INTRODUCTIONIn this review I discuss the growing chorus of criticism and controversy over the treatment of non-Western art and material culture in museums. I have chosen to bypass the steady flow of solid ethnographic studies of traditional arts and popular arts, and the emergence of new theoretical concerns in these studies for two reasons.1 First, academic anthropologists rarely consider mu seum anthropology as an important area for the employment of anthropolo gists, and thus for the training of students. The situation for anthropologists in museums is rapidly changing and aspiring curators should be advised of the directions of change. Second, museum anthropologists now practice in a highly politicized public setting and their experience puts current theory into practice in interesting ways.Controversies surrounding museum practice in the 1980s and early 1990s have highlighted many recent issues of academic debate-the nature of ethno graphic authority, the creation of traditions, the examination of colonial and postcolonial bias in the representation of other cultures, the ethical responsibil ities of anthropologists, and the epistemological status of analytical categories ("art," "text," and "culture").I refer the interested reader to review articles on recent studies in African art (1, 16), of literature on Paleolithic art studies (37,164), and on the study of material culture (68,96,116,136). Further ANNUAL REVIEWS JONESThe "politicization of the humanities" has blasted out of the academy and into the media (105) and has hit the museum world like a hurricane. The practice of anthropology in museums has entered a stage of heightened risk and intense public scrutiny (97). New political and economic realities are effecting changes in all areas of museum operations: research, curation, and exhibitions, in particular. Critics from within academic anthropology are help ing to shape these changes. This is a startling tum of events from the not-so distant past when academic anthropology ignored (at best) or derided museum anthropology, and when museums were considered the most conservative of research institutions (19). THE PRACTICE OF ANTHROPOLOGY IN MUSEUMS Diff erencesMany authors have described the rift between museum anthropology and academic anthropology (4:38-43; 43:156; 59; 67; 99; 100:180-81, 183). Aca demic anthropologists commonly dismiss collections-based research as non theoretical (4:40), or as exemplifying outmoded or unfashionable theories (such as evolutionism, see 116:491-92). Academics (and some museum cura tors) consider exhibition work "less respectable and intellectually demanding than teaching" (100: 184) or "like writing an elementary textbook with a liberal use of visual aids" (4:42).The practice of anthropology in museums has few things in common with its practice on campuses (4, 43, 99, 100).2 Museum curators conduct field research, publish in scholarly journals, and attend conferences. In small muse ums, curators are also expected to be familiar with a wide range of artifact types and c...
Entangled Objects: Exchange, Material Culture, and Colonialism in the Pacific. NICHOLAS THOMAS. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991. 259 pp., 31 b/w illustration, 4 maps. $32.50 (cloth), $14.95 (paper).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.