No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Narratives of the treaty table: Cultural property and the negotiation of tradition
... Given that Whitefeather is rooted in the community of Pikangikum, the narratives given by members of the Whitefeather Forest Corporation will also be considered in relation to writings on Aboriginal narratives (Cruikshank 1991(Cruikshank , 2000(Cruikshank , 2007Riddington 1996;Wickwire 2005). Narratives are an integral part of negotiations between government and First Nations (Laforet 2004). ...
... Narration itself is a necessary protocol of a relationship. However, the more time a negotiating group spends together, the less frequently that certain narratives will be told (Laforet 2004). A couple of participants mentioned that they have only heard narratives pertaining to early interactions, such as the arrival of a yellow Lands and Forests plane in the community, and the subsequent burning of furs, a few times during their years of work with Pikangikum. ...
... Management Corporation. The method is an analysis of narratives, as narratives are an important part of negotiation processes between First Nations and governments (Laforet 2004). The purpose of the study is to understand how negotiators from both groups perceive the history of the relationship, the workings of the relationship, and some of the challenges. ...
... Often, projects involving technologies of access and circulation for cultural property are thought to be a universal good, without a thoughtful consideration for what the people with the greatest stake in that material might think (Laforet 2004, Ginsburg 2007. Scholars have therefore proposed that as ICTs continue to impact such communities, these factors must be respected and built into the system design and the social process by which technologies are adopted (Christen 2006;Srinivasan 2007b;Boast, Bravo, and Srinivasan 2007;Srinivasan, Boast, Furner, and Becvar 2007;Hughes and Dallwitz 2007). ...
This paper advocates that tribal museums adopt a critical and reflexive approach towards using new media technologies to provide digital access to their collections, in support of their agendas of cultural revitalization and self-representation. We present a model which is intended to reveal the important social and cultural factors which should influence the design and implementation of technological systems of access to tribal museum collections, and we show how our model is working in the context of a particular tribal museum – the A:shiwi A:wan Museum and Heritage Center of Zuni, New Mexico, USA.
This paper offers an analysis of the function of the terms culture, heritage and museums in UNESCO charters and guide lines from its inception until today. The frame of analysis is soteriological, i.e. UNESCO is interpreted as a secular church and theology aimed at producing salvation via culture. In theology salvation is a tripartite concept. It can be related to “grace, the idea that salvation occurs less through human effort and more due to a higher power; effort, the idea that salvation occurs through human effort to overcome ignorance and/or sin; and ritual; the idea that certain practices or sequences of action have an automatic efficacy independent of human or divine intention.” (Flood, 2016: 624). Museological salvation is mainly connected to effort and ritual, and UNESCO has a theology for both of them. Culture is the arena for human effort, whereas the Museum is a prime place for ritual.
The credo is set in the opening of the UNESCO charter: “since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed.” To realize this Kingdom of Peace “the world’s inheritance of books, works of art and monuments of history and science” must be conserved and protected, and displayed by museums for the use in salvific effort and ritual.
In the early 1990 UNESCO soteriology experienced a crisis when the earlier orthodox belief in one universal and shared culture was proclaimed heretic and a new theology of diversity was introduced, the ritual was also redirected towards inter-cultural dialogue and post-national identity making (UNESCO 2009). This in turn led to turmoil over whether there is a reformed but still catholic theology of diversity, or a reformation producing diverse soteriologies in break away movements such as new museology, ecomuseums and post-museums (Vergo 1989, Davies 2011, Hooper-Greenhill 2000).
Seguimos dessacralizando o museu, colocando-o a parte do divino e dos saberes do sagrado, como distanciamos da vida desta dimensão. Proponho contradizer as generalizações em contextos museais e agregar outras visões. A etimologia da palavra museu sugere ao templo das musas, também considera o filho de Orfeu e sua missão poética no mundo, mas há outras concepções. É restritivo pensar o sagrado em termos de arquitetura profana monumental ou pela busca de certos objetos pelo público, isto está nos planos do poder, marketing, imaginário, afetos, emociones etc., não do sagrado. Sabemos o que é sagrado e como identificá-lo? Nossa base de reflexão museológica é um trabalho no Brasil com indígenas em museus tradicionais e autogestionados. Primero argumento, os indígenas vivem o sagrado. 2º. a espiritualidade faz parte do cotidiano indígena, mas é outra realidade com normas próprias que orientam a vida individual e social, 3º. um sistema de comunicação complexo no qual o Pajé tem um papel importante. 4º. argumento, enquanto os territórios indígenas são espaços sagrados – de práticas, cultos, lutas, violência, opressão, extermínio, resistência, conquistas – também as florestas e lugares de culto, os museus podem ser consagrados. Um Pajé afirmou sobre os objetos indígenas em museus – tudo é sagrado. Outro Pajé escolheu um museu para batizar uma menina indígena. Uma Pajé sabe que os remanescentes humanos em museus são seres humanos e devem ser respeitados pela equipe e público. Os indígenas nos alertam, há que saber onde e como guardar os objetos na reserva técnica, ainda, se manipulamos ou falamos sobre eles – evocamos outras dimensões, algumas pessoas têm permissão para trabalhar com os objetos, outras não. Sabemos o que é sagrado e como devemos tratá-lo museograficamente? Sobre isso queremos discutir a partir dos saberes indígenas.
Dans cet article, j’examine la relation entre un conservateur de musée et un Cri des Plaines spécialiste des rituels, dans le cadre d’une recherche anthropologique portant sur des objets autochtones sacrés et cérémoniels appartenant à des collections muséales, donc à l’État. J’avance que les relations des Autochtones avec les objets sacrés et cérémoniels se situent nécessairement en-dehors des catégories de la propriété sur lesquelles se fonde l’État, et je démontre que le simple fait de mettre en doute le présupposé voulant qu’il n’y ait qu’un unique cosmos préexistant remet en question ce qui est en jeu dans les revendications de propriété. Plutôt que de se préoccuper de droits de propriété légaux, ces revendications font apparaître que ce qui constitue les relations éthiques entre les musées et les peuples autochtones dépend de la reconnaissance de l’existence de mondes différents.
As museums begin to revisit their definition of "expert" in light of theories about the local character of knowledge, questions emerge about how museums can reconsider their documentation of knowledge about objects. How can a museum present different and possibly conflicting perspectives in such a way that the tension between them is preserved? This article expands upon a collaborative research project between the Museum of Anthropology and Archaeology at Cambridge University, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), and the A:shiwi A:wan Museum and Heritage Center to compare descriptions of museum objects by multiple expert communities. We found that narratives and objects in use are key omissions in traditional museum documentation, offering us several possibilities to expand our concept of digital objects. Digital objects will allow members of indigenous source communities to contribute descriptive information about objects to support local cultural revitalization efforts and also to influence how objects are represented in distant cultural institutions.
The ambivalent legacy of anthropologists' relations with local communities presents contemporary researchers with both obstacles and opportunities. No longer justifiable by assumptions of free scientific access and interpersonal rapport, research increasingly calls for explicit contract agreements and negotiated reciprocities. The complex, unfinished colonial entanglements of anthropology and Native communities are being undone and rewoven, and even the most severe indigenous critics of anthropology recognize the potential for alliances when they are based on shared resources, repositioned indigenous and academic authorities, and relations of genuine respect. This essay probes the possibilities and limits of collaborative work, focusing on recent Native heritage exhibitions in south-central and southwestern Alaska. It also discusses the cultural politics of identity and tradition, stressing social processes of articulation, performance, and translation.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.