2006 Volume 70 Issue 4 Pages 484-504
This paper will examine a plan to build a local museum in the context of social changes surrounding the Aborigines in Australia. It will also look into how researchers have been involved in the whole process. In an Aboriginal township located in the northeastern comer of Arnhem Land, where I conducted my research, the plan to construct a local museum and/or a 'keeping place' had come up for repeated discussion since the 1970s, without any success. However, since the same period, the attitude toward Aboriginal art has changed dramatically in mainstream Australian society as well as internationally. For a long time, the products of Aboriginal people were seen just as crafts or souvenirs, and never as 'art'. In the 1980s, however, Aboriginal art began to be regarded as 'art', and all the mainstream museums and art galleries started to collect it. With the recognition by mainstream society of Aboriginal art as a valuable cultural and artistic symbol, the idea has emerged to build a museum to exhibit the art in its own production area. The idea is that Aboriginal art should be valued and shared in a way to strengthen Aboriginal identity in the local production area. Around the same time, mainstream institutions started the policy of repatriation. Since colonial times, numerous Aboriginal human remains and artifacts have been collected and stored in museums and galleries. With the upsurge of the repatriation of colonized people's heritage worldwide, repatriation also began in Australia. However, as the collection included secret/sacred objects that cannot be simply be repatriated to the competent communities, a special building, such as a 'keeping place', had to be built that can be locked properly. Within that Australian social context, the plan was repeatedly submitted to the local communities to build a local museum and/or 'keeping place'. In my field area too, the possibility was discussed many times, but was never realized. I was involved in the discussion, and was asked several times to give advice, as well as to make an application for funding. Although I advised them that their statements in the application for funds had to be simple and straightforward, there were diverse opinions within the community, and it was impossible to make them reasonable. In 2003, the matter took a new turn. One clan leader mobilized the local government and managed to get reserve funding to open a 'knowledge center' in 2004. Many Australian researchers and journalists showed an interest in that project, and it attracted wide public attention. Many anthropologists also enrolled in the project. The leader and one of his juniors in charge of the center were actively involved in the research of those scholars. But in the local context again, the plan caused a lot of tension among the clan leaders. As a result, by 2005, the scale of the planned center was reduced, and it is now operated in a quite limited way. There are several reasons why a local museum had not been realized in my area of study for such a long time. First, there is a difference in the concept of 'art' between the locals and the outside world. In the local context, the paintings and carvings made by Aborigines are very important cultural items, to be sure. But they are not regarded as personal products, but are instead owned and shared by the members of patrilineal clans. Their art is based on the paintings and designs used in the rituals and creation stories of the clan, and even the secular paintings that can be sold are still in similar circumstances. Second -and perhaps the most important reason- is the difference in the attitude toward the exposure/concealment of the culturally important items. Although the government expected the local museums to function as the core of local identity by exhibiting the artworks, the most important objects cannot be
(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)
