Museum of Differences: A Tale of Another History

1

M

u

s

e

u

m

of D i f f e r e n c e s : A T

a

l

e

of A

n

o

t

h

e

r

H

i

s

t

o

r

y

Museum of Differences: A Tale of Another History Thesis Submitted to Post Graduate School of the Sandberg Institute in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Master of Design by Matthias Dolder Graduate Program Applied Art aka The Dirty Art Department Sandberg Institute Amsterdam, the Netherlands August 2012

COLOPHON Museum of Differences: A Tale of Another History Graphic Design Lu Liang Editors Kasandra Vartell and Billy Nolan Thanks to Kasandra for her precious help while writing and Lilly for supporting me Graduate Program The Dirty Art Department Sandberg Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands Head of department Jerszy Seymour Theory tutor and co-director-course Catherine Geel © Matthias Dolder, July 2012 Sandberg Institute, Amsterdam Masters Rietveld Academy Fred. Roeskestraat 98 1076 ED Amsterdam IMAGE CREDITS Jardin d’Acclimatation, 2012 Photography by Ernst van Deursen © Dirty Art Dept. Sandberg Institute Beauty and the Beast, 2012 Jardin d’Acclimatation, 2012 Tropen Action, 2011 Memories on Display, 2012 © Matthias Dolder

Jon Rafman, 630 St Clair Ave W, Toronto, Canada, 2009, Google Street View Picture Courtesy of Jon Rafman

TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE p.11 INTRODUCTION p.15 1.

THE CENTER From Authority To Uncertainty p.24 2.

ANOTHER HISTORY Inside The Frame p.32 Singular Narratives p.36 Beauty And The Beast p.42 Local Realities p.48 Jardin D’acclimatation p.50 Pl.Minorities p.63

3.

DIFFERENCES AS A TOOL

5.

MUSEUM OF DIFFERENCES Open Definition p.70

4.

CARTOGRAPHY OF CATEGORIES

Disruptive Discourse p.126 AFTERWORD Contemporary Art: A Recipe? p.132

Plurality Of Approaches p.80

“Behind The Mask Of Modernity” p.139

The Collector p.84 Critical Dialogue p.86 Tropen Action p.92 Platform Of Possibilities p.99 Subjective Categories p.107 Memories On Display p.110 Authentic Fiction p.118

REFERENCES p.157 BIBLIOGRAPHY p.158

PREFACE This thesis is written from the perspective of an artist, where the thinking process is closely related to the making, and both have equal importance. The theory needs to be experienced or applied to be validated. The paper follows academic rules, but subjective choices have been made in the use of references. From a selected bibliography a few authors were deliberately focused on in order to support the writing and reinforce the arguments. The thesis developed into a manifesto, as a reaction to what exists in theory, opposed to what was experienced in reality and the gap that existed between the two.

The resulting feeling of frustration pushed the formulation of strong statements, with the intention to provoke reactions that would turn into a dialogue.

“It is the question of how do we deal with complexity. Within the existing or dominant computing paradigm, in order to deal with a complex problem, we break down the problem into smaller, more manageable parts. This is essentially the Cartesian Method. But it is impossible to apply the Cartesian Method to quantum-mechanical generalized complementarities like the wave-particle duality or the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Whereas the Cartesian Method may work for mechanical systems, it cannot be of much use when we aspire to the understanding or creation of something that is living. The more correct approach that would correspond to a breakthrough into twenty-first century science would be to identify relationships of similarity, to find samples or patterns that capture something of the vitality and complexity of the whole without breaking it down in a reductionist way.� —Alan Shapiro1

“The work of reconstituting a new modernity whose strategic task would be to strive for the dissolution of postmodernism - entails first of all inventing a theoretical tool with which to combat everything in postmodern thought that in practice supports the trends toward standardization inherent in globalization. It is a matter of identifying what is valuable and extracting it from binary and hierarchical schemes of yesterday’s modernism, as well as from regressive fundamentalism of all sorts. It is a matter of opening up an aesthetic and intellectual region in which contemporary work might be judged according to the same criteria -in brief, a space of discussion.”

—Nicolas Bourriaud2

I nt r o d u c t i o n

16

Museum of Differences

The Museum of Differences is a theoretical tool that would act as a filter to address the role of the ethnographic museum in the 21st century and create a changing setting within an existing institution. The concept is to use what is in the museum, pass the elements through the Museum of Differences, and re-inject them into the existing frame. The main purpose is to release the ethnographic museum from its outdated role by presenting it as a new platform. The Museum of Differences is not a physical space but a moment outside of a frame where it is possible to think differently, where unconventional ideas can emerge and be applied to existing ethnographic museums.

Through observations of established institutions, mainly in Switzerland and the Netherlands, critical ideas have been formulated on the subject. The Museum of Differences combines academic dissertations on the subject, which remain on paper, with proposals to be applied to collections of ethnographic museums.3

Contemporary art work, including personal projects, will be used to represent possible outcomes. At the core of this thesis there are two main questions: Can the collection of an ethnographic museum be used to confront the institution’s colonial legacy and can the introduction of new keywords re-contextualize the collection into other narratives?

Ethnographic museums are clearly a prod-

A Tale of Another History

17

uct of Western society. They represent a direct heritage from colonial pasts where domination, control and classification of nature and cultures were common attitudes. The primary element of these museums is the collection of objects which have been removed from their function for the purpose of preservation. Their original use is no longer part of a shared knowledge, as they are physically and conceptually disconnected from their geographical context. By being in a museum, they become traces of something that was, rather than something that is.

The objects inanimate behind glass showcases.

The reasons why and means by which these objects ended up in the museum are not part of the display. In most cases, information regarding the acquisition of an object and its trajectory into the museum is not shared with the audience. There is a clear distinction between the institution as a context and the context of the origins of the artifacts that are displayed.

In the Museum of Differences, the history of the museum and the history of the exhibited objects overlap.

In an ethnographic museum it is easy to recognize mainstream history, as described in books and taught at school. This history has a clear and strong voice. Presented in an easily understood manner, it is comprised of linear and chronological events related to a single point of view. It has a nationalistic approach concerning the past, as well as a selective memory. Contradictions are avoided and antagonistic positions

18

Museum of Differences

simplified. Everything is defined; all facts are in order. It is clear and reliable.

The Museum of Differences introduces another history into the ethnographic museum; a history of multiple voices and points of view; an oral history, not written but experienced and lived; a history that integrates random facts and events into its narratives and considers fiction part of its reality. Minorities are part of the discourse.

“The stakes are immense. It is a question of rewriting ‘official’ history in favor of plural accounts, and in the process working out the possibility of dialogue among these different versions of history.”4

In such a context, identity is difficult to determine. It could refer to the identity of the object, the creator, or a culture. It could also refer to the museum itself, to the collection, to the collector, or to the curator. How does one deal with this proliferation of identities under the same roof?5 The Museum of Differences proposes to consider identity as something mobile and changing that layers our perception of the nature of objects, peoples, establishments, facts, or even moments, rather than something predefined and rooted in solid ground. No hierarchy is made between shared, personal and constructed identities.6 Although these categories exist, they are assembled to constantly evolve, in order to generate a more

A Tale of Another History

19

complex understanding of ourselves and our surroundings.

Differences are what make us who we are and we should celebrate these differences rather than ignore them. There is no point in creating a center from where the discourse should take form, especially in the context of a museum where the concept of “the others” is related to an ethnocentric position toward unknown societies and cultures.7 This would put Western society at the core, as a referential model.

Instead, we should create a more complex and subtle sense of identity linked to objects and the collection beyond officially organized history.

This could be done by introducing narratives, anecdotes and subjective facts into the institution, in order to diversify established notions of identity. What would be the position of an ethnographic museum if it would adopt a plurality of centers? And what type of discourse would emerge from such a position? These are questions that the Museum of Differences proposes to reflect upon.

The Museum of Differences does not aim to add separations or to introduce moral issues into the institution, but proposes to conciliate opposites in order to loosen control on the outcome of the role of an ethnographic museum.

The idea is to foster a more changing and flexible situation inside the collection. Most important is to create moments of dialogue and to explore possibilities.

20

Museum of Differences

What do such intentions bring? Are they even possible inside the institution? How far could one go in making changes? Would it not be adding problems to an already complicated situation? Is it realistic? These are valuable questions to keep in mind but they should not interfere in the process. Being wrong is another way in which to produce a flow of ideas. ×

A Tale of Another History 1.

Alan N. Shapiro, Gianna Maria Gatti’s The Technological Herbarium [essay on-line]; available from http://www.noemalab. org/sections/ideas/ ideas_articles/shapiro_ technological_herbarium. html; Internet: accessed 10 May 2012.

2.

Nicolas Bourriaud, The Radicant (Lukas & Sternberg, 2010), 26-27.

3.

“We can respect and critically integrate earlier narratives and hypotheses written by anthropologists and experts from the field, just as we need to take on the existing testimonials that originate from the producers and users of these artifacts. But we also need to expand the context of this knowledge by once again taking these extraordinary objects as the starting point and stimulus for contemporary innovation, aesthetic practice, linguistic translation, and even future product design.”

Clementine Deliss, “Stored Code: Remediating Collections in a Post-Ethnographic Museum”, Stedelijk Museum Bureau Amsterdam Newsletter, No124 (Fall 2011).

21

4.

Bourriaud, op. cit. 28.

5. “the characteristics determining who or what a person or thing is”. http://oxforddictionaries. com/definition/english/ identity?q=identity; Internet: accessed 20 July 2012.

6.

Hierarchy meaning “a system in which members of an organization or society are ranked according to relative status or authority, an arrangement or classification of things according to relative importance or inclusiveness”, http://oxforddictionaries. com/definition/english/ hierarchy?q=hierarchy; Internet: accessed 20 July 2012.

7.

The center here is seen as a point from where the things are related, decided and built.

The center is a referential point used to define the rest.

1.

T C

h e

n

e t

e

r

24

Museum of Differences FROM AUTHORITY TO UNCERTAINTY ”Where do you speak from?” critics ask, as if human beings must always stand in the same place and in one place only, and as if single language with which to express themselves. This is the blind spot of postcolonial theory when applied to art: it conceives the individual as definitively assigned to his or her cultural, ethnic, or geographic roots. In doing so, it plays into the hands of the powers that be, which profoundly desire subjects who denounce their own identity, thereby facilitating their statistical classification.” 1

Discourse formulated from a pre-defined center is comprised of discriminatory choices. Automatically, realities that are considered as minor are no longer part of the discourse.

Pushed aside, they are not part of a collective memory. Lost or forgotten from the discursive field of predominant knowledge, their memories only survive in small circles. These situations of exclusion can easily be used by all sorts of fundamentalists to raise a common feeling of injustice and segregation. The center generates a cycle of exclusion and inclusion that paradoxically denies having any involvement in such a process. Like blinders on a horse, it allows hegemonic behavior to continue in a way where separation and selection is tolerated, without having to take any responsibility on the outcome of such attitudes.

A Tale of Another History

25

The Museum of Differences proposes that the center becomes undefined. That it stays empty, or better said, that it remains open to replacement. What is at the center should be temporary. A mirror to reflect, a magnifying glass to unveil, or even an explosion to provoke the viewer, could take place in the center with the common purpose of challenging the audience by avoiding standards and routine in the museum display. Surprise could be used to stimulate the curiosity of the audience. “(...) the self as constructed out of borrowings, citations, and proximities, hence as a pure constructivism.”2

“No objects, no ideas” was the core concept behind an Exhibit organized in 1957 by Richard Hamilton and the members of The Independent Group. The show consisted of colorful panels suspended in space, through which the visitors had to find their own way. Therefore, the experience of the space was different for each viewer. The idea of not showing any artwork was to make the display itself the subject of the show. Choosing to leave the center empty, attention was directed toward the role of the institution as a space that creates meaning.3 (fig. 1 )

The Museum of Innocence in Istanbul, created by the Nobel Prize-winning Turkish author Orhan Pamuku, illustrates another unusual focus point. The particularity of this museum is

26

Museum of Differences

fig. 1 Richard Hamilton, Lawrence Alloway and Victor Pasmore. An Exhibit, 2012, (original exhibition 1957).

Generali Foundation, Vienna, Austria

A Tale of Another History

fig. 2 The Museum of Innocence, novel by Orhan Pamuk translated from Turkish by Maureen Freely.

Knopf 2009, 536 pp.

27

28

Museum of Differences

that it was created simultaneously with a novel.

It honors a work of fiction that comes from an author’s imagination. The objects displayed in the museum are the same as those described in the book. At the center of the museum, there is a book; and at the center of the book, a museum. 4 (fig. 2)

Both examples draw attention to the choices that were made: one by leaving the center empty, consequently drawing attention to the surroundings; the other by giving the same value to the subject and the object, the exhibited items and the place to exhibit.

An abstract center, open to interpretation and re-interpretation, would be more an object for discussion than of discord. In the context of an ethnographic museum, it would unlock the door to an infinite number of possibilities to explore. Many elements could occupy the center and be used as referential points. For example, the historical, conceptual and physical frame of the institution and its inscription into local realities could be one perspective. But also, the use and meaning of the objects displayed, as well as the history and stories to which they relate, could be used as a working frame to generate thoughts that would then be placed at the center of the museum. The final element would be the layers of interpretation and perspectives from which it is possible to look at those different components.

A Tale of Another History

29

As the predominant center dissolves, the Museum of Differences proposes that the center becomes diversified. In this way, what used to be a clear and predefined position will become filled with uncertainty. Outdated concepts of discovery, the unknown, the exotic and “the others” will be used as concepts to work on, with the purpose of creating exhibitions. As a consequence of being undefined, the center will once again be subject to experimentation with innovative displays. The position where the objects are presented, combined with their distinctive attributes, will cause the audience to experience the unfamiliar in their local ethnographic museum.

“If we look at the relation of cultures in this way, then we see them as part of a complex process of ‘minoritarian’ modernity, not simply a polarity of majority and minorities, the center and the periphery.”5 “(...): can we really free ourselves from our roots? That is, can we achieve a position in which we would no longer be dependent on the cultural determinisms, the visual and mental reflexes of the social group in which we were born, the forms and ways of life that are etched in our memories?

Nothing could be less certain.”6 ×

30

Museum of Differences

1.

Bourriaud, op. cit., 34.

2.

Ibid., 27.

3.

Bettina Brunner, “unExhibit”, Frieze.com, http://www.frieze.com/ issue/print_back/ unexhibit/; Internet: accessed 8 August 2012.

4.

Ron Gluckman, “A Nobelist’s Novel Museum”, 12.

Online.wsj.com, http:// online.wsj.com/article/SB 10001424052702304451104 577392024005675152.html; Internet: accessed 10 August 2012.

5.

Homi K. Bhabha, The Location of Culture, (Taylor & Francis, 2004), XX. 6.

Bouriaud, op. cit., 56.

2.

A

n

o

t

h

e

r

H

i

s

t

o

r

y

32

Museum of Differences INSIDE THE FRAME

There is no doubt that a museum is a place of memory, but what kind of memory? It is important to be aware that a museum has a selective memory that preserves a specific history. A museum decides what should or should not be preserved. The knowledge produced by such an institution should be questioned and not seen as being absolute. How can one be curious about what is seen and intrigued by what is said, if it is a dominant discourse that is being represented?

In the context of ethnographic museums, Western history has a strong voice, as these museums were created from their perspective to give “a new life to objects collected as evidence of faraway cultures”.1

During the colonial era, when ethnographic museums began to take shape, European specialists and collectors were the only sources equipped to understand and explain how different cultures functioned. They knew what had value and what should be preserved. Only they had the knowledge to select what would be a part of history.2

Their power was so strong that they invented a specific category, in which artifacts coming from around the world, defined as “primitive art”, could brought together. This category was unrelated to the specificity of the objects, but rather referenced the ongoing

A Tale of Another History

33

process of modernization that European society was undergoing. The term “primitive art” implied that a much simpler society existed in a time prior to our history.3 Progress and expansion were the reasons why this category was created.

“In the centuries before the eighteenth, artifacts from distant lands were licensed to the margins, as wonder-inspiring, exotic, and unclassifiable; in the nineteenth century, they were to be put at the bottom of the evolutionary scale. But in the eighteenth century, they were simply between categories: collections were specialized by then, and distant humans’ artifacts belonged nowhere, for they were neither fine art, nor natural curiosities, nor scientific instruments. It remained for the nineteenth century to find a secure place for these artifacts. That place came prior to time, but to put the primitive prior to time, Europe had first to invent it.”4

Ethnography is now long way away from its hegemonic past and the changes that we can observe outside of the institution, are also happening inside. There is a strong interest to integrate into the museum what was once intentionally omitted.5 Nevertheless, these changes are slow, hesitant and not completely convincing.6 Some reasons can be found in the ambiguous relation that the museum has concerning history, lost somewhere between culpability, responsi-

34

Museum of Differences

bility and nostalgia. The Museum of Differences provides ways to relate an alternative history inside an existing frame, a history that integrates minoritarian perspectives and local realities into the ethnographic museum. ×

A Tale of Another History 1.

Sally Price, “Artistic Replays and Cultural Difference”,to appear in Archive Journal, vol.2 (2012).

2 “The Idea that rescuing material products from societies around the globe and preserving them for posterity in Western-managed settings represented a laudable contribution to Science and Enlightenment went largely unencumbered by concerns about respect for the intentions of their original owners. It essentially gave carte blanche (I repeat: physically and conceptually) to collectors and certified experts in Western countries on the assumption that native peoples would have no understanding or appreciation of the paramount importance of preserving tangible evidence of their “authentic” (i.e., pre-contact) way of life.” Ibid.

3 “It remained for the nineteenth century to find a secure place for these artifacts.

That place came to be prior to time. But to put primitive prior to time, Europe had first to invent it.”

Shelly Errington, The Death of Authentic Primitive Art and Other Tales of Progress, (University of California Press, 1998), 12.

35

4 Ibid., 12 5 “(...), decolonization and immigration patterns contributed to invigorated identitarian politics, and thus a more vocal participation by native voices in debates about the collection and exhibition of material culture. It became increasingly clear that the people whose lives were being featured in ethnographic exhibits were quite capable of explaining their history, their cultural practices, their artistic traditions, and more in their own way, without always having to pass through the intervention of Western interlocutors.” Price, op. cit.

6 “But how widespread has this move toward recognition of the value and legitimacy of native voices become?

My recent exploration of the French museum world gives me reason to be pessimistic.”

Ibid.

36

Museum of Differences SINGULAR NARRATIVES

Being proud or feeling guilty about the past are two aspects of a similarly reduced approach to history. There is no way we can construct a new foundation for the ethnographic museum, if we are trapped in unproductive feelings.

“Anxiety links us to the memory of the past while we struggle to choose a path through the ambiguous history of the present.”1

What the Museum of Differences suggests is that creativity should take the lead. This is a dynamic way in which to approach material from the past. Through creativity, the notion of culpability or arrogant attitudes can be expressed, but something more will happen. History, seen as material to shape and produce new forms, will liberate itself from its loaded content. Feelings of bitterness due to exclusion, or nationalistic contentment, lead to unproductive situations. The result is apathy to progress. Not progress leading to modernity, but leading to a movement that generates thoughts and ideas to encourage creativity and an environment where serious matters from the past inspire imagination and productivity.

John Akomfrah, English film director and screenwriter, is one of the founders of the Black Audio Film Collective. In his latest film, The Nine Muses, he uses archival footage, com-

A Tale of Another History

37

bined with migrant testimonies, and cut with contemporary footage filmed in the vast frozen landscapes of Alaska, to relate the history of migration to Britain in the 1950s and 1960s.

In the film, there is a juxtaposition of migration as a reality and migration as a myth, for he is suggesting that “stories usually seen through the lens of post colonialism could as easily be viewed through the lens of mythic history”.2 (fig. 3 )

In his installation, the American artist, Marc Dion, is using science as a working method and the museum display as a language. He interprets the two discourses in a very personal way. His work Phantoms of the Clark Expedition is a reflection on the history of exploration, where he recreates objects on the basis of archival photography and documents. Items made out of papier-mâché are then placed in the trophy room's permanent exhibition, amongst real artifacts from expeditions. Dion describes them as “the sun-bleached bones of expeditions past.”3 (fig. 4 )

The Museum of Differences, as a working frame to generate ideas, would encourage similar creative attitudes towards the past. It would be a situation where moves aside from politically correct ones would be possible. It would be a moment where one need not be afraid of disturbing what is commonly expected to be found within an archive of collective memory, be-

38

Museum of Differences

cause the Museum of Differences would not only be a place to remember or relate historical facts.

It would also be a place where the past is examined to produce singular tales and illustrate personal views on collective moments. Thus it would serve as a location without concerns of being accurate or faithful to reality. ×

A Tale of Another History 1.

Bhabha, op. cit., XIX. 2.

Basia Lewandowska Cummings, “Review. John Akomfrah’s ‘The Nine Muses’”, Africaisacountry. com, http://africasacountry. com/2012/02/17/ review-john-akomfrahsthe-nine-muses/; Internet: accessed 8 August 2012.

3.

Allison Meier, “The Ambition and Arrogance of Exploration”, Hyperallergic. com, http://hyperallergic. com/52761/mark-dionexplorers-club/?utm_ source=feedburner&utm_ medium=feed&utm_ campaign=Feed%3A+ hyperallergic+%28 Hyperallergic%29&utm_ content=Google+Reader; Internet, accessed 8 August 2012.

39

40

Museum of Differences

fig. 3 Dir. John Akomfrah, The Nine Muses, 2010 Smoking Dogs Films

A Tale of Another History

fig. 4 Mark Dion, Campfire-Clark Expedition, 2012 papier-mâchÊ. Image courtesy the Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute

41

42

Museum of Differences BEAUTY AND THE BEAST “The dichotomous structure of thought that places nature in one slot and culture in another has a long history in Western thought.”1

Dichotomy is a division made between two things that are represented as opposites.2 In Western mentality it is a very common way in which to comprehend a subject, by defining it by its opposite. It is a two-way approach that does not integrate layers or periphery as part of reality. It is a very comfortable notion that is commonly used to categorize the unknown; what is unfamiliar and different.

A representation of this approach can be found in the magazine African Arts from the 1970’s. The publication has existed since 1967 and contains research and critical texts on traditional, contemporary and popular African arts.3 In the earlier editions, most of the pictures were in black and white. One could find advertisements for exhibitions or galleries at the beginning and end of the magazine, sometimes in full pages but mostly in the margins.

They were often illustrated by images of the artwork taking place at the time. One section of the magazine had photographs of exhibitions.

As an archive, it is a testimony of past standards but also serves as material to work with in a contemporary situation.

A Tale of Another History

43

All the elements together; the contrasted photography of African objects, the names of the galleries and the images of exhibitions and their titles; illustrate the concept of dichotomy and give the archive relevancy in a different historical context.

Transformations were made to the material taken from the publication. The prints were produced utilizing a different technique.

Through the medium of screen-printing, they were resized and shown in another context.

These were simple but consequent changes. To complete the modifications, a layer of abstract shapes was added either underneath or on top of the images to reveal or hide the content. These shapes were brightly colored and shaded to contrast with the monochrome images. The status of the reproduced advertisements changed and became limited editions through the printing process.

Rather than losing its original meaning, these changes re-actualized the images and inscribed them in a new context that highlighted their previous status. The archive material was re-contextualized, and as result gained in visibility and value. All manipulations have consequences; no arrangements or re-arrangements are innocent. ×

44

Museum of Differences

1.

Errington, op. cit., 28.

2. “a division or contrast between two things that are or are represented as being opposed or entirely different� http://oxforddictionaries. com/definition/english/ dichotomy?q=dichotomy ; Internet: accessed 28 July 2012.

3 http://www.international. ucla.edu/africa/ africanarts/; Internet: accessed 10 January 2012

46

Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History

47

48

Museum of Differences LOCAL REALITIES “Globalization, (...), must always begin at home. A just measure of global progress requires that we first evaluate how globalizing nations deal with ‘the difference within’ – the problems of diversity and redistribution at the local level, and the rights and representations of minorities in the regional domain.”1

As Hans Belting suggested during a conference in Amsterdam, a direction for the new museum would be to integrate it into more of a local history, instead of seeking to display an often suspicious globalized knowledge. In this way, the discussion around the outcome of the role of a museum needs to be seen as local phenomena. Rather than a museum with global ambitions, the local audience should be placed as a reference point to react by considering local needs. Members of immediate communities should be considered, instead of focusing on tourists. There needs to be a switch from a passive relation to the museum audience, to an active understanding of their needs, integrating the close population into the process of rethinking ourselves, our culture and our history.

Therefore, the new situation that the museum experiences needs to lead to specific answers rooted in realities that directly surround the institution.2 “The museum has and will always change.” ×

A Tale of Another History 1.

Bhabha, op. cit., XV. 2.

Hans Belting interviewed by Rein Wolfs, Future Museum, Facing Forward: Art & Theory from a Future Perspective, University of Amsterdam, 8 March 2012.

49

50

Museum of Differences JARDIN D’ACCLIMATATION

Many institutional frames are experiencing important reconfigurations. Social, cultural, and educational organizations are reconsidering their role in society. Smaller institutions that are no longer seen as essential are in danger of extinction and they are looking for alternative ways to extend their existence.

The Hortus in Amsterdam is a botanical garden that is part of the Vrije Universiteit.1 Its original function was to provide the biology department students with a place to carry out research. It was expected It to be an ordered, clear and classified environment, where nature was dominated and controlled. Now, it is on the edge of being abandoned. In a few years, plans are to shut it down, but its supporters are trying to find ways for it to survive by getting attention from the public. For example, the establishment has been opened to those in the art field to provide them with a working environment. For the artists, it is interesting to work in a context that confronts a real situation and is outside of the institutional frame.

Working on site provided the opportunity to create art influenced by the surroundings and in response to the specific context. The idea was to use elements from the garden to create an installation that brings complexity and chaos. Predefined ideas had to be put aside to

A Tale of Another History

51

give space to new and more appropriate ones.

Surprisingly, the garden was inviting order, a reorganization that would bring clarity and visibility. Separate the plants, group other ones, empty the space of overloaded elements and clean it from undesired components.

The ordering process is relative. From the position of the personnel of the garden, it was more an act of bringing confusion into their daily working pattern, with some complaining that they could no longer find a few of the plants.

However, this order brought a new look to the surroundings. By adding little changes, such as altering the surface of the ground or concealing the visibility of potted plants, the process of modifying the previously well-known landscape was complete.

Colored Plexiglas was found in the cellar of the botanical garden. This element was used to create abstract divisions in the space and to bring about new and interesting perspectives and points of view. The Plexiglas acted as a frame to modify the perception of what was to be seen and to flatten a three-dimensional space.

The title of the work was Jardin d’Acclimation, in association with the origin of the ethnographic exhibition, which finds its roots in the history of garden and zoological parks which emerged in Europe at the turn of the 18th and 19th century.2 “Acclimatation” also refers

52

Museum of Differences

to an attitude toward the context. By acclimatizing to an environment, and spending time in it, it was possible to propose a work that directly responds to it. Its meaning is ambiguous; it can simultaneously be an act of adaptation and manipulation.

Working primarily in one of the greenhouses of the garden, elements were gathered around the topic of power. Items were then spread throughout the garden to play “hide and seek” with the audience to question their understanding of the space. Reality can be altered, even slightly, when manipulating the system of representation that belongs to a place. By these means, using elements that could belong to the garden and placing them at specific spots, deliberately works with the idea of visibility. Some interventions were so subtle that they would vanish into the scenery if not recognized. But once removed, their earlier presence turned out to be much stronger than initially thought.

The memory of the intervention would leave a permanent trace in perception of the space.

Representation and reality blended into the same image.

A question still remains: Why didn’t the changes that happened through the work happen in the garden? The transformations that the space experienced need to outlive the temporary intervention, more as a shift in state of mind rather than a physical modification of the space. But for this it is necessary to fully inte-

A Tale of Another History

53

grate all components of the context, in order to create a work where art and life acclimatize with each other in a complex hierarchical relationship.3 The experience should not end with a comment like “We want it like it was before”.

And in this sense, there is a need to find ways to approach such a situation, so that the local people become open to changes, even if the changes are drastic. ×

54

Museum of Differences

1.

Hortus Botanicus Vrije Universiteit, Van de Boechorststraat 8, 1081 BT Amsterdam http://www.vu.nl/nl/ over-de-vu/cultuur-kunst/ hortus-botanicus/index.asp; Internet: accessed 25 July 2012.

2.

“Les exhibitions ethnographiques trouvent leurs origines dans l’histoire des jardins et parcs zoologiques créés en Europe au tournant des XVIIIe et XIXe siècles (…). Ces jardins se tournent très vite vers l’exotisme et les espèces rares, afin de répondre a la demande de leur public. Leur objectif est de montrer une zoologie original, empreinte d’exotisme et accompagnée d’une mise en scène théâtrale, afin de répondre au gout alors en vogue. (…)Parallèlement a ces premières “curiosités” montrées dans le jardin se développent, au cours du XIXe siècle, les fêtes foraines et le cirques, qui réunissent parfois plus d’animaux exotiques que les jardins zoologiques eux-mêmes et surenchérissent dans le spectaculaire. Ces éléments préparent alors la mode des exhibitions et des mise en scene de populations venues d’ailleurs, qui a se répandre a

travers l’Europe (…).”

Pascal Blanchard, Gilles Boëtsch and Nanette Jacomijn Snoep, Exhibitions : L’Invention du Sauvage, (Actes Sud Editions, 2011), 98.

3. “(...), artlike art holds that art is separate from life and everything else, whereas liflike art holds that art is connected to life and everything else. In other words, there is art at the service of art and art at the service of life. The maker of artlike art tends to be a specialist; the makes of lifelike art, a generalist.”

Allan Kaprow, Essays on the Blurring of Art and Life, (University of California Press, 1993), 201.

62

Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History

63

pl. MINORITIES

“And yet the immigrant, the tourist, and the urban wanderer are the dominant figures of contem­ porary culture.”

—Nicolas Bourriaud1

“Our nation-centered view of sovereign citizenship can only comprehend the pre­dicament of minoritarian ‘belonging’ as a problem of ontology – a question of belonging to to a race, a gender, a class, a generation becomes a kind of ‘second nature’, a primordial identification, an inheritance of tradition, a naturalization of the problems of citizenship. The vernacular cosmopolitan takes the view that the commitment to a ‘right to difference in equality’ as a process of constituting emergent groups and affiliations has less to do with the affirmation or authentication of origins and ‘identities’, and more to do with political practices and ethical choices. Minoritarian affiliations or solidarities arise in response to the failures and limits of democratic representation, creating new modes of agency, new strategies of recognition, new forms of political and symbolic representation - (...) ” 2

According the “right to narrate” to minorities and integrating them into the dialogue would be an act with major consequences.3 Introducing into a dominant discourse points of view that are underrepresented in a history that values achievement and creation would permanently modify the output of such a discourse.

There would be no need to glorify the margins or mull over such a position. The only impera-

64

Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History

65

tive would be to build a network of discourses as broad as possible; to extend the boundaries of the center to the periphery; and to relate the stories that are found along the way.

Examples can be found in contemporary artists’ works, where standardized models of behavior in society are investigated and combined with personal experiences. Mainstream historical and cultural events are used to raise questions on preconceived notions of origin and identity.

It is illustrated in the work Oma Totem, by the Vietnamese artist Danh Vo, who deals with questions of colonialism, migration and cultural identity in a very personal way. The installation part of the exhibition Vo Danh was presented at the Kunsthaus Bregenz in 2012 and consists of an assembled washing machine, refrigerator, television and crucifix. 4 (fig. 5)

“The four objects, which the artist’s grandmother received from the immigration authorities on her arrival in Germany in the 1970s, not only testify eloquently to what, at the time and from a Western European point of view, was deemed essential to life, but also their vertical ordering creates a striking visual metaphor of cultural self-definition.”5

The ethnographic museum, an institution

fig. 5 Danh Vo, Oma Totem, 2009 Objects from the artist’s grandmother Nguyen Thi Ty: 26˝ Phillips television set, Gorenje washing machine, Bomann refrigerator, wooden crucifix, and personal entrance card for a casino.Images courtesy of Kunsthaus Bregenz, Bregenz.

Photos by Markus Tretter.

66

Museum of Differences

at the core of a multicultural representation of knowledge, is a place where integration would be possible. If we could relate a history from minorities and majorities, comprised of biographies and autobiographies that blend into each other, it would be possible to have a real understanding of the differences. ×

A Tale of Another History 1.

Bourriaud, op. cit., 51.

2.

Bhabha, op. cit., XVII. 3. “(...) the ‘right to narrate’ as a means to achieving our own national an communal identity in a global world, demands that we revise our sense of symbolic citizenship, our myths of belonging, by identifying ourselves with the ‘starting-points’ of other national and international histories and geographies.”

Ibid., XX. 4.

Contemporary Art Daily, “Danh Vo at Kunsthaus Bregenz”, Contemporaryartdaily.com, http://www. bibme.org/citation-guide/ Turabian/website; Internet: accessed 8 August 2012.

5.

Ibid.

67

68

Museum of Differences

3.

D i f f e r e n c e s As T

A o

o

l

70

Museum of Differences OPEN DEFINITION “In a world growing ever more uniform with each passing day, we can defend diversity only by raising it to the level of a cherished value, one that exceeds the immediate attraction of the exotic and kneejerk instincts of conservation – that is to say, only by establishing it as a conceptual category.” 1

We often find it difficult to accept our differences as an existential condition of our lives.

We are different from each other and in our perception of reality. The differences create a dynamic understanding of ourselves, of our environment and of how we understand it. The differences create a complex network of similarities and disparities that interact in a continuous flow of disconnection.

In the preface of The Location of Culture, Homi K. Bhabha, a critical theorist and important figure of contemporary post-colonial studies, explains that people of different cultural and national origins are accepted by the states in our global world when it is economically beneficial to the nation.2 There is no real interest in differences as a value, but rather as way to be more selective and expand the human resource possibilities. It is diversity based on economical interest.

In Radicant, Nicolas Bourriaud asks:

A Tale of Another History

71

“Why should Patagonian, Chinese, or Iranian artists be required to produce their cultural difference in their works, while American or German artists find themselves judged on their critiques of patterns of thought, or on their resistance to authority and the dictates of convention?”3

Non-Western artists are judged on their differences, while Western artists on their capacity to produce a relevant discourse. In this case, differences become an instrument of seclusion and create hierarchy by assigning status.

In her paper, Sally Price, professor of anthropology and author of numerous books and essays on the subject of ethnographic museums, relates ways that an ethnographic museum deals with the presentation of cultural differences in the context of a museum where imperialist ambitions are relegated to phenomena of the past; where the border between the viewer and the one that is viewed is gradually vanishing. 4 She suggests that the display of differences can only take place in a true “dialogue of cultures”.5

The museum could be used as a place to establish such a dialogue and it could happen through the exploration of differences inside the institution. The outcomes could then be applied to real life situations.

An ethnographic museum is a place that preserves objects from different cultures and

72

Museum of Differences

from multiple origins. Detached from its colonial past, it could be a symbol of diversity; a condensed representation of multiculturalism and multi-nationalism. The Museum of Differences proposes to use this condition to further develop the status of the museum from a place that preserves and produces knowledge, to a place of experimentation, where unexpected outcomes might occur. The museum could then become a laboratory in constant development, where the audience has an active role in using the tools provided to build their own judgments. These changes could happen by placing the concept of differences at the center, which would become the point from where to stand and observe. The differences would become a tool with which to consider the object, the collection, the museum and ourselves. And this reflection should be extended to the outside, into local realities and global concerns, to question contemporary matters.

The concept of differences in the Museum of Differences is purposefully vaguely defined, as differences need to become part of the discussion to generate thoughts and ideas. It is a tactic employed to keep the definition open to interpretation, thus allowing its meaning to continuously evolve, or to be discarded in order to create an entirely new meaning. It is an evolutionary concept that could adapt to various situations. The archaic static center that has already made comparisons would be replaced by a dynamic center that is not fixed but is the actual

A Tale of Another History

73

act of comparing. The model of a pre-formulated discourse from biased observations and comparisons would be replaced by a model where the dialogue emerging from the comparisons would be more important than the outcome.

Therefore, the actions involved in the process would be more significant than the final result. “(...): there is no other; rather, there are other places, elsewhere, none of which is original, still less standard for comparison.

The fundamental requirement of an ethics of diversity is to travel in order to get back to oneself, to start of “from the real, from what is, from what one is,” that is to say, the context where happenstance caused you to be born, a context whose values are not absolute but circumstantial.”6

It would no longer be an act governed by a hierarchical relation between the subject and the object that extracts data from a defined position, but a situation where the subject and the object have equal value. It would be the dialogue between the two that would be placed in the center.

The concept of differences would create a working situation that produces a multiplicity of points of view, and as such, a changing frame within the institution. The journey becomes more important than the destination. The notion of differences within the ethnographic museum would be used to provoke productive dialogue between cultures, dialogue that should

74

Museum of Differences

then expand into daily life through the integration of differences.

An example can be found in the public intervention Chalk, by the artists Jennifer Allora and Guillermo Calzadilla. The work consists of enormous pieces of chalk, distributed to the population on Lima’s central square in front of the parliament building where citizens gather to protest and express their demands to the government. The artists provided an ephemeral and fragile tool, with a strong ideological meaning, to give the people the opportunity to write temporary message on the pavement.

The intervention established an evolving situation, where singular voices generated a complex and temporary form registered on the ground.7 In the episode Paradox from the Art 21 series, Allora said about the work: “the piece has the potential to actively disrupt what are the norms of a particular setting.”8 (fig. 6)

Their proposition comes in reaction to a specific context. And by providing a tool that can be used in different ways, they left the outcomes of their work open to interpretation.

Instead of defining the outcomes, they created a platform where different opinions could be expressed. The Museum of Differences suggests that public interventions of this sort should also take place inside the institution. Individuals or groups of people could elaborate situations that focus on ways to express differences within a

A Tale of Another History

75

specific setting. In this way, differences could be attenuated or intensified and would exist as a moment in time and be defined as such. ×

76

Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History

77

fig. 6 Jennifer Allora and Guillermo Calzadilla, Chalk (Lima),2002 Installation at Pasaje Santa Rosa, Lima, Peru, Courtesy Lombard-Freid Fine Arts, New York, and Carmen Rita PĂŠrez / Arte Actual, Santa Domingo, Dominican Republic

78

Museum of Differences

1 Bourriaud, op. cit., 20.

2 Bhabha, op. cit., XIV. 3 Bourriaud, op. cit., 28.

4 See Sally Price, “Cultures en dialogue: options pour les Musées du XXIe siècle”, Histoire de l’Art et Anthropologie (2009).

5 “A dialogue with the men and women who created those objects, or with their descendants. that would neither be a anachronistic condemnation of colonial practices, neither a suspicious obliteration of such practices.” Ibid.

6 Bourriaud, op. cit., 67.

7 Carlos Motta, “Allora & Calzadilla”, Bombsite.com, http://bombsite.com/ issues/109/articles/3333; Internet: accessed 9 August 2012.

8 Art 21, “Episode: Paradox”, Pbs.org, http://www.pbs. org/art21/watch-now/ episode-paradox; Internet: accessed 9 August 2012.

4.

C a r t o g r a p h y O

f

C a t e g o r i e s

80

Museum of Differences PLURALITY OF APPROACHES “(...), to remediate also means to bring about a change of medium, to experiment with alternative ways of describing, interpreting and displaying the objects in the collection. In this we recognize the value of re-introducing the laboratory into the museum, both as a physical location for research and as a virtual extension of communication.”1

A museum collection should be approached from different perspectives. If looking at it from the institutional point of view, Western history is involved. Seeing a collection from its own perspective, from an object separated or closely related to its original context, is another angle. Finally, the understanding that indigenous people have regarding objects, is a tale on its own.

This plurality of approaches, as the Museum of Differences suggests, needs to be exposed in the ethnographic museum. The discussion must take place in the temporary, as well as the permanent exhibition spaces of the museum. In addition, new spaces for fresh thoughts need to be defined inside or at the margin of the institution.2 “Car l’objet, lui, est l’animal domestique parfait. C’est le seul ‘être’ dont les qualités

A Tale of Another History

81

exaltent ma personne au lieu de la restreindre, Au pluriel, les objets sont les seuls existants dont la coexistence est vraiment possible, puisque leurs différences ne les dressent pas les uns contre les autres, comme c’est le cas pour les être vivants, mais convergent docilement vers moi et s’additionnent sans difficulté dans la conscience.

L’objet est ce qui de laisse le mieux ‘personnaliser’ et comptabiliser a la fois. Et pour cette comptabilité subjective, il n’y a pas d’exclusive, tout peut être possédé, investi, ou, dans le jeu collecteur, rangé, classé, distribué.”3 ×

82

Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History

83

1.

Deliss, “Stored Code: Remediating Collections in a Post-Ethnographic Museum”, Stedelijk Museum Bureau Amsterdam Newsletter, No124 (Fall 2011).

2.

“The Weltkultur Museum in Frankfurt (…) develop a new research lab on the borderline between advanced art practice and anthropology. (…) priceless objects, films, and photography from the Frankfurt collection are newly interpreted and prepare the ground for future exhibitions.(...) Selected artists, scientists and academics will be invited to undertake research in the Labor, formulating new interpretations and creating original artworks based on the collection.” http://www. weltkulturenmuseum.de/en/ labor; Internet: accessed 28 July 2012.

3.

Jean Baudrillard, Le Système des objets, (Edition Gallimard, 1968), 126.

“Art and the public have come to be accepted as stable, rather than historically constructed, ideological categories.”

—Douglas Crimp1

84

Museum of Differences THE COLLECTOR

The act of collecting is exciting, while at the same time desperate. Indefinitely repeating the same action can make one neurotic in the need to gather one more item to complete a collection, or to expand a collection by adding a number of very similar objects. A proliferation of items is accumulated under the same roof with the sole purpose of ownership. Functions, meanings and beliefs are developed to put a collection into order. Unordered, it is seen as a mass of undefined junk, fragmented stories, pieces of memories and remains of past glories. Why is a collection so precious? Why has it become something so sacred? The collector will die but the collection will survive. Is that the answer?

“Car on se collectionne toujours soi-même.”2 “Le pouvoir profond des objets collectionnés ne leur vient en effet ni de leur singularité ni de leur historicité distincte, ce n’est pas par la que le temps de la collection n’est pas le temps réel, c’est par le fait que l’organisation de là collection elle-même se substitue au temps. Sans doute est-ce là la fonction fondamentale de la collection: résoudre le temps réel en une dimension systématique.”3 ×

A Tale of Another History 1.

Douglas Crimp, On the Museum’s Ruins, (The MIT Press, 1995), 295.

2.

Baudrillard, op. cit., 128.

3.

Ibid., 134-135.

85

86

Museum of Differences CRITICAL DIALOGUE “And the history of museology is a history of the various attempts to deny the heterogeneity of the museum, to reduce it to a homogeneous system or series.”1

“And when art thought to be naturally lodged in the museum, an institution of the state, it is an idealist rather than materialist aesthetic that is served.”2

Transparency is one of the categories that the Museum of Differences proposes to introduce inside the museum. It is a physical or conceptual space where the ethnographic museum reflects on its own situation, past and/or present, and develops an egocentric perspective of its collection.

This is not a dialogue but a monologue; a critical monologue on its status. It is a place reserved for auto-critiques, with no censorship and severe scrutiny of the museum’s personal history.

Institutions often have a hard time to accept criticism, whether it comes from within or externally. This denial of critique needs to change and appraisal to become part of the alternate museum of ethnography.

“Every time you walk into a museum or concert hall, it instantly triggers references to that history, and if you don’t know much about it, you will miss much of the meaning of the art.”3

A Tale of Another History

87

A common visitor is not necessarily aware of what makes a collection; what systems underlie the acquisition of objects and what kind of trajectory an object experiences before being shown to the audience. The Museum of Differences suggests that the spectator is more informed, in order to be aware of the schemes that guide the institution he is visiting.

“Call the museums, concerts hall, theaters, journals, and so forth frames of mind.”4

In the Museum of Differences the history of acquisition is revealed. Value systems invested in an object are communicated to the viewer, meaning that the museum is no longer pretending to be honest, when what it actually shows is the result of complex, manipulated and well ordered value system. Stolen, fake and mislabeled objects are shown as such. Dialogues are set up with all the parties involved: the specialist, the collector, the curator; as well as the audience, the local community and the population of the place from where the items originate. This allows for a suitable discussion on how and what is to be shown in the institution. This discourse can take place within the exhibition display or outside of it, in a wider context; through existing means or ones that still need to be initiated.

The ethnographic museum, liberated from any type of idealistic perception of its role, could observe a collection with brand new eyes. A dialogue with the audience could then be for-

88

Museum of Differences

mulated to reveal the unexposed. The Nine Eyes of Google Street is an example of how the outcome of such a scenario would look like.5 The unfiltered approach that the artist has toward a collection of images demonstrates just how surprising the result can be. (fig. 7; see also p. 5)

With a category that works around the concept of transparency, the Museum of Differences intends to bring more interaction and honesty to its relationship with the audience – to educate the audience, not in a discursive way, but to encourage the development of individual criticism on what is to be seen and displayed as the so-called truth.6 ×

A Tale of Another History 1.

Crimp, op. cit., 54.

2.

Ibid., 295.

3.

Kaprow, op. cit., 203.

4.

Ibid., 203.

5.

The Nine Eyes of Google Street View is a project initiated by the artist Jon Rafman. The nine eyes are the camera mounted on top of the vehicle that Google sends around the world. The artist “spent hours looking at the images collected by the cars and searching not just for the amusing, the ridiculous and the fortuitous but also for postcard perfect moments.”

The work shows bizarre and unexpected situations extracted from a giant database of images.

Regine Debatty, “The Nine Eyes of Google Street View”, We-make-money-not-art. com, http://www. we-make-money-not-art. com/archives/2012/08/ the-nine-eyes-of-googlestreet.php#.UCyvycgjFRw; Internet: accessed 9 August 2012.

6.

“Scientific, discursive understanding is both less and

89

more than truth: less than truth, because understanding is related to a “discipline” and expressed in the language of that discipline. Always doubly limited, it is thus removed from any absolute notion of Johannes Fabian, “Ethnographic Misunderstanding and the Perils of Context”, American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 97, No. 1 (Marsh 1995), 41.

90

Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History

fig. 7 Jon Rafman, NánRén Rd, Manjhou Township, Pingtung County, Taiwan 947, 2011, Google Street View Picture. Courtesy of Jon Rafman

91

92

Museum of Differences TROPEN ACTION

The ethnographic museum in Amsterdam is called the Tropenmuseum, and previously, the Colonial Institute. The building is imposing, clearly marked with the stamp of colonial style.

On its website, the history of the institution is mentioned without any critical stances. In the permanent exhibition you can find dioramas, objects under glass, and buttons to push to create interaction with the audience.1

There are some minor parts of the permanent collection reserved to critics. A room is set aside for contemporary art and there is also a large space for temporary collections. A sculpture by Roy Villevoye invites questions in a corner next to the elevator.2 An important part of the museum, with videos, games and workshops, is dedicated to children. While one can be served exotic dishes at the Ekeko restaurant, it is also possible to become a member of the library, where very general books can be found.3 In addition there is a shop selling books, compact disks, postcards, incense and random “Made in China” and “Made in India” trinkets.

A cinema and theater are complete the museum’s facilities, where periodically conferences on various subjects are organized.

The artworks realized in the Tropenmuseum took the shape of actions, with temporary interventions inside the museum that contrasted with the permanent, heavy displays. From

A Tale of Another History

93

one day to another, decisions were made, realized and documented. However, it did not take long for the museum personnel to remove them.

Javastraat is only a few blocks away, in a popular neighborhood of Amsterdam. 4 Here, the actions bring from the outside elements that would confront the existing setting of a museum. Ordinary objects are integrated into a display and this positioning changes their status, as well as the way in which one looks at them.

Items that were meant to be used are utilized to represent a scene that was once a part of everyday life. The actions demonstrate the relative nature of decisions made by an institution and how open to miscomprehension they can be.

Who decides which objects have enough value to end up in an ethnographic museum?

For display, how does one distinguish the objects of a collection from the ones used to create an environment? Are the trinkets from the museum shop part of the collection or just souvenirs? And why are they more expensive than the ones you find outside, on Javastraat, when they are exactly of the same quality.

By an act of displacement, from the outside to the inside and vice-versa, objects are confronted with a new surrounding or removed from their original context. The boundaries of value are blurred and our perception of an object strongly influenced by the setting in which it is found.” ×

94

Museum of Differences

1.

“The reconstruction of local environments and attractive displays of exhibits drawn from the museum’s huge collections draw visitors right into the daily lives of the people of the tropics and subtropics.” http://tropenmuseum.nl/ MUS/5860/Tropenmuseum/ About-Tropenmuseum; Internet: accessed 25 July 2012 2.

“The lifelike sculpture represents a small black man holding a white baby. Koos van Brakel, Tropenmuseum’s Head of Collections, explains why the museum bought the sculpture: “What makes this work special is the way it forces viewers to ask questions. We hope that they will try to work it out what it means for themselves.

That fits in with our ethos.

While as a museum we try to tell a story, we also give our visitors the space to make up their own mind about what they see.” http://www.tropenmuseum. nl/smartsite.shtml?ch= TMU&id=55687; Internet: accessed 25 July 2012 3.

“In the mythology and folklore of Peru, Bolivia and northern Argentina Ekeko is

the god of abundance.” (webster online dictionary) http://www. websters-online-dictionary. org/definitions/EKEKO? cx=partner-pub-093945075 3529744%3Av0qd01tdlq&cof= FORID%3 A9&ie=UTF-8&q=EKEKO&sa=Search#906; Internet: accessed 10 August 2012 4.

“Welcome to the website of the retailers association in Java Street. The shopping street of the Indian neighborhood in Amsterdam. In the Java Street you will find retailers and products from all over the world. This website gives you a foretaste of the atmosphere in the street and the products we sell. Come by and test the Java Street!” http://www.javastraat.nl/ corp/index. php?page=299&site=22&ln=nl; Internet: accessed 25 July 2012

A Tale of Another History

95

96

Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History

97

98

Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History

99

PLATFORM OF POSSIBILITIES

“En se figeant, le regard se voile, s’aveugle.’Idole’: le mot suffit. Il n’est plus nécessaire de décrire la chose, d’en cerner l’origine, d’en énoncer les propriétés.”

—Serge Gruzinski1

Important parts of the collections of ethnographic museums are not shown to the public.

Many of the objects are lying somewhere in storage. This may be due to different reasons.

The museum may not have enough space to exhibit all of the objects, or they may not be considered interesting enough to be shown, or they may not yet be related to any exhibition topic.

Often, this hidden part of a collection can now be seen online on a virtual database. This makes the once private part of a collection open to the public, thus providing a way for the museum to escape from the question of inflexible categories, as the problem of hierarchy of value in a collection is avoided.

The display of a permanent collection is another issue. Often, it does not age well. What is at the peak of innovative ways of exhibiting can quickly become outdated and irrelevant.

This is due to the quickly changing economical and cultural structure that society is experiencing, in tandem with the constant flux of new information that becomes available. Thus, the museum needs to reconsider its use of permanent and inflexible settings.

Mobility and change are concepts that the Museum of Differences would set as standards in the use of collections, and not only in temporary museum exhibitions. An evolving situation

100 Museum of Differences would be introduced into the ethnographic museum with the purpose to create new meanings and relations to what is to be seen. Sometimes the focus would be on the display and at other times on the object displayed. It could also be a concept or a statement represented through the setting. The physical space of the museum, as well as the structure and elements used to present the objects, would be built around the idea of mobility and transformation.

Bétonsalon, an art center located in Paris, provides an illustration of this concept. In 2010, it had a series of exhibitions with the title The Half of Things. On this occasion the space served as a place of work, as well as an exhibition space. Invited artists worked day-to-day and played with “the possibilities of a display that continuously evolves”.2 All participants shared a similar methodology that envisioned “the exhibition as a pivotal site for realization of the work.”3 The Half of Things focused its concerns on the changing nature of the work over the course of the exhibition. The specific setting and the evolving situation made it difficult to identify the work. The space could not be reduced to what was to be seen at the moment. Therefore, it was important to organize the performance during the show, to create new events that would take place in the space, and to document the whole process in order to communicate the meaning of the work to the audience. (fig. 8)

A Tale of Another History

101

The concept of a temporary platform can also be expanded to the virtual collection. The Gallery of Lost Art is an online exhibition that will only exist for one year and shows artworks that have disappeared. 4 Curated by the Tate Modern museum, it “explores the sometimes extraordinary and sometimes banal circumstances behind the loss of major works of art.”5 In addition to a virtual exhibition, the site provides a platform for discussion. (fig. 9)

When talking about the project, the curator Jennifer Mundy says: “Museums normally tell stories through the objects they have in their collections.

But this exhibition focuses on significant works that cannot be seen. It explores the potential of the digital realm to bring these lost artworks back to life—not as virtual replicas but through visual evidence and the stories surrounding them.”6

The Museum of Differences envisions many benefits in the utilization of a flexible approach to represent categories in the provided space.

First, to gain in freedom in the use of the space and autonomy in the understanding that the audience has of the categories that are shown.

Confronted with unexpected classifications of the artifacts, the spectator would likely be curious and interested. Second, the institution would be faster to react to external changes and

102 Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History 103

fig. 8 La Moitié des Choses, 2010 View of the exhibition © Aurélien Mole

fig. 9 The Gallery of Lost Art (screen view) 2012. www.galleryoflostart.com

104 Museum of Differences would be more open to accommodate to them.

Finally, mistakes could happen but they would be integrated into the museum as part of the dialogue. And more importantly, additional exhibition settings could be explored and formulated within what the Museum of Differences would define as a moment in space and time.

Long or short-term moments of display would replace the outdated temporary and permanent division of the collection. Unexpected outcomes would also emerge from such dynamic use of the space. In The Museum of Differences mobility exists as a distinct category to provide a platform of possibilities, rather than a fixed structure. ×

A Tale of Another History 105 1.

Serge Gruzinski, de Christophe Colomb à ‘Blade Runner’ (1492-2019)”, (Fayard, 1990), 48.

2.

Bétonsalon, “La Moitié des Choses”, Betonsalon. net, http://www.betonsalon.net/spip.php?article230&lang=en; Internet: accessed 10 August 2012.

3.

Ibid.

4.

The Gallery of Lost Art: http://galleryoflostart.com/ 5.

E-flux, “The Gallery of Lost Art”, E-flux.com, http:// www.e-flux.com/ announcements/thegallery-of-lost-art/?utm_ source=feedburner&utm_ medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ efluxshows+%28e-flux+shows+%3A%3A+rss%29; Internet: accessed 10 August 2012.

6.

E-flux, “The Gallery of Lost Art”, E-flux.com, http:// www.e-flux.com/ announcements/thegallery-of-lost-art/?utm_ source=feedburner&utm_ medium=feed&utm_

campaign=Feed%3A+ efluxshows+%28e-flux+shows+%3A%3A+rss%29; Internet: accessed 10 August 2012.

106 Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History 107 SUBJECTIVE CATEGORIES Objective classification is simply not possible.

In the ethnographic museum, where strong concepts are empowered in many of the artifacts it owns, objective categories are used as a means to exercise control. This control neutralizes, rationalizes and ultimately simplifies the meaning of complex objects.

“A l’inverse, l’objet pur, dénué de fonction, ou abstrait de son usage, prend un statut strictement subjectif: il devient objet de collection.”

—Jean Baudrillard1

As a professor of anthropology, Shelly Errington explains that there are two main histories of classification in Western museums: one related to national glory and the other to “objective knowledge”.2 One displays culture and is about the history of art. The other presents nature and is related to natural history. The former follows a timeline, where the elements shown unfold chronologically.

“One work of art influences another one, one school or style influences the next.”3

The latter is geographical and taxonomi­ cal, the exploration of a space rather than a journey through time. 4 It does not represent nature itself, but an objective representation of it through knowledge.

“Together they divide the universe into nature and culture.”5

The display used in ethnographic museums is related to that of natural history muse-

108 Museum of Differences ums, and this affiliation is clearly motivated.

Objective classification is a myth; it is subjectivity with ambition. One is not asked to think about and question the divisions; they are already made. The order is taken for granted. All of the elements are understandable and as familiar to us as possible.

The Museum of Differences intends to integrate subjectivity into the ethnographic museum space, to embrace it as a powerful tool.

To use subjective classification to illustrate a truth that does not pretend to be a truth. The audience is asked to consider and question what is to be seen. Misunderstanding is part of the game. Through subjectivity, objects are kept unfamiliar, and as such, open to interpretation.

Subjectivity can enact extremist convictions of all sorts, but integrated in the whole idea of the Museum of Differences, it is a way to interact conceptually with the collection and the audience. ×

A Tale of Another History 109 1.

Baudrillard, op. cit., 54.

2.

Errington, op. cit., 21-23.

3.

Ibid., 21.

4. “(…), with the result that a stroll through any particular museum of natural history is a safari in geographical space rather than a stroll through time.” Ibid., 22.

5.

Ibid., 28.

110

Museum of Differences MEMORIES ON DISPLAY

A temporary exhibition took place in an apartment. What is left of this moment is photography defined as portraits, portraits of the collector who has passed away. The display was composed of objects that were not meant to be exhibited outside of a domestic environment.

The reason why they were gathered together is mysterious to those outside of the family and the circle of close friends. The inheritor had to deal with an accumulation of “stuff” with values closely related to personal memories.

This moment of transition was the setting used to create a series of images that would help overcome the idea of death, a paradoxical act in itself regarding the meaning of collecting. Many layers of emotional feelings were involved, a situation far from the impersonal context of the collection of an institution.

Nevertheless, the objects were approached without any consideration of their individual value or function. Personal belongings, antiquities, artworks, expensive designer furniture and secondhand items, were treated at the same level. It became only a matter of form, size and texture; properties such as strength or fragility; objects that would support or contain.

The rest of the decisions were made by subjective and aesthetic choices. Intuition and tryouts were leading the process. Undecided

A Tale of Another History

111

associations of objects surprisingly produced powerful connections and playful moments of rearrangement created a bit of chaos in the setting, animating the wider composition.

As a portrait, the arrangements were not meant to exist as an installation but only as two dimensional images, where a specific point of view is imposed on the viewer. The physical comprehension of the objects became flattened by the image to remove any alternative perception of the scene.

The emotional involvement with the subject and the objects used in the display could have easily turned the project into something too personal. Instead, this created a series of photographs that translated into a setting, a presence, a situation full of paradox, where the absence of the collector was incorporated into the collection and inanimate objects turned into living relics.

A collection can be approached by many different angles; intuitive knowledge can be combined with rational decisions.1 Working with a collection, linked to the space from where it is found, enables the space to act as a conceptual frame that strengthens the meaning of the objects, due to this interaction. A moment of thought and emotion acts as a reflection on temporality. ×

112

Museum of Differences

1. “(...), we have a prejudice about knowledge that only knowledge that is greifbar – graspable, tangible – is real knowledge. That’s a mistake.

The world and reality are now too complex to respect only tangible knowledge. We need to have more respect for intuition and feeling. We need to develop our intuitive knowledge to help us to live better in the present.”

Florian Frickes, Learning to Love Androids: The Wondrous World of the Universal Scholar Alan Shapiro [essay on-line]; available from http://www.alan-shapiro. com/learning-to-loveandroids-the- wondrousworld-of-the-universalscholar-alan-n-shapiro-byflorian-fricke/; Internet: accessed 8 August 2012.

A Tale of Another History

113

114

Museum of Differences

118

Museum of Differences AUTHENTIC FICTION “Should the fiction disappear, there is nothing left of the Museum but a “bric-abrac”, a heap of meaningless and valueless fragments of objects which are incapable of substituting themselves either metonymically for the original objects or metaphorically for their representations.”1

Truth is the antonym of fiction. It is absurd to look for truth in a museum and ir­ relevant to believe that there is a kind of truth in the way a collection is displayed. The museum as an institution is an antonym on its own, presenting what is believed to be truth, and therefore, filled with contradiction. Repeating a pattern of conventional frames with the trademark of reality, on purpose or not, is at the edge of defamation. Investigating those established categories confirms that they are built on constructed theory and a subjective understanding of reality.

The work of the American artist, Jimmie Durham, takes an ironic and ambivalent look at the art field and political realities and plays upon the invention of “postmodern savage”.2 At the Swiss Institute in New York, he proposed a work called Maquette for a Museum of Switzerland. The artist describes Switzerland like a “unique and exotic enclave of ‘a’ more than ‘anti-’ European culture”.3 The exhibition is an imaginary proposition to

A Tale of Another History

119

display part of Swiss culture, of pre-Christian and non-Christian phenomena, in a European museum of the future. (fig. 10)

In this case, the use of fiction is subtle and stays close to actuality. It is used to experiment with a possible reality within the invention of a museum. The following fictional example pushes to the limit of reality to express present matters in imagined landscapes.

Superpower: Africa in Science Fiction is an exhibition that brought together various works that use science fiction as a tool to produce critical discourses. By placing the work in a distant time, the artists have more room to think about social realities. It is possible “to resist the usual formulations of global discourse” by considering the ideas and methodologies of science fiction in a critical way. 4 In other words, science fiction can be used to complicate what documentary or ethnographic representations are trying to simplify, without being disconnected with reality. (fig. 11) “Thus [Jean] Rouch’s films raise central issues about ethnographic film-making, its strengths and limitations as a means of conveying information. Rouch has also turned the risks of subjective involvement with, and “disturbance” of, his subjects to positive use to produce what he has styled

120 Museum of Differences

fig. 10 Jimmie Durham, Maquette for a Museum of Switzerland, 2011 View of the Exhibition, Swiss Institute Contemporary Art, New York. Courtesy Migros Museum fĂźr Gegenwartskunst Zurich and Opdahl Gallery Berlin/Stavanger

A Tale of Another History

fig. 11 Luis Dourado, Untiled Map1, 2009/2010 Digital collage and Paper Manipulation Porto/Berlin,Portugal/Germany Š Luis Dourado

121

122 Museum of Differences a kind of “science fiction.” The reasons for this change from several years of conventional film reporting have never been fully spelled out, though by reading between the lines of this and other interviews, it is quite apparent that Rouch in some sense feels that academic ethnographic description not only freezes the situations described, but if those situations are ‘tragic,’ as they so often are, that it is only by introducing fantasy and role-playing that the participants can transcend them and begin to discover ‘a way out.’”5

The Museum of Differences dares to go a step further by seeking to introduce fiction into the ethnographic museum. The worthless matter of relating objective knowledge would be abandoned in favor of a creative use of information. Objects would become props and the museum a stage set to experiment with narratives of fictional genre. The archeological function of the museum would turn into a playful environment to act or reenact invented trajectories, previously restrained, into reality. ×

A Tale of Another History 123 1.

Crimp, op. cit., 53.

2.

Swiss Institute Contemporary Art New Yors, “Maquette fo a Museum of Switzerland”, Swissinstitute.net, http://swissinstitute.net/ exhibitions/exhibition. php?Exhibition=118; Internet: accessed 20 July 2012.

3.

Ibid.

4.

Basia Lewandowska Cummings, “Curating Superpower: Africa in Science Fiction”, Africaisacountry.com, http://africasacountry. com/2012/06/18/ curating-superpowerafrica-in-science-fiction/; Internet: accessed 11 August 2012.

5.

Paul Henley, “Jean Rouch Talks about His Films to John Marshall and John W. Adams”, American Anthropologist , (December, 1978): 1005.

5.

M O

u

s

e

u

m f

D i f f e r e n c e s

126 Museum of Differences DISRUPTIVE DIALOGUE The next step for the Museum of Differences will be to test how the paths explored in the different chapters evolve in real situations. It is only then, when applied to a physical context, the words and concepts developed will either start to make sense or nonsense. That is the point where the concept of Museum of Differences could differentiate itself from other academic papers on the subject. Would the current political and economical situation allow discontinuity in the history of an institutional frame?

Could it happen? Nothing is certain.

And where are the voices of the indigenous people? If looking at the ethnographic museum in the continuity of its colonial inheritance, the perspectives of indigenous people are still missing. Not only in their relation to history or to objects, but also in the production of thoughts, ideas or concepts.1 The standpoint of the Museum of Differences is that it is an evident matter which need not be disputed; it just needs to happen more often and more distinctly. This integration of underrepresented voices into the museum also needs to involve other minorities, such as immigrants and refugees. The center must be expanded and integrate plurality into the dialogue.

As mentioned earlier, words are powerful. Words are used to categorize and to make the unknown more familiar. Special words are

A Tale of Another History 127 invented to fragment history and turn interwoven moments into a clear and linear succession of events. The Museum of Differences argues that the first step toward a real reconfiguration of the ethnographic museum will occur with a change in the institution’s title. The current title signifies a historical position and places the institution in a clear cultural category. If a change of title is seen as a first step to reformulate the status of the museum in society, to create continuity or discontinuity with history, it can be explored as territory to formulate strong statements from where to narrate and articulate a collection. “When the determinants of a discursive field begin to break down, a whole range of new possibilities for knowledge opens up that could not have been foreseen from within the former field.�2

The Museum of Differences is determined to focus on the new possibilities that open up when previous discourses fall apart. The new modes of organizing knowledge and ideas will be plural and based on the exchanges that happen between all the parties involved. The network of groups engaged In the Museum of Differences will create a complex and flexible point of view with the aim, not to produce a single discourse, but a range of discourses that integrate disruption into its structure.

A re-definition of the ethnographic muse-

128 Museum of Differences um should be possible, if instead of simplifying the discourse, complex cultural and social outcomes would be integrated. Theoretical tools would need to be developed to embrace a plurality of points of view, layered with personal and collective memories. Complex historical events would be turned into creative solutions to question and reflect upon. Preexisting ideas would be considered as such and newly formulated concepts integrated in the institution as part of a changing platform. And the introduction of new elements would be carefully considered in relation to their surroundings. The museum, the collection and the exhibition context would then be seen as transitory situations rather than a fixed arrangement. Instead of defining its role, the Museum of Differences suggests that the ethnographic museum becomes a place to experiment with definitions in a setting composed of a succession of moments.

These statements have been formulated to provoke discussion; discussion which needs to extend into existing ethnographic museums and be turned into actions. It is only when applied and tested in real situations, that new concepts can be discredited, reformulated, improved or validated. Ă—

A Tale of Another History 129 1. “(...), if the goal is to liberate the study of art from its Eurocentric shell, much still remains to be done. My own reading of the situation suggests that the most underdeveloped aspect of artworld globalization lies less in the realm of art than in the realm of art criticism. Supplying the product is one thing, but having a say over what it represents (aesthetically, iconographically, referentially, historically) is quite another.�

Sally Price, Primitive Art in Civilized Places, second edition (The University of Chicago Press, 2001), 131.

2.

Crimp, op. cit., 134.

130 Museum of Differences

A f t e r w o r d

132 Museum of Differences CONTEMPORARY ART: A RECIPE? “The political function of contemporary art lies in this confrontation with a reality that slips away in order to appear in the form of logos and unrepresentable entities – flows, movements of capital, the repetition and distribution of information; so many generic images that seek to escape any visualization not controlled by public relations. The role of art is to become the radar screen on which these furtive forms – spotted and embodied – can finally appear and be named and represented.”1

Art and anthropology have a lot in common and the two fields mutually feed each other.

The links are so obvious that one wonders why a separation exists between the two domains.

Both are based on the study of human behavior in a social or cultural context. More and more books, exhibitions and seminars are organized around various topics belonging to one or both of the disciplines.2 In contemporary museums entire shows are curated concerning anthropological questions.3 “Many ethnology museums choose to work with contemporary artists as an instrument for institutional self-analysis, in order to use the subjective perspective to arrive at new insights. In this way, the collective narrative is being replaced by a mi-

A Tale of Another History 133 cro-perspective of different voices and the original colonial museum becomes a kind of meta-text for continuing commentary on this complex global reality.”4

With unequal success, the integration of contemporary art is also applied to ethnographic museums.5 It is not a necessity and sometimes it turns completely flat. It makes one wonder if it is intentional or just a way to avoid the complexity of presenting diversity. Translation, as defined by Nicolas Bourriaud, is an act of displacement that causes “the meaning of a text to move from one linguistic form to another and puts the associated tremors on display”.6 If the tremors caused by the shift are not understood as such, or not carefully considered, the translation falls apart and is meaningless. It is not enough to insert contemporary artwork inside an ethnographic museum and think it would work autonomously, as if by magic. These new elements would not necessarily introduce relevant concepts essential to the reconfiguration of the museum.

“All these practices have in common a focus on translation: elements belonging to a local visual or philosophical culture are transferred from a traditional universe in which they were strictly codified and fixed to one in which they are set in motion and placed beneath the gaze of a critical reading.”7

134 Museum of Differences

In an institution every element shown to the public has a meaning and needs to be carefully considered. Bringing interactivity into the museum does not automatically create interaction with the audience. Bringing contemporary art into a different setting does not necessarily provoke reactions. The museum needs to direct the visitor toward those new elements in order for him to be stimulated by them. The museum also needs to have a deep understanding of the new ingredients that are used and see them as part of the wider context. Each new element demands reorganization of the whole. It is not enough to add layers of components on top of each other with the expectation that they will make sense. Each new layer comes with its own set of rules, which need to be either consciously integrated into the new surroundings or purposefully rejected. A permanent in-depth modification takes place and it needs to be addressed.

New elements brought into an existing setting create new relationships. These changes need articulation, or re-articulation of the old and the new, so that the distinctions between the two dissolve into each other, as well as into the wider picture.

The introduction of contemporary art pieces into the ethnographic museum is not sufficient. The theoretical thinking behind the work must come with it and be directly applied to the institutional frame and the collection display. This has to be done with a critical attitude, keeping in mind that most of the intel-

A Tale of Another History 135 lectual production of art and its esthetic choices is dominantly produced in Western society. It needs to be seen as such.

“Taken together, these four characteristics of lifelike art – the what, where, who, and why – make up what I call the whole situation, or as much of it as can be identified at present. Anyone can see that the four parts merge and that the artist merges with the artwork and those who participate in it. And the work - the ‘work’ merges with its surroundings and doesn’t really exist by itself.”8 ×

136 Museum of Differences 1.

Bourriaud, op. cit., 58-59.

2.

See for example the symposium organized by The Stedelijk Museum and Stedelijk Museum Bureau Amsterdam at Project 1975 SMBA, “Video symposium ‘What is a ‘Postcolonial Exhibition’?”, Project1975.smba.nl, http://project1975.smba.nl/ en/article/videosymposium-what-is-apostcolonial-exhibition? utm_source=rss&utm_ medium=rss&utm_ campaign=videosymposium-what-is-apostcolonial-exhibition; Internet: accessed 2 August 2012 Or the book with Mariet Westermann and Hans Belting, Janet Berlo, Suzanne Preston Blier, Suzanne Preston Blier, Steve Bourget, Sarah Brett-Smith, Shelly Errington, David Freedberg, Anna Grimshaw, Jonathan Hay, Dr. Howard Morphy, Iken Stanley Okoye, Fancesco Pellizzi, Ruth Phillips. Anthropologies of Art. (Clark Studies in Visual Arts, 2005).

3.

See on the subject the exhibition Animism at The Haus der Kultur der Welt in Berlin in 2012, presenting the work of about 30 artists to create an Ethnological Museum of Modernity. Or the same year the contemporary art triennial Intense Proximity at the Palais de Tokyo in Paris exploring the connection between art and ethnography.

4.

Alice Smits, The Netherlands in Post-Colonial Perspective [essay on-line]; available from http://framerframed.nl/en/ dossier/niet-willen-wetennederland-in-postkoloniaal-perspectief/; Internet: accessed 25 February 2012.

5.

The Wereldmuseum of Rotterdam held an exhibition called Future Pass: From Asia to the World, and had the ambition to present the “new aesthetic that will dominate the 21st century”. Curated by Victoria Lu (Creative Director, Today Art Museum, Beijing ), it showed an accumulation of works in rooms with dark grey walls and bright spotlights and no natural light. Influenced by Asian art, animation and comics, it featured artists from all over

A Tale of Another History 137 the world. This exhibition was held in a temporary space. Next to it, the permanent exhibition had all the ingredients of a classical ethnographic display (behind vitrines, ordered by continent, and accompanied by tags of summary descriptions. No pictures were allowed). No connection of the temporary exhibition with the context of the museum and no interaction between the contemporary works and the permanent collection.

6.

Bourriaud, op. cit., 54.

7.

Ibid., 140.

8.

Kaprow, op. cit., 211.

BEHIND THE MASK OF MODERNITY Images curated by the Museum of Differences Behind the Mask of Modernity is a visual essay that presents a series of images where the old and the new is combined to tell the story of a modern society, a society where symbols overlap but do not merge into each other, and where “primitive� language can become either a stereotype or a representation of differences used to express cultural identity.

Cristina De Middel, The Afronauts series 10, 2012, photography Š Cristina De Middel

Brian Jungen, Prototype for New Understanding #8, 1999, Nike athletic footwear, human hair, Photography by Trevor Mills, Artwork owned by Collection of Colin Griffiths, Vancouver

Gabriel Orozco, Black Kites, 1997, human skull and graphite, © Gabriel Orozco; Marian Goodman Gallery, New York; Galerie Chantal Crousel, Paris; and Kurimanzutto, Mexico City

Francis Alÿs, Gun Camera from Sometimes Doing Something Poetic Can Become Political Sometimes doing Something Political Can Become Poetic, 2005, Mixed media, Image size 18 x 40-1/2 x 13-1/4”

Jake and Dinos Chapman, Insult to Injury , 2003, Francisco de Goya ‘Disasters of War’ Portfolio of eighty etchings reworked and improved, Each: 14 9/16 x 18 1/2 in. (37 x 47 cm) (framed) Paper size: 11 1/8 x 15 in. (28.3 x 38.1 cm).

Credit Photo: Stephen White, Courtesy White Cube

Walter Van Bierendonck, Lust Never Sleeps, Winter 2012/2013 collection,Photography by Dan Lecca,Š Walter Van Bierendonck

SBTRKT, Hold On (Sisi Barbak Rmx), 2012 Photographer: Dan Wilton, Masks: A Hidden Place

Dir. Aki Kaurism채ki, Le Havre, 2011. Sputnik, Pyramide Productions and Pandora Filmproduktion

Beau Dick, Untitled (Pugwis, The Sea Creature), 2009 Red Cedar, horse hair, acrylic, feathers Width 18 inches, height 22, depth 10 inches. Courtesy of Blanket Contemporary Art Inc.

Romuald Hazoumé, Liberté, 2009, Plastic, porcupine quills and fabric, © Romuald Hazoume 2009 /ADAGP. Licensed by Viscopy, Sydney, 2010

Makode Linde, Time Challenger, 2009, silk screen print.

Print, 41,5x29,5 cm © Villa Contemporary Art 2012

Yinka Shonibare, Leisure Lady (with ocelots) , 2001, Life-size fiberglass mannequin, 3 fiberglass ocelots, Dutch wax printed cotton, leather, glass, Vanhaerents Art Collection, Brussels

Mathangi Maya “M.I.A.” Arulpragasam, Bad Girls, 2012. Dir. Romain Gavras, Production by Danja

A Tale of Another History 157 REFERENCES Baudrillard, Jean. Le Système des objets. Édition Gallimard, 1968 Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. Taylor & Francis, 2004 Blanchard, Pascal, Gilles Boëtsch and Nanette Jacomijn Snoep. Exhibitions : L’invention du sauvage. Actes Sud Editions, 2011 Bourriaud, Nicolas. The Radicant. Lukas & Sternberg, 2010 Crimp, Douglas. On the Museum’s Ruins. The MIT Press, 1995 Deliss, Clementine. “Stored Code: Remediating Collections in a Post-Ethnographic Museum”. Stedelijk Museum Bureau Amsterdam Newsletter, No124 (Fall 2011): 9-23 Errington, Shelly. The Death of Authentic Primitive Art and Other Tales of Progress.

University of California Press, 1998 Fabian, Johannes. “Ethnographic Misunderstanding and the Perils of Context”.

American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol.97, No.1 (March

1995): 41-50. Database on-line. Available on Jstor Gruzinski, Serge. La Guerre des Images: de Christophe Colomb à “Blade Runner” (1492- 2019). Fayard, 1990 Henley, Paul, “Jean Rouch Talks about His Films to John Marshall and John W. Adams”, American Anthropologist , Vol.80, No.4 (December, 1978): 10051020. Database on-line.

Available on Jstor Kaprow, Allan. Essays on the Blurring of Art and Life.

University of California Press, 1993 Price, Sally. “Artistic Replays and Cultural Difference”. Archive Journal, vol.2, 2012. To be published.

Received by email Price, Sally. “Cultures en Dialogue: Options pour les Musées du XXIe siècle”.

Histoire de l’Art et Anthropologie, Paris, coédition INHA / Musée du Quai Branly (“les actes”). Septembre 2009.

Available from http:// actesbranly.revues.org/352 Accessed 28 October 2011 Price, Sally. Primitive Art in

158 Museum of Differences

A Tale of Another History 159

Civilized Place. University of Chicago Press, 1989

tag/decoloniality/ Accessed 25 February 2012

Shapiro, Alan N. “Gianna Maria Gatti’s The Technological Herbarium”.

Noemalab.org, 14 April 2010.

Available from http://www. noemalab.org/sections/ ideas/ideas_articles/ shapiro_technological_ herbarium.html Accessed 10 May 2012

Maaskant, Madeleine and Manet van Montfrans. The National Museum of Ethnology, a Dream. Opera P-Pers Publisher, 2007 Mauss, Marcel. Sociologie et anthropologie. Presses Universitaires de France, 1950

BIBLIOGRAPHY Appiah, Kwame Anthony.

“Is the Post- in Postmodernism the Post- in Postcolonial?”. Critical Inquiry, Vol.17, No.2 (Winter 1991): 336-357. Database on-line.

Available on Jstor Borgmeister, Rainer and Chris Cullens. “‘Sections des Figures:’ The Eagle from the Oligocene to the Present.” October, Vol.42. Marcel Broodthaers: Writings, Interviews, Photographs (Autumn 1987): 135-154.

Database on-line. Available on Jstor Collard, Jean-Max. “L’exposition, une immatérielle”.

Hippocampe, No 5 (Juin 2011): 33- 38 Durham, Jimmie. A Matter of

Life Death and Singing. JRP | Ringier Publication, 2012 Gioni, Massimiliano. “The Limits of Interpretation”.

The Exhibitionist, No 4 (June 2011): 17-22 Hantelman, Dorothea von.

“The Curatorial Paradigm”.

The Exhibitionist, No 4 (June 2011): 6-12 Heide, Sara van der. 24 European Ethnographic Museums.

Roma Publication, 2011 Levi-Strauss, Claude. Tristes tropiques. Pocket, 1955 Lucero, María Elena. “‘Decoloniality’ in Latin American art”. Southernperspectives. net, 14 August 2011. Available from http://www. southernperspectives.net/

Perec, Georges. Penser / Classer. Seuil / 2003 Price, Sally. Au musée des illusions - le rendez-vous manqué du quai Branly.

Édition Denoël, 2011 Price, Sally and Richard Price. “Executing Culture Musee, Museo, Museum”.

American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol.97, No.1 (March 1995): 97-109. Database on-line. Available on Jstor Roelstrate, Dieter. “Artist at Work: Willem de Rooij”.

Afterfall.org, 2 November 2010. Available from http://afterall.org/online/ artists-at-work-willemde-rooij Accessed 2 November 2011 Russo, Alessandra.

“Triptyques novohispano.

Plumes, Cartes et Graffiti pour une histoire métisse

des arts (16e-17e siecles)”.

Nuevo Mundo Mundos Nuevos, Aulal Virtual, 2007.

Janvier 2007. http://nuevomundo.revues.org/3420.

Accessed 4 November 2011 Serota, Nicholas. Experience or Interpretation: The Dilemma of Museums of Modern Art. Thames & Hudson Ltd, 2005 Shapiro, Alan N. “Conversation between Alan N. Shapiro and Franco Torriani about Gianna Maria Gatti’s The Technological Herbarium”. Noemalab.org, 4 October 2010. Available from http://www.noemalab. org/sections/ideas/ideas_ articles/shapiro_ torriani_ conversation.html Accessed 10 May 2012