Week 4

 This week, we looked into various issues with accessibility and inclusion for museum visitors. The further I researched, the more I became invested in the colonialism aspect of visiting these museums. Someone coming from another culture seeing their own peoples work on display taken away from them, that they had to pay money to see, is rather ridiculous. While it is ridiculous, there are several issues that arise from bringing back artifacts to their native people. Some people find looking at a picture of the artifact, simply viewing a model, or even viewing a handmade duplicate, to loose the "aura" of the original piece. This, is ridiculous and extremely selfish. In the words of Perus Vice Minister for Culture, Luis Jaime Castillo Butters, “Now, what was before a sign of power is a sign of weakness.”(Donadio, Vision of Home 2014) People cannot let go of their colonialist heritage,  and it shows. Certain museums, such at the University of Yale, have simply given some of their artifacts back.(Donadio, Vision of Home 2014). Although I could not find an example, I would be extremely curious as to what people have replaced the pieces with or how much backlash museums have gotten for returning said artifacts. Another common argument is that the country of origin has died since the time colonizers took their work. Typically, the pieces can be simply returned to their country of origin as opposed to the individual tribe itself, as it the case with Peru and Yale.(Donadio, Vision of Home 2014). The piece is a part of the countries history, and will naturally be treated with respect in the space it is kept. Another common complaint is that the artifact won't be viewable in the country any more and will remove access. Though it was never the museums to keep. In fact museums typically take artifacts from people who steal them, such is the case in Italy in 2018, where smugglers were attempting to take artifacts worth 47 million dollars to various collectors (Finders, But Not Keepers: The Controversies of Cultural Heritage and Ownership 2018). This is exactly why bigger museums need to set an example, so that the pieces can go back to were they safely belong.



Finders, But Not Keepers: The Controversies of Cultural Heritage and Ownership. (2018, August 21). Retrieved September 18, 2020, from https://globalheritagefund.org/2018/08/21/finders-but-not-keepers-the-controversies-of-cultural-heritage-and-ownership/

Donadio, R. (2014, April 17). Vision of Home. Retrieved September 18, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/arts/design/repatriated-works-back-in-their-countries-of-origin.html

Comments

  1. India ASeptember 19, 2020 at 4:46 PM

    Hello Nathan! You have a lot of great points in your article. I remember learning a lot about issues like this in Art History 2. There are many museums, especially in the UK that have museums full of artifacts from other cultures that were stolen in the past. There are a lot of important culturally specific pieces that are key elements to their religion, to their culture, or family possessions. These items were wrongfully taken in the past and as you said, put in the museums for people of that background to pay to see what was taken from them. What do you think museums could do to make these things right? How could these things be returned yet still studied and be shown? Do you think they should be shown?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Shannon McLellandSeptember 20, 2020 at 9:59 PM

    Hi Nathan!
    I really liked how you included the fact that the moral thing to do is return the artifacts even if the civilization is gone because it is still a part of their heritage. Do you think that museums could come up with a way to either circulate the items? Or to have a proposal of certain terms with other museums and institutions of that culture where the access to these pieces would not be 'cut off'?? I would like to see more in depth examination of your points to hear more about your opinions.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Labor

  Racism and sexism are things we've been told are bad since we were children. Yet, did this solve the problem of racism and sexism? No, of course not. Everyone whether they realize it or not, grows up with a bias know as, well, implicit bias. This is why it is important to listen to minority staff members when they express concern over their treatment in the museum and recognize how they treat people who they may have biases towards. Yet how does one recognize this bias? In the article by Jennifer Edgoose, Michelle Quiogue, and Kartik Sidhar, they describe removing implicit bias as "[...] discovering your blind spots and then actively working to dismiss stereotypes and attitudes that affect your interactions" (Sidhar, 2019). Educating or exposing yourself voluntarily yourself on one particular group can remove bias. One thing that they do not bring up that would be a crucial step to finding bias is to think of the area you grew up in and how they treated out...
Read more

Week 3: Audience Research

Image
 This week, the reading allowed us to go more in depth with how museums are tackling diversity. The two pieces I chose to read were "Your Label Makes Me Feel Stupid" by Gail Gregg and "Developing an Inclusive Tour" from the Minneapolis Institute of Art. "Your Label Makes Me Feel Stupid" discusses changing the way we describe art so that others may make their own judgements about the piece and when it was made as opposed to providing technical jargon that the average museum goer may not understand. In the article, the piece 15 April 1962 by Frank Lobdell is discussed as its description changes from “A tightly coiled form struggles against the confines of the canvas. Thick paint, hot colors, hard lines, and a gouged surface reinforce the sense of uneasiness. They express the artist’s view of the human condition as a struggle for meaning and dignity.”(Gregg, "Your Labels Make Me Feel Stupid" 2010) to “The horrors of Frank Lobdell’s firsthand exp...
Read more

Week 7

Image
 This week we covered controversial exhibits, and there is none more controversial in the field of animation than Ralph Baskshi. Ralph Baskshi has created extremely controversial animations that cover themes of race and oppression. He also made Cool World ,one of the first big budget adult animated movies of the western 21st century.   A background painting from “Cool World. (© Bakshi Productions, Inc.) His work is technically phenomenal,  though the more offensive pieces are difficult to explain to modern sensibilities as his views on race in "Coonskins" and "Fritz the Cat" are controversial. The portrayal of the black characters in his films are stereotypes, though their purpose in the story is to speak to how people misunderstand black people. Though Ralph Baskshi is white, he grew up in Brooklyn which also explains why he has certain views on black people that other white people might find offensive ( "Brownsville") . His animated pieces are typically ...
Read more