I think we need to question this idea that encyclopedic museums are universal and somehow “neutral institutions”. Can we address the particular social political and financial context that set the stage for how these institutions emerged?
Agreed. Museums themselves were founded on the theft of objects. If the cultures they were taken from still had them, how would the cultural wealth of these non European cultures have preceded?
I think something that is missing from this debate is the fact that many times now when objects are repatriated, cultures are actually asking that museums continue to care for the artifacts when they do not have proper care facilities. Repatriation does not mean that museums will be emptied of their art, rather that cultures will have the option to access the objects when they choose.
Let’s face it, this would not be a debate if what had been stolen was from Europe by countries in the global south.
I think we need to question this idea that encyclopedic museums are universal and somehow “neutral institutions”. Can we address the particular social political and financial context that set the stage for how these institutions emerged?
Agreed. Museums themselves were founded on the theft of objects. If the cultures they were taken from still had them, how would the cultural wealth of these non European cultures have preceded?
What about the fact that it's a simple debate. You don't take what belongs to someone else. Stealing is stealing. An age old concept.
I think something that is missing from this debate is the fact that many times now when objects are repatriated, cultures are actually asking that museums continue to care for the artifacts when they do not have proper care facilities. Repatriation does not mean that museums will be emptied of their art, rather that cultures will have the option to access the objects when they choose.
Let’s face it, this would not be a debate if what had been stolen was from Europe by countries in the global south.