Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Ian Fairweather
(University of Manchester)
Sharon Macdonald (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin)
Stephen Terence Welsh (Manchester Museum)
Send message to Convenors
- Track:
- Museum Anthropology
- Location:
- Kanaris Theatre, Museum
- Sessions:
- Thursday 8 August, -, -
Time zone: Europe/London
Short Abstract:
The related, transformatory processes of decolonisation, reconciliation and multiculturalism have radically altered both the theory and practice of museum ethnography. In a world of 7 billion people and innumerable cultures, what role can 21st century museum ethnography play?
Long Abstract:
From its inception in the late 19th century, museum ethnography operated largely within a cultural evolutionary paradigm that interpreted extra-European ethnographic objects, and the cultures from which they originated, as primitive, inferior and on the verge of extinction. Object-focused museum ethnographers acquired vast collections with which to construct typologies and cultural hierarchies. Objects were sometimes used to make astonishing and disturbing assumptions about complex cultures.
Such uncritical practice continued unabated until the disintegration of European empires, assertion of civil rights and mass transnational migration in the latter half of the 20th century. These led to the portrayal of extra-European cultures and the control of cultural patrimony being academically and politically contested. As a discipline, museum ethnography was forced to recognise these shifting socio-political paradigms and adjust its practice accordingly.
Through critical museology, repatriation and collaboration, museum ethnography has undergone rigorous reform. Museum ethnographers are now much more likely to openly and honestly acknowledge the colonial legacy of their predecessors, and to work closely with both source and diaspora communities, recognising the importance of both tangible and intangible culture. Even so, perhaps museum ethnography remains an anachronism. An increasing number of municipal culturally focused participatory spaces, often devoid of collections offer alternative attempts to contend with the cultural as an amorphous concept. In a world of 7 billion people and innumerable cultures, what role can 21st century museum ethnography play? Are colonial ethnographic collections still primarily triumphal reminders of an imperial past? Is more radical 'decolonisation' of the museum required?
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Thursday 8 August, 2013, -Paper short abstract:
The presentation examines the strategies in national museum spaces to comprehend and respond to contemporary concerns over the engagement and representation of their own First Peoples.
Paper long abstract:
Funded by the Australian Research Council, our multi-year research program has visited over 250 museums in an attempt to examine the capacity of major national museums in the US, the UK and Australia to represent and reflect the lives and perspectives of their own contemporary First Peoples.
Through discussions with museum professionals, the notions of success for the museum are examined. The primary research work has been carried out by an Aboriginal Australian researcher, exploring the idea that reversing the focus away from the Indigene and back to the museum space appropriately places the museum at the centre of its own epistemological challenge. An arguably risky, singular perspective providing review and judgments could be located as skewed and unrepresentative. It does, however, mirror a position that many museums deploy when they send institutional representatives to connect with a community, or employ a pan-Indigenous expert to develop a community-focused or representative project to exhibition. It, if cheekily, 'reverses' this gaze.
Further exploring this relationship, 'culture at the edge of the world' describes the difficulty for these national museums, often located far from the action of robust First Peoples' communities, to accurately represent their lives and histories. These museums at the edge of the world, risk occupying an extra-cultural space to the Indigenous community and, arguably to many communities that they seek to represent.
This presentation highlights some moments of 'success', explores the engagement and imperatives for communities and visitors, and ponders the changing role of national museum spaces in these relationships.
Paper short abstract:
(Former) colonial institutes and museums for ethnography remain bulwarks of knowledge production. Digitization of collections in conjunction with new media allows hidden objects to become accessible. Also critically assessed is the role of source communities in decolonizing museum collections.
Paper long abstract:
During the past centuries, thousands of objects of indigenous Amazonian people were sent to Europe and the United States, while only a small selection has been publicly on display in cabinets of curiosities, museums of ethnography or natural history. These museums and related institutions (universities, libraries, etc.) became "bulwarks of knowledge production" which conventional models reigns supreme, particularly pertaining Amazonian Tropical Forest Cultures. This neo-evolutionary paradigm, in conjunction with current studies on materiality and the subjectification of things, unintended or not, has estranged objects from people. Nonetheless, things are a materialization of multiscalar interrelationships between objects, people, non-people, and the environment. Currently, indigenous people request to become collaborators in contextualizing museum collections, as well as (co)guest-curators of exhibitions, because if future indigenous generations have to rely on museum collections for gaining insight into their inherited culture, a flawed perspective will be received. Persisting in an unequal dialogue with source communities and lacking shared research objectives, museums and related institutions (such as universities, libraries, etc.) will remain neo-colonial bulwarks of knowledge production. Moreover, museum collections hold historical objects that are rare or even absent in contemporary indigenous societies, but still present in the collective social memory. In order for 21st century ethnographic museums to become post-colonial, museum collections ought to become a meeting ground foregrounding the shared and contested material and intangible heritage.
Paper short abstract:
Acknowledging the distributed personhood of museum artefacts, a grammatical and metaphorical starting point for many Ojibwe museum objects, offers a way of breaking down colonial barriers to a sympathetic, collegial modern ethnographic practice.
Paper long abstract:
This paper takes as its starting point a Canadian Anishinaabe perspective regarding the personhood of ceremonial artefacts who, in their aboriginal context, are frequently spoken of and treated as wiikanag, ritual brothers. In a museum context, these person/objects are also treated as metaphorically animate; we would not have museums if we did not believe in the capability of artefacts to amaze and educate. Acknowledging the personhood of artefacts addresses one of the fundamental power asymmetries of the colonial museum and provides room for innovation in traditional ethnographic practice, placing the ethnographer and the artifact in a collegial rather than object/analyst relationship. Personhood is not absolute either for ethnographers who are subject to unequal power relationships within the museum nor artefacts whose vulnerability lies in their ownership by an institution but acknowledging the personhood of object/persons as Strathern, Gell and others explain, opens those objects to multiple meaningful relationships including family and community relationships long denied them by colonial ethnographic practice. This paper looks at the example of repatriation of an Ojibwe collection for new directions in ethnographic practice.
Paper short abstract:
The aim of this study is to write a biography of Taiwan aboriginal objects. By tracing their social life, I want to explore the entangled relationship between things and human,self and other and the West and the East.
Paper long abstract:
Aboriginal objects sleeping in the museums, are alive by giving social meanings, which transfer among different spaces and times. Museums become arenas where powers struggle and provide special context for representing Taiwan aborigines and their culture. In such cultural contact zone, political and scholarly discourses impose upon these objects and shape or reshape their meanings by contextualization and recontextualization. In the colonial context, the practice of collecting and exhibiting becomes one part of civilizing project and an indispensable step for modernization. They are considered as trophies of colonial expansion and involve in the process of decolonizing in the post-colonial context. Until the 1980s, Taiwan aborigines have tried to recover traditional culture and pursue more equal rights. Then museum is not just the cultural contact zone with entangled powers, but also the storage where aborigines could find authentic aboriginal objects and gain knowledge. Whereas the paradox is that museums essentialize aboriginal culture as some kind of object or technique, by which Taiwan aborigines try to reconstruct self-identify.
Paper short abstract:
Museum Ethnography is a fundamentally creative pursuit, through which civilization and a myriad of cultures have been constructed, rather than simply displayed. This prompts reflection on the ways in which digital technologies make it possible to rebuild culture and civilization in new forms.
Paper long abstract:
In a recent paper on 'The Museum as Method', Nicholas Thomas has noted that the poachers have turned gamekeepers, with many former critics of museum ethnography now its curators. This paper will ask whether in continuing to critique museum ethnography for its perceived complicities with colonialism, contemporary critics are aiming at the wrong target.
In asking why critique has run out of steam, Bruno Latour has argued that academics have not been quick enough to prepare themselves for new threats, new dangers, new tasks, new targets. By continuing to focus on the colonial, this paper will suggest that both critics and curators of museum ethnography have ignored its ongoing complicities with a global financial and political system that continues to do considerable harm to the very people with whom museum ethnographers appear to be most concerned.
This paper asks whether museum ethnographers of the twenty-first century can embrace their role as creators and inventors of culture and civilization, and retool, utilizing an expanded arsenal of digital technologies to reimagine human life in ways that unite people around the world in the face of new dangers, rather than continuing to emphasise the distinctive cultural practices that divide them.