Who can Native Americans trust?
Robert Johnson
Having recently returned from the meetings in Albuquerque of
the Society for Applied Anthropology, I have a suggestion for
Native American tribal groups.
The next time there is a meeting of anthropologists or archaeologists
which include those who work "for" your people, I would suggest that
you hire yourself a white private investigator to attend the meetings.
You should then instruct him or her to solicit the true feelings
of those white anthropologists and archaeologists towards their jobs
and the tribal group that employs them.
I would suggest that you would have reports concerning the true
feelings of those white anthropologists and archaeologists that
work for your people.
I would further suggest, that after the reports you obtained on
those who work "for" your tribes, you may decide that you are
better off not trusting white anthropologists and archaeologists,
could go it alone, and redouble or begin to set up programs for your
peoples in anthropology and archaeology.
Robert Johnson-
Formerly of the Dept.
of Anthropology,
University of Colorado
Dave Wells
anthropologists and archaeologists and the possible problems of Native
Americans trust in their services.
I am Native American, a student and directing a facilities planning project
for one of the Native American nations. I have been searching for a
graduate programme that will allow me to continue museum studies, but
either those programes are art history oriented or anthropology
oriented. I have a few problems with studying history that concerns art
(rather than finding new ways to talk and describe the work art and so
forth) and I have some definite problems approaching Native American
collections through anthropology. It is as if we are so academically
definient that we cannot remove the ethnocentrism and consider Native
American collections in a multi-disciplinary manner; to which they
deservedly belong. Further, I would greatly challenge the notion that a
culture can be understood through material culture; that would seem
self-limiting at best and not very holistic.
Anthropology has been too often and too long the realm of "colonial"
thinking, and although much has changed over the years to remove much of
that stigma and orientation, it has not totally escaped that mind-set. I
think that if we are truly to look at cultures and to represent them in
museum settings, we have to be able to present EVERYTHING that affects
and defines that culture.
I think we need new ways of arriving at understanding and for
interpreting that information. Certainly, it is time we used our
academic and syllogistic systems to make this leap.
I am very willing to entertain any sort of discussion on these topics.
Dave Wells
Olympia, WA
JSIMMONS%UK...@pucc.princeton.edu
You raise a very interesting question re: graduate programs. What you
might consider is a museum studies program similar to the one here at
the University of Kansas which has an American Studies option (there is
also an anthropology option, as well as history and natural history).
You will probably have to find a program flexible enough that you can
more or less design your own course of study, but that should not be
too difficult. It sounds like you have a clear idea of what you need.
Good luck,
John Simmons
Natural History Museum
University of Kansas
jsim...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
marta henriksen
Being a half Native American and half white person who attended these
same meetings, and who is also a graduate student in Anthropology, I
would suggest that there was some small representation for "our" people
there. Unfortunately that voice is small, but growing in strength. My
questions are: why a white investigator? Why an investigator at all?
I agree that programs from within the community are often far superior to
those imposed from outside, and that "we" should be doing our own ethnography.
I do not, however, agree that all the work being done by anthropologists
who are of other ethnicities among the Native American communities are
doing a disservice. Maybe it would be more fruitful to speak in
specifics than to make blanket accusations.
Mr. Johnson, I heard your paper at the meetings here in Albuquerque, and
was moved by your point of view. But, as I said to you in the session, I
feel that there must be room for many different kinds of voices to be
heard in the struggle to decolonize the systems of knowledge which are
dominant in the world. Some of us will choose to take up arms, and some
of us will not. A revolution needs both kinds of people, those who fight
with their bodies and those who fight with their minds. I am sorry to
see that you are leaving the University, I have appreciated your insight
into many things on the lists, and feel that anthropology could benefit
from the conscience nudging of your persistent voice.
Marta Henriksen
Department of Anthropology
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM
hen...@unm.edu
Marjorie Halpin
at EVERYTHING that affects and defines a culture. This is obviously not
possible, except in the most complex kind of hypermedia presentation
perhaps. I suggest that the real problem is the nature of
'representationism' itself; a particular mindset especially prevalent in
anthropology, but increasingly widespread among other kinds of museum
professionals. Why don't we discuss alternatives to 'repreenting'
others, including the relatively undebated issue of 'self-representation.'
Marjorie Halpin
UBC Museum of Anthropology
James Fredrick Wylie
Americans." He implied that they are self-serving and untrustworthy.
Isn't it more accurate to say some people act this way regardless of
their ethnicity or affiliations. All groups, nations, armies, churches,
etc. have been betrayed at some time, frequently by members of their own
group. All groups should keep an eye on those that are selected to act
in the group's interests, not just "Native Americans." In conclusion,
why not hire a purple people eater, black Republican, or yellow
public relations manager-why a "white" PI?
James Wylie
Texas A&M U.
Robert Johnson
> I am sorry to
> see that you are leaving the University, I have appreciated your insight
> into many things on the lists, and feel that anthropology could benefit
> from the conscience nudging of your persistent voice.
Marta
I appreciated your point of view also.
I am not however leaving the university. I am going into our new
department of multicultural studies where an anthropology of
liberation is being created.
We are approaching a time when the fate of humankind hangs in the
balance.
Anthropology will not be appropriated by those who will use it to
effect tyranny. Anthropology lives in the heart of universities and
in the heart of Chiapas.
Robert
Murph the Surf
> Why don't we discuss alternatives to 'repreenting'
> others, including the relatively undebated issue of 'self-representation.'
> Marjorie Halpin
> UBC Museum of Anthropology
The new national museum being built in New Zealand is dealing with the
problems of how to represent two cultures, the European and Maori,
neither of which is, I understand, considered native to the islands,
in one environment.
Is there someone from New Zealand lurking out there?
Robbin Murphy
rnm...@acfcluster.nyu.edu
Ken Heard
^^^^
--
Ken Heard
Consultant Museologist
Coordinator
Technology and Transport Museums Sector
Canadian Museums Association
E-Mail: khe...@ccs.carleton.ca
Carol E Mayer
approaches reach towards a conversation rather than instruction.
However, I note that the voice of the museum is not there. Are we still
talking at the "other" whether they be the "occupants" of the display
case or the "viewers" of the display case?
On Wed, 5 Apr 1995, Gregory Scheib wrote:
> The Nat Mus of the Amer. Indian has a really fine exhibit at the Custom
> House NY. They display objects and give examples of an "art history"
> interp." an "anthro" interp, and a "Native" interp. You might not argee
> with the content of each label, but it makes you realize there is more
> than one way to present and discuss objects and their meanings. And of
> course, each highlights different aspects of the same object. I hope
> more museums will pick up on this multi-view approach. It is refreshing and
> much needed at the Smithsonian.
>
> Gregory Scheib
> George Washington University
> gsc...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu
>
> On Mon, 3 Apr 1995, Marjorie Halpin wrote:
>
> > David Wells argues that to represent cultures in museums we have to look
> > at EVERYTHING that affects and defines a culture. This is obviously not
> > possible, except in the most complex kind of hypermedia presentation
> > perhaps. I suggest that the real problem is the nature of
> > 'representationism' itself; a particular mindset especially prevalent in
> > anthropology, but increasingly widespread among other kinds of museum
> > professionals. Why don't we discuss alternatives to 'repreenting'
Gregory Scheib
voice" is intact. How can it not be, they are after all
controlling the objects, themes, and interpretations, regardless of how
diverse the view points. Not that I'm complaining. This
conversational approach is still far better than other methods of
presentation I've seen.
I do agree we are still talking at the audience/other. And I guess I don't
have an solution for that. It seems the core of museum exhibition is to
shape meaning, weither that meaning is broad or narrow, inclusive or
exclusive. Regardless of how many viewpoints presented in exhibition,
they are all filtered by the curator/museum. My point is that there
should be more than just one view presented in cultural exhibition so
that the viewer can make judgements and opinions for themselves, and see
that there is more than one way to look at a subject/object.
( A pretty nifty run on sentence there.)
I don't think a museum can present a subject and not avoid manipulating
it. We are after all just another form of mass media. What are our
"journalistic ethics?"
Gregory Scheib
George Washington University
gsc...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu
Knut Djupedal
>Subject: Re: Who can Native Americans Trust?
>On Mon. 3 Apr 1995 Dave Wells wrote, "Mr. Robert Johnson posed and
>interesting insight..." , and later, "I think that if we are truly to look
>at cultures and represent them in museum settings, we have to be able to
>present everything that affects and defines that culture. I think we need new
>ways of arriving at understanding and for interpreting that information."
My job is to build a new museum, i.e., to lay the premises and rules for a new
institution. In this situation, it has occurred to me that many museums
begin as collections and then someone asks "What do we do with all this
stuff?" I think that we should perhaps begin at the other end, that is, ask
of the institution the existential question, "Who are you", or "Who should you
become?"
For my own part, I see museums as storytellers, as Singers of Tales. Like any
storyteller, museums recount the past or the present, but they also interpret
and define it. Their tales may be entertaining, but if they are good at their
task, the tales also have a point. Sometimes they wil frighten their audience,
sometimes they will make the audience laugh. Throughout, they collect and
conserve artifacts. However, the artifacts themselves, no matter how
valuable or unique, are but anchors for their tale, to be reinterpreted again
and again as the story is retold over time.
I think that it is here we may find a basic philosophical difference between
theme parks and museums (at least the theme parks in this country). The
former tell the same tale over and over again, without any basic change in the
story line. Furthermore, their story is a safe and comfortable one. The latter
tell a story based on the best available evidence. If the evidence changes,
the story will change as well. Too, they are perfectly willing to make the
audience uncomfortable if the story requires it.
I think, then, that like any really expert storyteller, the primary task of a
museum is not to entertain. It is to express the realities of a culture and to
make that culture, in all its variety, available to the present and future.
Such a task must be, to use Mr. Wells' words, multi-disciplinary and holistic,
and it is at least in theory, unlimited.
Knut Djupedal
Director
Norwegian Emigrant Museum
Strandgt. 33, 2300 HAMAR NORWAY
knut.d...@emigrant.museum.no
Hank Burchard
> I am Native American, a student and directing a facilities planning project
> for one of the Native American nations. I have been searching for a
> graduate programme that will allow me to continue museum studies, but
> either those programes are art history oriented or anthropology
> oriented. I have a few problems with studying history that concerns art
> (rather than finding new ways to talk and describe the work art and so
> forth) and I have some definite problems approaching Native American
> collections through anthropology. It is as if we are so academically
> definient that we cannot remove the ethnocentrism and consider Native
> American collections in a multi-disciplinary manner; to which they
> deservedly belong. Further, I would greatly challenge the notion that a
> culture can be understood through material culture; that would seem
> self-limiting at best and not very holistic.
>
> Anthropology has been too often and too long the realm of "colonial"
> thinking, and although much has changed over the years to remove much of
> that stigma and orientation, it has not totally escaped that mind-set. I
> think that if we are truly to look at cultures and to represent them in
> museum settings, we have to be able to present EVERYTHING that affects
> and defines that culture.
>
> I think we need new ways of arriving at understanding and for
> interpreting that information. Certainly, it is time we used our
> academic and syllogistic systems to make this leap.
>
> I am very willing to entertain any sort of discussion on these topics.
I am also a native American, lower-case (n)ative American, that is,
and it sounds to me like you are not seeking a multi-disciplinary
approach but an *undisciplined* approach to Native American history.
Why do you feel there is stigma attached to the anthropological
approach to history? I have just returned from Jamestown VA, where
anthropologists of many ethnic origins are studying, with equal attention
and respect, the artifacts and culture of the early colonists and of the
indigenous peoples. They using the same methods for both for the good and
sufficient reason that both are *human* cultures.
In Europe and England anthropologists excavate caves and graves and
campsites by the same standardized methods to seek to understand the
material and spiritual culture of my ancestors. I don't regard this as
demeaning in any way, I find it fascinating.
When I hear members of an ethnic group criticizing "outsiders"
studying their history and culture, I tend to suspect that the group
fears the resulting history will conflict with traditional stories and
founding myths. It always does, because the stories we tell about
ourselves are heroic, whereas the truth is, we are all human beings.
For instance, the widely promulgated image of Native Americans as
living in harmony with nature and among themselves until the Europeans
invaded Eden is as lovely as it is ludicrous. Native American tribes
typically practiced wholesale slaughter of game, with attendant waste;
many practiced chattel slavery, exquisitely cruel torture of captives,
and cannibalism. Many allied themselves with Europeans against their own
neighbors. And so forth. These are not matters of shame, they are matters
of fact that must be understood if we are to understand particular
cultures and find the common threads that unite us.
Slavery, human sacrifice and cannibalism were practiced by many
European cultures also, in many cases well into "modern" times. I am not
ashamed of this, I am interested by it. The only things I am ashamed of
are the wrong things I myself do.
Native Americans are no more spiritual than any other humans. It is
simply that the expression of spirituality varies among them as among all
human groups. Anyone who is afraid of having his or her culture examined
should look into his or her own heart for the source of that fear.
oecpc114@sivm.si.edu (rachel)
observed that it is the same one, different group, that has been going
on forever--some members of my Jewish family would side with you, some
with D Wells on the question of whether THEY can interpret US. it's all
the same.
At the risk of becoming a paraiah in my circle of leftist liberal
friends and collegues, i wrote on this topic, re the Museum of the
American Indian in New York, in the latest issue of NAMES publication
"The Exhibitionist" and i would welcome (gulp) comments.
rachel b.
smithsonian
Jack Thompson
As one who grew up among the Umatilla, Yakima, & Warm Springs Indians; a
young white man who stood by and watched the Indians catch salmon at Celilo
Falls before The Dalles Dam eliminated the Falls (and watched as a young Indian
boy pushed gravel down the throats of salmon which his parents were
selling to my parents [among others] by the pound); who remembers Indian
boys being shorn of their long hair by sheep shear-wielding white boys;
who went to college and at one time served as director of a folklore
project on a NW Indian Reservation, I have some opinions.
Catholic and Protestant Indian schools have been around long enough to
have destroyed the direct transmission on native culture.
Native languages survive (for the most part) in the records (and some
audio recordings) of linguists/anthropologists who learned from native
speakers who lacked many if not most teeth. Think about it.
Scholars (of the non-Native American persuasion) who wish to spend time
on a reservation require a letter from the tribal council in support of
their funding. Tribal councils all too often write such a letter in
return for an agreement from the scholar to the effect that the tribal
council has the right of first refusal for any publication of the results
of the scholar's results.
This helps to explain why there are so many articles about basket making
and pottery, etc.
Material culture studies may not always be politically correct, but they
are not (may not be...) swayed by the whim of the researcher
The problems are long standing; the solutions (and they are multiple)
will come with time and understanding.
But they will not come from university faculty and they will not come
from tribal council members.
Jack C. Thompson
Thompson Conservation Lab
Portland, OR
j...@Reed.edu
On Mon, 3 Apr 1995, Dave Wells wrote:
> Mr Robert Johnson posed an interesting insight in his message concerning
> anthropologists and archaeologists and the possible problems of Native
> Americans trust in their services.
>
> I am Native American, a student and directing a facilities planning project
> for one of the Native American nations. I have been searching for a
> graduate programme that will allow me to continue museum studies, but
> either those programes are art history oriented or anthropology
> oriented. I have a few problems with studying history that concerns art
> (rather than finding new ways to talk and describe the work art and so
> forth) and I have some definite problems approaching Native American
> collections through anthropology. It is as if we are so academically
> definient that we cannot remove the ethnocentrism and consider Native
> American collections in a multi-disciplinary manner; to which they
> deservedly belong. Further, I would greatly challenge the notion that a
> culture can be understood through material culture; that would seem
> self-limiting at best and not very holistic.
>
> Anthropology has been too often and too long the realm of "colonial"
> thinking, and although much has changed over the years to remove much of
> that stigma and orientation, it has not totally escaped that mind-set. I
> think that if we are truly to look at cultures and to represent them in
> museum settings, we have to be able to present EVERYTHING that affects
> and defines that culture.
>
> I think we need new ways of arriving at understanding and for
> interpreting that information. Certainly, it is time we used our
> academic and syllogistic systems to make this leap.
>
> I am very willing to entertain any sort of discussion on these topics.
>
> Dave Wells
> Olympia, WA
>