|
by Elizabeth Lominska Johnson
As museum and archives professionals, we are in the position of having responsibility for materials created and used by other people. During the time that I have worked in the area I have seen our relationship with these materials change from one in which the materials were seen to be in our custody, to be managed according to the rules and ethics of our professions, to one in which our role is seen increasingly as one of trusteeship. We legally own the physical objects or records, but we do not own the rights to the ritual or spiritual properties that they may embody. These rights are retained by the people from whom they came.
In preserving these materials, and giving access to them, we are accountable to those peoples. This applies especially to First Nations objects and records. As the Museum of Anthropology has world-wide collections, the principle of accountability can also be seen as applying internationally to other indigenous peoples. Our changing professional ethics are being developed in consultation with originating peoples, and in response to their expressed wishes.
As a museum that also has a small archives, we are constantly having to make decisions as to how our holdings should be housed, preserved, and made accessible. As time goes on, we learn that some are culturally sensitive, and need special ritual care. They may be subject to restrictions as to who can see or handle them, and under what circumstances. This applies not only to certain types of objects, such as ceremonial masks, but also may apply to photographs of sacred objects or ceremonies, or of objects that represent hereditary rights, such as totem poles. We are now limiting commercial photography of the totem poles in the museum's Great Hall, for example. Restrictions could also apply to showing photographs of certain people or situations. In some cultures it may be inappropriate to show publicly a photograph of a deceased person, except in the context of a ceremony commemorating that person. When two women from Musqueam did an exhibit at the Museum of Anthropology of photographs from their community, they had to seek advice from elders on the question. Sound recordings may also be subject to restrictions. In our archives we have tapes of Northwest Coast songs that almost certainly should be heard only in a ceremonial context, by the people who have the right to do so.
In our decision-making we are guided by our discussions with originating peoples, and by the principles set out in the document: Turning the Page: Forging New Partnerships.
"Between Museums and First Peoples." This document was produced in 1992 by the Assembly of First Nations and the Canadian Museums Association, after a series of regional and national meetings between representatives of both groups. When the Task Force first met, they identified these three issues or concerns:
* increased involvement of Aboriginal peoples in the interpretation of their culture and history by cultural institutions;
* improved access to museum collections by Aboriginal peoples; these include "not only human remains and artifacts, but also information associated with these materials: research results, photographs, works of art, and any other information related to First Peoples culture and history held in cultural institutions."
* the repatriation of artifacts and human remains.
Among the guiding principles the Task Force report articulates are the following:
* that museums and First Peoples will work together to correct past inequities in their relationship, and that the desire and authority of First Peoples to speak for themselves should be recognized;
* working in an equal partnership entails respect for First Peoples' knowledge and approaches, as well as for the knowledge and approaches of academically-trained workers;
* that First Peoples and museums have a shared interest in the cultural materials of the past;
* that First Peoples and museums must accept the philosophy of co-management and co-responsibility as the ethical basis for principles and procedures relating to Aboriginal collections, and
* that appropriate representatives of First Peoples will be involved as equal partners in any exhibition or programme concerning their language, heritage, or culture.
During the past ten years we have taken various steps to try to implement these principles in our daily practice. We have also developed policy and procedures documents, based on our ongoing experience, concerning repatriation, access and restrictions with regard to photographs, and the care of culturally sensitive objects. These documents evolve as we learn. They are made available to anyone who would like to see them.
Although these guiding principles have been articulated, we also have to recognize the diversity of the peoples from whom our holdings have come, and the fact that there may not be unanimity between groups or within any one group as to what kinds of materials are sensitive and how objects or photographs should be interpreted. We were recently assured by a group of local Tibetan-Canadians that there is no problem with displaying Tibetan religious objects made of human bones, for example, whereas other groups objected strongly to the display of human remains. Each situation has to be negotiated, and written agreements may be drawn up to ensure that mutual agreement has been reached.
There are various ways that we are trying to improve access to our holdings. With regard to the artifact collections, the Museum of Anthropology has had a visible storage system since 1976. About half the collections, 15,000 objects, are on view in this gallery with their documentation. Some have been covered, removed or displayed in particular groupings or relationships because of their sacred nature or other restrictions. We are presently changing the display of Buddha images from Southeast Asia, following advice from knowledgeable people that they should not have other objects placed above them, or be in the same display case as weapons. In addition to the visible storage system, our collections documentation database is also nationally accessible through this CHIN system, as are the records of most major museum collections in Canada. This will end, tragically, because of withdrawal of federal government support at the end of this year. The database will become publicly accessible but because financial support for museums' participation has been withdrawn, we are having to move to commercial systems and standardization will be lost. Until now Canada has been a leader in this field but we are now reversing this direction just when archives in Canada, and museums in other countries, are moving forward towards national standards.
We are often approached by First Nations individuals and groups who are trying to locate their regalia, photographs or recordings of songs or stories. For some time we have hoped to be able to take more initiative in informing people that we hold materials from their communities. To help us with this process, we were fortunate to receive a Museum Assistance Programme Collections Documentation and Research grant. This is enabling us to improve the ownership and acquisitions information on our collections, particularly those from First Nations, so that we have more complete and accurate information identifying their communities and families of origin entered onto our database. In the second half of the grant we are hiring someone with First Nations cultural knowledge to facilitate communication between the museum and the peoples from whom our collections came. This may help us in maintaining culturally appropriate care for the materials, as well as improving the information we have about them. It may also lead to more requests for repatriation, but so far we have had very few. Contemporary technology is now enabling museums and archives to give widespread access to their holdings, by allowing the dissemination of images and information over the Internet and through CD-ROM. We support this in principle, but are approaching it with caution because of concern for the rights of the people who are represented through their objects or images. Some of our students are doing Internet exhibits, which have the value of being flexible and adaptable as feedback is received. We are exploring the potential of the new technologies and participating in an experimental imaging project, but do not want to proceed with widespread dissemination of images of our holdings without consultation. We need the agreement and participation of the people represented. On the other hand, new technologies may provide us with one way of providing information on our collections to their communities of origin.
The principle of working as equal partners may prevent us from speeding onto the information highway, but as we use these new technologies it will remind us to try to do so cooperatively, in appropriate and respectful ways.
1 Paper presented at the annual conference of the Archives Association of British Columbia for the session "Archives and the Heritage Continuum," Vancouver, B.C., 25 April 1997.
Elizabeth Johnson is the Curator of Ethnology / Documentation at UBC's Museum of Anthropology.
Reprinted from the AABC Newsletter, Fall 1997, Vol. 7, No. 4.
© 1997 Archives Association of British Columbia