What should
be done about ill-gotten art objects which form part of the collections of
Western museums? Should they be returned
or should they be used to educate the West about other cultures? Can museums help us to learn about the dark
side of our history, or do they usually simply encourage national pride and an
erasure of inconvenient narratives?
Rio Matsui
ReplyDelete“How did this come here?”, that's what I always think when I visit a museum in Europe. Egypt, Orient, Asia, Africa; by visiting one museum in Europe, we can explore the history around the world. However, we have to also understand the murky past of those items we are looking through the glass. It is an undeniable fact that the Western powers have slightly taken those items from the people they subjugated. In my opinion, in some cases, those museums work as a well-managed storehouse, although on the other hand, it damages the value of the people’s history.
Most of the museums in Europe invest a large amount of money for maintaining their stored items in a clean and good condition, and it is true that this helped to pass on the real appearance of historical artifacts. In addition, by being stored in European museums, many artifacts were protected from being damaged or destroyed from conflicts. By coming to Europe, those artifacts were able to survive Civil Wars and cultural revolutions that were definitely erasing those from the world.
However, it is also true that the difference in cultural views has damaged the historical value of the artifact. For example, we can see the Elgin Marbles, a collection of classical Greek marble structure that is now stored in the British Museum. Until the 21st Century, the Elgin Marbles was known as being completely white, just like the Roman sculptures. Although, after researches conducted, it was proved that the Elgin Marbles was originally colored. Due to the strong idea of “Greek = White” in Britain, through the 17th-18th century, an action called as “Cleaning” has been done to almost all Greek sculptures, destroying its original appearance.
I don’t mind them displaying those artifacts in the museum, but I think they should always have some awareness towards the culture they originate from. Sending them back is not required, although, as Ms. Janet Browne does, it is necessary to listen to different communities to have guidance and advice for the materials.
Museums have always been considered educational institutions where people come to enrich their knowledge and relax at the same time. However, as the article suggests, they cannot fulfill this educative function if the history of objects or persons is presented in the form of an “edited fairytale”. It’s understandable that nations want to show themselves in the best light but it is not right not to tell the whole truth. Every story can be seen from more points of view and museums should provide us with all of them, objectively.
ReplyDeleteI don’t understand the author’s aversion to the neutrality of museums and her argument with Nazis: “Who likes a neutral museum that doesn’t speak up against political injustice, historical violence? Nazis and the far-right would argue for a ‘neutral’ museum.” I would say it’s quite the opposite. Nazis would be those who would edit the facts to fix them in their theory and delete the ones which could mess up their propaganda. And such museums wouldn’t be ‘neutral’ anymore. Neutrality doesn’t mean that a museum doesn’t speak about issues. That’s a different problem if a museum is already biased and offers just these “fairytales” in order to satisfy the feeling of nationalism.
Every country and every nation has its own history and colonialism belongs to it as well. It was an unfair, terrible experience for a lot of countries, however, it is part of their identity and they should respect it since they cannot change it. The thieves, as well as those who had been robbed, died a long time ago and the return of artifacts wouldn’t be the right way to reach justice. As @Rio mentioned, besides the protection from damage and destruction, a large amount of money was invested (and still is) to keep the stored items in good condition. I completely understand the loan on which the artifacts could be given back. Even though they argue that they were stolen, they cannot just ignore the effort which was put into the artifacts’ restoration.
In my opinion, a short sentence “This artifact was acquired during colonialism as a war trophy.” would help ease this tension between nations because the oppressor would admit his power was used to acquire it. It wouldn’t be just another fairytale as “This artifact was acquired thanks to James Cook’s brave expedition to the Hawaiian Islands.” People would realize the atrocity due to which they could admire the items behind the glass.