Museological Representation of Aboriginal Culture in Canada, Essay Example

One pressing issue in socio-cultural anthropology within the context of modernity is the so-called crisis of representation ironically undermines the foundations upon which the discipline itself was constructed upon: the authority granted to the anthropologist—and by connection, the museum curator—to examine, assess, and interpret so-called cultural Others. Many considerations must be taken into account in order to effectively and authentically represent the cultural heritage of an Aboriginal community without objectifying indigenous peoples and rendering them subaltern. In the past, museums and other cultural institutions have categorized the ancestral remains as “scientific artifacts,” which thereby commoditizes the remains as specimens of scientific study and thus ignores the cultural significance of indigenous traditions. Such a reduction of Aboriginal culture and remains to scientific objects of study signifies how institutional violence via cultural display, academic research, and knowledge production by the hegemonic, institutional powers has objectified aboriginal people into the present day and positioned them as helpless, passive, subaltern subjects.  While having access to visual and oral material culture is significant for the representation of cultural heritage, cultural continuity, and cultural renewal, the western conception of aboriginal cultural heritage centers on objectifying indigenous artifacts that are central to aboriginal culture. Thus, museums must take into account the constitutional rights of aboriginal communities when representing their cultural heritage. The practice of repatriation is central for shaping the contours of museum representation, so considerations of what aboriginal material culture the Crown purportedly owns is of paramount importance and thus what government-funded institutions, agencies, and museums possess. Members of aboriginal communities must be involved in both museum initiatives and processes with regards to public education programming, governance, interpretation, training and employment, and access to the various collections. Indeed, the collection of mandate within various museums must be unique in nature in order to effectively negotiate the authentic representation of aboriginal cultural heritage and the commoditization of indigenous culture in a way than has hitherto rendered it subaltern.

Society has become unequivocally postmodern as profound societal changes have been wrought and have thus impacted the scope and nature of anthropology as an academic discipline. The methodology of anthropological and ethnographic practices have shifted away from so-called participant observation towards a more interactive, dynamic approach and technique.  As such, ethnographers who study non-Western societies within the context of modernity no longer occupy the dual roles of author and observer. Rather, cultures being considered have garnered the agency to articulate their own narrative within the ethnographic museum, as the curator no longer occupies the role of guardian and interpreter of aboriginal cultures. Spheres of accurate representation and mutual interests must be developed in order to effectively portray the cultural heritage of aboriginal communities. The notion that museums retain the duty for accurately interpreting the past indeed resonates with ideas of veracity and authority. As a result, all museological interpretations are assumed to be irrefutably legitimate and authentic representations of various cultures. However, this statement omits the notions of cooperation and partnerships with other cultural agencies and organizations that are central to how cultural heritage should be interpreted. Museums thus cannot deny the value of contemporary aboriginal cultures through such exclusionary policy. Museums as cultural institutions have historically been viewed as unaccountable to and autonomous of the aboriginal cultures they purportedly represented in an authentic fashion. Canadian museums must continue to evolve and develop in various arenas in order to remain legitimate within a multicultural, post-colonial world. The “Spirit Sings: Authentic Traditions of Canada’ s First Peoples” exhibition, which was held in 1988 at Communications Canada, underscored the necessity to bolster the interaction between Aboriginal communities and museums. Aboriginal peoples need to seize control over how their own cultures are represented in order to enhance the authenticity of the narrative visually articulated in museum exhibitions.

References

Ames, M.M. (1999). How to decorate a house: the re-negotiation of cultural representations at the University of British Columbia Museum of Anthropology. Museum Anthropology, 22 (3), 41-51.
Hedlund, A.L. (1994). Speaking for or about others? Evolving ethnological perspectives, Museum of Anthropology 18 (3), 32-43.