more to get into venues, and they often get jobs deciding on the bag policy to implement at venues. Backpacks are generally worn by children and teenagers, who make noise, damage things (whether they have a backpack or not), laugh at the willies on the statues/paintings, don’t donate, don’t vote, and don’t get jobs as museum curators. Generally, they are considered a nuisance.
Ultimately, museums would like to ban all bags. They have made the decision that banning handbags would be more cost than benefit, so they permit them. This has painted them into a tight corner, and some are now allowing backpacks being worn like a handbag, because the only way to not allow it would be to admit the real reason handbags are allowed and backpacks aren’t.
Australian sports and museums are both making separate pushes to try to attract younger people to their events, which may explain the lack of backpack bans down here.
People wearing backpacks sometimes forget it is there and inadvertently knock into/over things when they turn. I have not heard of the “one shoulder rule”, but in the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery I was asked to either hold my backpack or wear it backwards (on my front) while perusing the museum.
I’ve been whacked this way myself while waiting in line for a bus/airplane, and done the same to others, so accidentally swinging into things seems like a good possibility to me. In addition to people being more cognizant of a bag on one shoulder vs both, should they bump something with the bag, it is more free to move and will not hit with such force as with both straps.
Because if your bag is large enough to be only carried on your back (i.e. you cannot carry it on one shoulder), you’ll much more likely to bump into, and do some damage to objects/sculptures/other people while turning around. This is because you don’t see your bag, and it is much harder to estimate how big it is when maneuvering. It is much less likely when your bag is on your side, as you can see it.
Also with a large back on your back you’re taking up to twice more space, which may be a problem near crowded exhibitions.
Update: Clément provided a link which confirmed the above theory, at least from Smithsonian Museum of American Art:
For the protection of our artworks, suitcases, large umbrellas, large
bags, and large backpacks are not allowed in the galleries. Smaller
backpacks and bags are permitted, at the discretion of the museum’s
security officers, if they are hand-carried. Backpacks may not be worn
on the back, but must be carried on the side, under the arm, or on the
front of the body. These limitations help us protect the artworks from
accidental damage.
Credit:stackoverflow.com‘
5 Mar, 2024
4 Mar, 2024
4 Mar, 2024
5 Mar, 2024
4 Mar, 2024