Reparation

 

As I was looking for an article I wanted to study about a specific case of reparation from a museum, I found myself so bombarded with articles pertaining to it I started to wonder why there was still so much push back from museums in returning their stollen and looted artifacts to their places of origin. There arguments are feeble at best and the overwhelming instances of a museum saying they would return one or a few things to look good in the public eye; only to have the government have to step in and seize items and on some occasions multiple times is astonishing. These places are supposed to be setting the standard in stewardship, inclusion, and sharing history and art with the masses; yet they continually fail to put the general well being of people (even most of those working for them) in the background as much as possible for the sake of maintaining an enormous amount of value in their collections that are rarely have on display for the people (but only the people that can afford to visit) in that city to see and learn about. Why after being so thoroughly called out for having massive collections of the nation’s war loot; are they not more apt to return it?[1]  

With the continued rhetoric that has been fed to society for generations condoning such acts as stealing artifacts, treasure hunting, war spoils, and finders keepers among other notions of the same flavor, the common thinking in the upper levels of museum operations seems to be; we are the keepers of the history and no one else can have it. We stole it fair and square.

With popular culture making media that glorifies all manner of stealing under the guise of preserving history as in all of the Indiana Jones films, The Mummy films, National Treasure and the list goes on; as well as video games, books, etc. The notion that American and European white people are allowed to go to other countries and obtain pieces of other people’s cultures for the sake of preserving, studying, and monetizing those items has been an acceptable excuse to pillage for far too long.

Museum discussion makers are stalling the reparation of their items because they do not want to see the collection, the physical representation of their wealth depleted, that would mean the shareholders would no longer profit off a museum’s collection or any new items the museum could acquisition from possible black markets or illegal brokers. The Met boasts a collection of over 2 million pieces spanning over 5000 years of human creations.[2]  The Met has also had 27 artifacts seized by the Metropolitan DA as the only means of returning an item in the care of the museum to its place of origin because the foundational rules of the museum forbid any item leave the museum (Times, Bowley). Other high profile museums have only recently started to return items in their collections to its place of origin despite setting guidelines and principles that aligned with the 1970 UNESCO convention that was intended to help the nations of the world with how antiquities were handled back in the 1970’s. Yet 50 years later and the governments are having to step in to make sure the museums return known stolen items. Although the knowledge of taking anything from someone else by force or theft is a fairly universal way of not making friends has been around for a very long time. [3]

If museums truly wanted to be a place of history, education, inclusion, inspiration, and community support perhaps they could start working with each other instead of against each other by learning how to admit that past officials have made unethical discissions and obtained items that should have been left where they were and in their cultural context as was intended by the people who understood it and could teach others about it. Return the parts of their collections that should be returned and perhaps more of the collection could be shared. Perhaps museums could even reach a point where parts of collections could be shared among museums all over the world in circulation so as many people could see them as possible while also keeping pieces in their proper context and historical or religious value that the people who made them hold them to. 

The rational of museum officials, shareholders, and the public in general needs to be shifted to consider the true impact of past actions because we are the ones that are here now to change the thinking, to work at making the world a more inclusive and considerate place for future generations.

 

Bibliography

Bowley, Graham. “For U.S. Museums with Looted Art, the Indiana Jones Era Is Over.” The New York Times, December 13, 2022. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/13/arts/museums-looted-art-repatriation.html.

“General Information.” General Information - The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Accessed April 2, 2023. https://www.metmuseum.org/press/general-information?&rpp=50&st=facet&pg=1&cat=Topic%7COverview.

“John Oliver on Stolen Antiquities in Western Museums: ‘Abject Callousness on Display.’” The Guardian, October 3, 2022. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/oct/03/john-oliver-stolen-antiquities-western-museums.

 

---

[1] “John Oliver on Stolen Antiquities in Western Museums: ‘Abject Callousness on Display.’” The Guardian, October 3, 2022. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/oct/03/john-oliver-stolen-antiquities-western-museums.

 

 

[2] “General Information.” General Information - The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Accessed April 2, 2023. https://www.metmuseum.org/press/general-information?&rpp=50&st=facet&pg=1&cat=Topic%7COverview.

 

[3] Bowley, Graham. “For U.S. Museums with Looted Art, the Indiana Jones Era Is Over.” The New York Times, December 13, 2022. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/13/arts/museums-looted-art-repatriation.html.