15 minute read
HART2274 Introduction to Museum and Curatorial Studies
HART2274 Introduction to Museum and Curatorial Studies Unit Coordinator: Dr Susanne Meurer
ELYSSA HUNT
In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, museum institutions emerged as ‘active tools of empire’1 , displaying and collecting objects deemed to be of value to European tastes.2 When established in European nations, they reinforced colonial and imperial values, positioning ethnographic study as a study of the ‘other’, or the ‘savage’, and therefore justifying European superiority and the maintenance of European colonial empires. Additionally, the establishment of museums in European settler colonies created cultural institutions that elevated European values, promoted the ‘other’ as a curiosity and an object of study, and contributed to the dispossession of land through the physical occupation of space. Museums worldwide house vast collections of objects attained during the colonial period, large portions of which were attained as spoils of war, looting, and other violent acts. Displays of ethnographic and anthropological objects in Western institutions as ‘curiosities’ curated presumptions of ‘otherness’ and ‘savagery’ in nonEuropean cultures,3 justifying colonialism and ideas of European superiority. As a result, decolonising the museum has become an urgent priority. In this essay, I will evaluate measures taken by three institutions to address decolonisation as a priority: The British Museum, Pitt Rivers Museum, and The Australian Museum, through the 2021 exhibition Unsettled.
The British Museum is often interpreted as a cornerstone of British culture and identity, housing over four million objects.4 The museum was initially opened in 1759,5 housing an initial collection purchased from Sir Hans Sloane in 1753, which included ‘natural and artificial varieties’, books, coins and artefacts.6 Following this initial opening, the British Museum collection was expanded with objects attained during Britain’s imperial efforts. Colonial processes were ‘inextricably intertwined’ with scientific research.7 Colonial powers embarked on scientific voyages in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, with some, including the Endeavour voyage, becoming the catalyst for later colonisation. Additionally, specimens collected scientifically were often displayed as curiosities in Europe,8 curating notions of the ‘other’ while celebrating European scientific achievement, establishing ideas of colonial superiority.9 Additionally, portions of the British Museum collection were attained during periods of colonial violence and looting.10 The British Museum has become one of the most recognisable and referenced institutions within the decolonisation debate, with heavily contested objects within the collection, including the Parthenon Marbles and Benin Bronzes referenced extensively in decolonisation and restitution discussions. Amidst mounting pressure, the British Museum has engaged in multiple ways with these debates.11 Several pages on the British Museum website are dedicated to contested objects within its ‘Explore the collection’,12 and minutes from repatriation debates are available, including requests for the repatriation of human remains collected from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, which were denied due to a lack of evidence13. A particular example on the British Museum website is an Aboriginal bark and red mangrove wood shield, likely collected from coastal Northern New South Wales in the later eighteenth or early nineteenth centuries14. The museum website discusses requests for the wood shield to be returned by Aboriginal community members, acknowledging the significance of the shield in relation to Australia’s colonial past,
Spear Points made from stone, glass and ceramic insulators from telegraph poles, c. 1855-1940, Kimberley region, Australia. © The Trustees of the British Museum.
but states that the museum would consider ‘lending the shield again’, rather than repatriate, in order to engage with the wishes of ‘some communities’ to have the object on display ‘closer to their originating community.’15 This stance reflects a broader trend within the engagement of the British Museum with requests for repatriation. While some human remains have been returned, the museum appears to be encouraging engagement and research of the colonial implications of objects within its collection, rather than an outright return of said contested objects. As truly decolonising the British Museum would require a complete disintegration of the institution, not returning objects maintains the hegemony of the British museum over these pieces, and over the decolonisation debate, as well as preventing a true restructure of the museum institution. The British Museum, however, has in recent years engaged with the histories of its colonies through the installation of large scale exhibitions.16 Additionally, groups and symposiums appointed by the institution, including the Global, Local, and Imperial Histories Research Group, engage with academics, museum professionals, communities and other individuals to internally examine methods of decolonisation.17 Giblin, Ramos and Grout discuss the installation of exhibitions aimed at exploring cultures and examining colonial histories, most notably Indigenous Australia: Enduring Civilisation (2015) and South Africa: The Art of a Nation (2016). Indigenous Australia was curated by Gaye Sculthorpe, who herself is of Indigenous Tasmanian heritage, although Giblin, Ramos and Grout criticise the curation of South Africa by three white, non-South African curators, as well as its focus on South Africa, a country largely carved up by European powers, rather than on Southern African ethnic groups or regions.18 Therefore, while the British museums continues to engage with debates surrounding decolonizing the museum,
most notably through research and the curation of major exhibitions analysing colonial narratives, the institution lacks any incentive to properly restructure. As the institution was established on colonial values, in order to properly decolonise it must dismantle these values. While efforts to research and present the collection from the perspectives of the peoples these objects originate from can aid in dismantling the colonial notions of the ‘other’ and of ‘curiosities’, the present system of lending objects maintains the institution’s control over collections that contributed, and were collected as a result of, colonial processes and violence.
The Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford has a similar history to the British Museum. Established as an archaeological and anthropological collection in 1884, the initial donation of 22,000 objects to the University of Oxford by Augustus Pitt Rivers has since grown to a collection of over 500,000. The collection maintains close ties with the University, with many of its curators and researches also working within the Oxford Archaeological and Anthropological schools. Pitt Rivers Museum has publicly addressed its place as a ‘contested space that calls for innovative curation to engage with more difficult aspects of its history,19 and has taken several steps to engage with its own history and collection, as well as within broader debates around decolonisation and restitution. Dan Hicks, Professor of Contemporary Archaeology at the University of Oxford, and curator at the Pitt Rivers Museum, published The Brutish Museums in 2020, discussing restitution and colonial violence in relation to the Benin Bronzes, a contested object within the British Museum collection.20 Rivers 20172022 strategic plan21 lists several plans of action that relate to the practice of The Pitt decolonising what is an incredibly diverse collection of anthropological and ethnographic objects. These steps include ‘mending… historically difficult relationships… including reconnecting objects with originating communities’, a review of materials from an ethical perspective, an increased access to, and mobility of, collections, and ‘strategic alliances’ with other disciplines, both within and outside the University of Oxford, including postcolonial studies, politics, and engagement with the communities of which objects within the collection originate.22 In July 2020, during a period of closure due to the Covid-19 Pandemic, the Pitt Rivers Museum removed from display all known objects containing human remains. A total of 123 objects were removed, including the famous Shrunken Heads (tsantsa), which were a major drawcard for visitors. The removal of the Shrunken Heads/Tsantsa, which had the potential to lower visitor numbers, can be interpreted as a conscious and physical attempt to enforce de-colonial processes within the museum walls. A statement on the Pitt Rivers website maintains that human remains were collected ‘as a way of supporting academic arguments at the time, that ranked some societies as savage and others as civilised. The measurement of bodies… was used to uphold racist and sexist beliefs… our audience research has shown that visitors often understood the Museum’s displays of human remains as a testament to other cultures being ‘savage’, ‘primitive’ or ‘gruesome’. Rather than enabling our visitors to reach a deeper understanding of each other, the displays reinforced racist stereotypes. By removing human remains from display we seek to show our respect for the communities around the world with whom we work.’23 In this case, Pitt Rivers internally analysed its own contributions to ongoing practices of colonial thinking, and, in the process of decolonisation, decided to remove objects that maintained colonial ways of thinking among museum visitors. The museum has also stated that the process is not complete, and with ongoing research and community engagement they
“Unsettled”. Exhibition at the Australian Museum, Sydney, curated by Laura McBride and Mariko Smith, on view until 27 January 2022. https://australian.museum/exhibition/unsettled/
may remove further objects. Although established as an anthropological and ethnographic collection of objects collected during the colonial period as a means of enforcing ‘otherness’ and ‘savagery’, the institution has taken considerable steps to identify problematic aspects within its own history, and its own engagement with visitors. Upon conducting internal examinations, the institution has identified problematic aspects of its collections and displays, and has taken the physical step of removing objects as part of the decolonisation process. Although it appears the objects are still within the Pitt Rivers collection, just no longer on display,24 the main concern addressed was the maintenance of the notion of the ‘savage’ to visitors.25 Laura van Broekhoven, director of Pitt Rivers, has stated that in discussions with descendants of Amazonian tribespeople, they have been glad to have a representation of their cultures on display.26 Pitt Rivers has previously repatriated Maori remains,27 and hence the decision to remove the Tsantsas from display comes as an effort to confront the museums role in maintaining colonial views of the ‘other’ within the modern British population. As the decision is recent, whether this is an effective means of combating museum visitors ideas of the ‘other’ and the ‘savage’, as opposed to maintaining display of the objects and instead using them as a point of education, is still unknown, however their removal, and accompanying statement by Pitt Rivers, has garnered considerable public and media attention, prompting discussions both within and outside the museum walls.
The final institution I will discuss is the Australian Museum, and more specifically its Unsettled exhibition, which opened in winter 2021. The Australian Museum, previously known as the Sydney or Colonial Museum, was established in Darlinghurst in 1827. Initially a natural history museum, the institution houses over 21 million ‘natural and cultural objects’.28 Its establishment as a Colonial institution in the early years of the Sydney Colony established European cultural values on Indigenous land, its collection maintaining ideas of ‘the other’ and European superiority, contributing to the processes of settler colonialism in Australia. In 2018, the Australian Museum commissioned an exhibition examining the significance of the Endeavour Voyage, 250 years after it occurred, from an Indigenous perspective.29 Laura McBride, a Wailwan and Kooma woman, and First Nations Director and Curator for the Australian Museum, discussed the process of creating Unsettled, stating that ‘First Nations peoples did not want another show about Cook; he was but a small footnote in a more expansive history. Instead, we were asked to take the opportunity for a long overdue truth-telling about our shared past.’30 McBride details a long process of discussion and engagement with different Indigenous communities, leading to the development of the three ‘highest-ranking categories for possible exhibition topics: ‘colonisation and its effects, Australia’s origins and foundation, and addressing the false, constructed history that is pervasively shared in society.’ The most common specific responses were: truth, truth-telling, invasions, wars, massacres, genocide, assimilation, dispossession, resistance, resilience, and survival.’31 McBride also discusses the importance of truth-telling, and grieving, as a means of healing, and the importance of addressing ‘historic inequities’ as a means of closing the gap between Indigenous and non- Indigenous Australians.32 The resulting exhibition, available for digital viewing on the Australian Museum website due to Covid-19 lockdowns,33 is an impactful exploration of Indigenous culture, the ongoing effects of Cook’s Endeavour voyage, and broader colonisation and its impacts on Indigenous cultures. The exhibition begins with a Bill Day poem, addressing a lack of education of
Indigenous history within white education systems,34 and as the viewer moves through the space, they are encouraged to engage with the legacy of Cook as a means of journeying toward a better future. The exhibition combines artefacts and documents with contemporary art, soundscapes and film. It directly confronts popular misconceptions, including Cook as the first European to ‘discover’ Australia, and emphasises the often understated role of Joseph Banks in the establishment of the Sydney Colony. A large sign states that ‘Australia is the only major Commonwealth country that does not have a treaty with its First Nations peoples’, and several objects engage with the Frontier Wars. Moving through the space, the exhibition engages with the Stolen Generations, missions, and Indigenous deaths in custody. Before leaving, the visitor is encouraged to continue the journey to a shared future by listening to Indigenous peoples, acknowledge their existence on unceded Aboriginal land, to challenge and question beliefs, and support First Nations programs.
Although efforts to decolonize other sections of the Australian Museum are not evident on its website, the curation of an exhibition by an Indigenous curator, considering a vast array of Indigenous perspectives, that challenges common views of the Cook landing and its subsequent effects, is a significant step in decolonizing the Australian Museum. The exhibition is aimed at non- Indigenous Australians, with the intent of confronting the past in order to move towards a better future. Viewing Unsettled online, the exhibition is impactful and engaging, and the extensive process of engagement with Indigenous voices prior to installation provides an important step in the decolonisation process. Although the Australian Museum, as an institution, sits on unceded land, and historically was engaged with much of settler-colonial history, Unsettled confronts this. The exhibition provides a step in the decolonisation process, which will hopefully be continued in other spaces within the Australian Museum.
The role of the museum as a central institution in colonial processes is a role that is constantly being debated, contested, and analysed, both within museum institutions and in broader public discourse. As the process of decolonising the museum is ongoing, institutions have engaged with the task in different ways. Measures taken by the British Museum to research objects, loan items to communities (that often want them returned), and set up large scale exhibitions that engage with the stories and cultures of items in their collections, as well as engaging with colonial themes, protect the British Museums hegemony over often stolen objects, while engaging somewhat with the decolonial process.
The Pitt Rivers Museum, despite a very similar role in enforcing colonial stereotypes, has taken more direct action, actively analysing its own role in contributing to harmful practices and stereotypes, and hence making efforts to engage with communities and remove harmful objects, and appears to be open to ongoing conversations.
Lastly the Australian Museum, through its exhibition Unsettled, has contributed to decolonising the museum through the display of a traditionally European Australian story from an Indigenous narrative, however, currently the process needs to extend beyond a single exhibition and into the whole museum. The museum is a Western institution that upholds Western values rooted in Empire, racism and the dispossession of Indigenous lands, and in order to truly decolonise, institutions need to critically analyse their own roles within this history, and make efforts to directly confront and dismantle these values.
Endnotes 1. John Giblin, Imma Ramos, and Nikki Grout. “Dismantling the Master’s House: Thoughts on Representing Empire and
Decolonising Museums and Public Spaces in Practice An
Introduction,” Third Text 33, no. 4-5 (2019) pp. 471. 2. Ibid, pp. 880. 3. Dan Hicks, The Brutish Museums: The Benin Bonzes, Colonial
Violence and Cultural Restitution (London: Pluto Press, 2020), pp. 46. 4. British Museum Website, accessed from: https://www. britishmuseum.org/collection. 5. “History,” British Museum Website, accessed: https://www. britishmuseum.org/about-us/british-museum-story/history. 6. Ibid. 7. Claire Smith, “Decolonising the Museum: The National Museum of the American Indian in Washington, D.C,” Antiquity 79, no. 304 (2005): pp. 424. 8. “The Baudin Expedition in Australian waters (1801-1803): the faunal legacy,” Western Australian Museum, 2018, accessed: https://museum.wa.gov.au/fc/aos/dj. 9. Smith, “Decolonising the Museum,” pp. 424. 10. Hicks, The Brutish Museums. 11. Giblin, “Dismantling the Master’s House,” pp. 472-78. 12. “Contested Objects Collection,” British Museum, Accessed from: https://www.britishmuseum.org/about-us/british-museumstory/contested-objects-collection. 13. “Request for the repatriation of human remains to the Torres
Strait Islands, Australia,” British Museum, https://www. britishmuseum.org/our-work/departments/human-remains/ request-repatriation-human-remains-torres-strait-islands. 14. “Early Shield From New South Wales,” British Museum Website, https://www.britishmuseum.org/about-us/british-museum-story/ contested-objects-collection/early-shield-australia. 15. Ibid. 16. Giblin, “Dismantling the Master’s House,” pp. 471–86. 17. Giblin, “Dismantling the Master’s House,” pp. 472. 18. Giblin, “Dismantling the Master’s House,” pp. 476. 19. “Human Remains at Pitt Rivers Museum,” Accessed from https://www.prm.ox.ac.uk/human-remains-pitt-rivers-museum. 20. Hicks, The British Museums. 21. Accessed from: https://www.prm.ox.ac.uk/files/ prmstrategicplan2017-22-foronlineuse-singlepages-ilovepdfcompressedpdf 22. Ibid. 23. Ibid. 24. Ibid. 25. Ibid. 26. Dave Gilyeat, “Pitt Rivers: The museum that’s returning the dead,” BBC, 29 January 2019, accessed https://www.bbc.com/ news/uk-england-oxfordshire-45565784. 27. Ibid. 28. “About,” Australian Museum, https://australian.museum/about/ organisation/. 29. Laura McBride, “Unsettled”, 2021 https://australian.museum/ learn/first-nations/unsettled. 30. Ibid. 31. Ibid. 32. Ibid. 33. “Unsettled,” Curated by Laura McBride, 2021, online viewing available at: https://australian.museum/learn/first-nations/ unsettled. 34. Ibid.
Bibliography Australian Museum, “The Museums Early Days,” 15.07,2020, accessed: https://australian.museum/about/history/. British Museum, “Request for repatriation of human remains to the
Torres Strait Islands,” British Museum, 2011, https://www. britishmuseum.org/our-work/departments/human-remains/ request-repatriation-human-remains-torres-strait-islands. Hicks, Dan. “Decolonising museums isn’t part of a ‘culture war’. It’s about keeping them relevant,” The Guardian, 7 May 2021 Giblin, John, Imma Ramos, and Nikki Grout. “Dismantling the
Master’s House: Thoughts on Representing Empire and
Decolonising Museums and Public Spaces in Practice An
Introduction.” Third Text 33, no. 4-5 (2019): 471–86. Pitt Rivers Museum, “Human Remains in the Pitt Rivers Museum,” accessed https:// www.prm.ox.ac.uk/human-remains-pitt-riversmuseum. Pitt Rivers Museum, “Strategic Plan 2017-2022,” accessed https:// www.prm.ox.ac.uk/files/prmstrategicplan2017-22-foronlineusesinglepages-ilovepdf-compressedpdf. Smith, Claire. “Decolonising the Museum: The National Museum of the American Indian in Washington, DC.” Antiquity 79, no. 304 (2005): 424–39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00114206. Unsettled, 2021, Curated by Laura McBride, Australian Museum accessed: https://australian.museum/learn/first-nations/ unsettled.
