#9 Own the Change
Restitution, its digital aspects and the need for diverse perspectives
The things in digital that take over the stage of GLAM discourse are too often hypes like the animated deep fakes of old photographs or NFTs. Both left us with an uncomfortable feeling of “How is this adding value to our societies or understanding of history or art? How is it making the world better or even more beautiful?”. (By the way: We’ll try to not engage in the NFT debate - we don’t want to add to the noise.)
There are aspects about the cultural heritage sector that need to change, and one of them is the activities and people that we focus our attention on. If we shine the light more regularly on the little things that happened outside the radar of our sector, the people that are deeply concerned with engaging their communities with history and arts, without getting all the attention, the big funding, or even the praise of their peers (although they should). Digital in GLAM should be less about chasing the hype, the new shiny stuff, the big institutions. So this is why it’s the mission of Dig It! to balance the big transformative projects with the smaller, just as much dedicated and important discourses. One of these debates that we should engage more in are the digital aspects of repatriation. Let’s get to it!
To add a bit of joy, we feature some of the winning images from Wiki Loves Monuments 2020 - one from each continent (apart from Australia and Antarctica which weren’t represented in the competition).
Furthermore, in this issue, we talk about repatriation and the ethics around its digital aspects, balancing different memories about the past, how you can ask those difficult questions about your institution’s process of change, and our responsibility as visitors and users.
1. Let’s Talk about... Repatriation, restitution, and their digital aspects
Larissa: This week, the Director of the Humboldt Forum in Berlin, announced that the newly-finished museum and cultural space will not exhibit the Benin Bronzes in their collections, but instead highlighted possibilities for their return to Nigeria. This brings the important debate around repatriation and restitution of artworks and heritage objects that were looted, stolen, and/or obtained in colonial contexts back to the center stage. In a longer press statement, the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, the organization managing among others the Humboldt Forum, said that “it is an important first step that all Benin bronzes located in Berlin are digitized and accessible online”.1
I think this is an interesting aspect of repatriation that we do not talk about as much as we should. When Andrea Wallace and Mathilde Pavis published their legal report in response to the French Cultural Ministry’s recommendations around repatriation in 2019, they stated2:
“[...] while France returns Africa’s cultural heritage, Paris could still legally retain control over the generation, presentation, and stewardship of Africa’s digital cultural heritage for decades to come. This means that the French could claim a right to digitise cultural heritages that are not theirs in the first place. Decisions about digitisation will fall under EU rather than African law, meaning that there is a risk of imposing Western perspectives of how intellectual property should be exploited — or not — and how access should be extended to Africa’s cultural heritage.” Mathilde Pavis and Andrea Wallace, 2019
These are crucial points on the power hierarchies in these discourses to consider when we talk about the repatriation and return of cultural heritage objects from colonial contexts.
Medhavi: As an OpenGLAM advocate, (and more as a happy user of Indian art content from the various platforms) I have to admit, I never saw open collections through this lens! Does a study of the use of digital collections by people (like me) from the Global South influence this discourse at all? What role do institutions and platforms like Google Arts and Culture play?
Now that we increasingly talk about digitization, I feel perhaps it is necessary to focus on ethics in digitization projects and the need for approaches that are truly collaborative and/or participatory. A while ago, at an archive in Berlin, I was kindly walked through some absolutely wonderful collections; a particular sound record from India caught my attention. Could I access this song digitally? Could I share it with friends on social media? The answer was a quick “no”. In the conversation that followed, I was both awestruck and disappointed. Disappointed because it meant I couldn’t see this amazing resource being shared with educators/students in India (it would be of so much value there!). The part that left me awestruck was the explanation behind the “no”: the song came from a prisoner of war; the recording, made over a century ago had not accounted for his permission. Then how could this be digitized and opened to the world?
Let me add another layer here: how do we decolonize digital content, archives, and collections? Collections, when digitized, hardly indicate how they came into a museum’s collection. Even metadata used by western institutions is not always aligned with the cultural terms that one would ordinarily use for the object in the home country. Taking digitization decisions together, organizing metadata collaboratively, I feel, can promote a much more dynamic and inclusive engagement with cultural heritage. And while writing this, I do acknowledge that it is easier written in a newsletter than in practice.
Larissa: Talking about the data - there is another aspect that I was thinking about: licensing. Imposing EU or other western notions of copyright on digital items seems to be wrong when they shouldn’t have had those objects in their collections in the first place. So although many of these objects and their digital reproductions would be in the Public Domain along with copyright in the EU or US - should we treat them with those standards and western perceptions of ownership when contexts of their possession were criminal or doubtful? When possible, the terms of making such data accessible should be evaluated in close cooperation working with the objects’ original communities.
At the same time, if GLAM institutions already digitized objects from colonial contexts and want to work with the respective communities, publishing this kind of collection data could maybe help in some cases to find descendants of communities and to begin a process of repatriation. The German Museums’ Association (Deutscher Museumsbund) recently published a guide on the management of collections from colonial contexts:
“The digitization and online presentation of the collections are the basis for more transparency and international exchange. Both the technical and the human resources for this require adequate funding.”
They highlight the need for exchange with the respective communities of origin to find the right terms for metadata and publishing. Still, I wonder if open licenses are the right choice in those cases of publishing collections data with colonial and criminal contexts? Is openness supporting the need for transparency and re-use through their communities or are they furthering the western interpretation of these objects when those objects might never have been intended to be seen or used publicly? However, restrictive licenses, when applied by the GLAM institution without consideration of the original communities, seem to be even more difficult, as they restrict access to cultural heritage once again. Especially when they are intended to generate income for the institution by selling image licenses.
Medhavi: That said, I wonder what could happen in cases of complete repatriation, including digitized versions. How do they facilitate new knowledge or revive traditional practices?
Please join in - what is your take on the digital aspects of repatriation? How have your institution been handling digitized collections of objects from colonial or similar contexts?
2. Favourite Discovery
Medhavi: At the other end of the spectrum of restitution dialogue is the collaborative exploration of “shared heritage”. A digital project brings Vietnamese and French specialists together to explore their relationship through the lens of eight themes. Introducing the project, Michel Spain, Director of CNRS, said:
“Because if there is indeed a French memory of Vietnam, there is also and simultaneously a Vietnamese memory of France.”
I’d say that collaboration is an effective strategy to improve access to objects and information - when power imbalances in collaborations are deconstructed and reflected upon together.
3. Shout out to… Jass Theti
Larissa: I recently got the chance to listen to Jass Theti explaining her work on diversity and inclusion at Intersectional GLAM. She presented herself as a “pain in the ass for the status quo” - and oh, do we need people like that in this sector. I strongly recommend having a look at her publications to reflect upon intersectionality, anti-racism, diversity, and white privilege:
“When I conduct workshops outlining practical steps to increase intersectionality and representation within the Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums (GLAM) I begin with what I believe to be a foundational element: understanding privilege.
Once an individual understands their privilege they then have the ability, if they so choose, to use their new found understanding of their world to lift up the voices of the marginalised and overlooked.
In short – using your superpower for good.”
Jass Theti, 2020 (Link)
4. And now for something completely different
Questions can help us to start reflecting, alone or together. The Cooper Hewitt Interaction Lab has now published a whole toolkit on transforming the museum experience. In a series of workshops, they have worked together with a range of museum professionals to support institutions in their process of change. The toolkit touches upon a lot of themes, such as visitor “curatorial, education, audience research, programming, and public engagement, visitor services, exhibition design, digital, and accessibility.”
Larissa: I especially like the lists of critical and sometimes provocative questions that the authors have provided to support organizations in finding their way to becoming a relevant cultural heritage institution in the 21st century. Because we all have to decide “how we [might] transform our collective approach to designing museum experiences to better reflect the diverse communities we serve”.
5. The written word
“Activists, journalists, and culture lovers in Nepal and in the Nepali diaspora are now working together to find stolen heritage and make repatriation claims, in order to return stolen gods to their rightful owners and context. But everyone who goes to (United States) museums has a role to play. It seems that museums are reluctant to repatriate art when they think their core audiences and donors won’t care if they keep it. We need to make it clear to our museums that we do not want to walk around in galleries of stolen artworks.”
Erin L. Thompson and Emiline Smith (2021) on Hyperallergic.
Medhavi : What stands out for me in this piece is the responsibility it places upon the visitor/audience. How can we, as visitors, hold institutions accountable? Should we ask more questions about provenance or acquisition when we see objects from different countries in museums? The regular visitor does not usually assume that they can ask these questions!
From an institutional point of view, could this be an opportunity for GLAMs to involve their visitors in their display strategy - one that would foster learning as well? It reminds of Jatinder Kailey’s experience of involving the South Asian diaspora in developing an exhibit about Queen Victoria, ‘the Empress of India’. By sharing their collection with members of the community and fostering the development of new knowledge - the exhibit was able to create a new dimension in telling its story. Perhaps a participatory approach towards sharing information (even about stolen heritage) can lend a new direction to discourse about museum practice.
6. Upcoming
Events
🗓 5-7, 16, 23 April: In order to tackle Zoom fatigue, this year’s Museums and the Web online conference will be spread over six days in April. There are great keynotes coming up, featuring Lonnie Bunch (Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution) and including sessions on the impact of the pandemic on digital transformation in museums. More information here.
🗓 9 April: Speakers from Nigeria, the US, and Europe discuss the fate of Benin Bronzes. The symposium “The Benin Bronzes: Towards the Resolution of a Long-Standing Dispute?” addresses Nigeria’s claims and the preparations for the physical return of the Bronzes, outlines collaborative international projects and looks at alternatives to restitution such as those proposed by institutions in Europe and elsewhere. Register here.
🗓 16 April: Wikimedia France is organizing a whole day on GLAMWiki cooperations and open data in museums. Their “Journée Wikimedia Culture et Numérique 2021” (in French) features great workshops and panel discussions on opening up cultural heritage collections. Larissa will be joining for a panel on the choice of going open - so hope to see you there! You can register for the event until 9 April here.
Call for Proposals/Papers
🗓 31 March 2021: In June, the next MuseumNext Summit will focus on new digital income sources for museums: “With the museum sector now facing an unprecedented need to raise funds in the face of the Covid pandemic, this event will share actionable advice on how museums can use technology to boost their income.” Find out more about the MuseumNext Digital Income Summit and how to send in your proposal here.
In our next issue, honoring Earth Day in April, we will focus on activities in GLAM on climate change. Do you want to inspire us or point us towards your institution’s actions regarding this topic? Then leave a comment or send us an email!
As always, we want to hear from you - what did you think of this issue of Dig It! ? If you liked it, consider subscribing to this newsletter to receive the latest updates directly in your inbox.
Stay safe - see you soon!
You find comments and press coverage of the events here:
Brown, Kate: Amid Pressure to Accelerate the Return of the Benin Bronzes, Germany’s Key Players Scramble to Find a Cohesive Approach. Artnet News, 25 March 2021. Link.
Hickley, Catherine: Germany moves towards full restitution of Benin bronzes. The Art Newspaper, 22 March 2021. Link.
Hickley, Catherine: ‘The movement is unstoppable’: African scholars and activists hail German plan to return Benin bronzes. The Art Newspaper, 24 March 2021. Link.
Marbot, Olivier: Les « bronzes du Bénin » bientôt de retour au Nigeria. Jeune Afrique, 24 March 2021. Link.
Oltermann, Philip: Berlin's plan to return Benin bronzes piles pressure on UK museums. The Guardian, 23 March 2021. Link.
If you want to dive deeper into this topic, we recommend the following publications of the same authors:
Pavis, Mathilde and Andrea Wallace (2019): Response to the 2018 Sarr-Savoy Report: Statement on Intellectual Property Rights and Open Access relevant to the digitization and restitution of African Cultural Heritage and associated materials. JIPITEC – Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law, 10(2), pp. 115-129. Link.
Pavis, Mathilde and Andrea Wallace (2020): SCuLE Response for the EMRIP Report on Repatriation of Ceremonial Objects and Human Remains Under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Centre for Science, Culture and the Law at Exeter. Link.