Museums, Community Identity, and the Ethics of Collections

The Controversy of Museum Display

Willard L. Boyd, in his work "Museums as Centers of Controversy," states that museums are often thought of as "places of objects" when in reality they are "places of ideas." Boyd argues that objects found in nature "give rise to human ideas about nature," and that "ideas are the principal means by which humans interact with objects in museums." He further notes that "the simple display of an object" can in itself be controversial. While this may seem surprising, Boyd explains that when exhibits go beyond the mere wonder of a standalone object and are designed to inform and stimulate visitor learning, "they consciously invite controversy — as they should."

This paper examines what role museums play in the life of a community; what new roles and responsibilities museums are adopting; whether museums recognize the community's stake in their decision-making and programming; and what collaborative relationships have developed between museums and the communities in which they operate. It also addresses whether museum exhibitions can ever be truly objective, who controls collections and exhibition viewpoints, how collections define and reflect community identity, and how museums might build on the intellectual potential of their holdings as they seek new civic roles.

Historical Review of Museums

Boyd relates that museums in ancient Greece and Egypt were "centers of speculation and research" and served as sites of study for scholars such as Plato, Aristotle, and Ptolemy in their investigations of the natural world. Colleges and universities in the United States are organized "around collections of art, material culture, and natural science." Boyd further notes that one may trace the "roots of the Darwinian revolution" in museum collections.

Boyd holds that consultation in this context must "be real, not cosmetic." The whole point of consultation is learning, and learning requires listening with an open mind and a willingness to change when necessary. Consultation offers expansion in both public and professional knowledge and understanding.

Authority, Restrictions, and Regulations in Museum Collections

Boyd examines the profession of the museum and the "what and how" of collections, which are "properly considered the province of the curator, whose professional judgment should be conclusive or at least accorded great weight." However, Boyd points out that this is often not the case — the judgment of the curator is frequently questioned, and even "formally curtailed by government regulations and peer ethical standards to which museums as institutions are primarily held responsible."

Collections of the 1890s, when compared with those of the 1990s, are described by Boyd as "unfettered" in contrast to the restricted collections of the present. Museum and curatorial ethical codes have thus far failed to fully articulate collection practices in relation to restrictions, while national and international governments actively promulgate restrictions on collections. As a result, governments and the public have come to view museum curators and their institutions as responsible for depriving communities of their cultural heritage. Furthermore, museums are often seen as notorious for the acquisition of objects seized in wartime or stolen in peacetime by private, public, and governmental entities.

Boyd observes that public demand generally drives the direction of ethical standards, laws, and regulations, and that public demand tends to focus on situations requiring redress. It is for this reason that "after years of denial, we are now properly focused on the art seized by the Nazis from the Jews." The AAMD guidelines called upon art museums to "immediately review the provenance of works in their collections to attempt to ascertain whether any were unlawfully confiscated during the Nazi/World War II era and never restituted." Prior to the ADAA's issuance of guidelines on Nazi-looted art, the provenance of many artworks was inadequate, with museums failing to adhere to export and plunder background-checking standards.

The Art Dealers Association of America (ADAA) has stated that its members "will continue to research the history of the works of art which they offer and make every effort to supply as complete and accurate a provenance as the available information permits." The ADAA acknowledged that "research into provenance is not a title search and there are frequently gaps in a provenance for perfectly legitimate reasons," but assured collectors that members "warrant good title for every work they sell" and that research "will be professionally conducted by dealers uniquely qualified to do so because of their specialized knowledge and experience in the field."

Boyd underscores the need for museums and curators to incorporate acquisition policies adhering to the principles of the international conventions of UNESCO on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property. He notes, for example, that some Greek fragments of a vase were reported "looted and illegally exported from an Italian tomb" after Harvard adopted the essence of the UNESCO convention in its acquisition policy in 1971. While that museum's policy accepted "reasonable assurance" that articles did not violate this policy, many art historians and archaeologists — noting that up to 80 percent of antiquities on the market were looted in recent decades — insist on tougher standards. As one commentator put it: "Ethically, given the enormous amount of looted material on the market, we are obligated to presume these items to be guilty until they are demonstrated to be innocent, and therefore the burden of proof should be on the purveyor of the object."

The International Council of Museums ethical code stipulates that a museum "should not acquire, whether by purchase, gift, bequest or exchange, any object unless the governing body and responsible officer are satisfied that the museum can acquire a valid title to the specimen or object in question and that in particular it has not been acquired in, or exported from, its country of origin and/or any intermediate country in which it may have been legally owned — including the museum's own country — in violation of that country's laws." The code further stipulates that in relation to material of a biological or geological nature, acquisition should not be made by any direct or indirect means of any specimen that has "been collected, sold or otherwise transferred in contravention of any national or international wildlife protection or natural history conservation law or treaty of the museum's own country or any other country, except with the express consent of an appropriate outside legal or governmental authority."

In order to meet these ethical code requirements, museums must take proactive measures to assure that their acquisitions carry "good title." At institutions such as the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, "special hunting permits and waivers on import bans raise red flags." There are also differences of opinion about what is ethical in terms of museum collections — for example, the recent sale of "Sue," the most complete Tyrannosaurus rex specimen ever found, to the Field Museum for $8.4 million prompted significant debate.

Repatriation of collections acquired prior to current laws and ethical standards is also an important focus. In the United States, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act has been adopted by Congress. In relation to objects acquired before certain policies and standards existed, discussions should center on the "circumstances, legal and otherwise, under which the museum took possession," along with the laws and regulations existing at the time of acquisition. These discussions can have various outcomes, such as "the return of the objects to the lineal descendants of culturally affiliated tribes." Alternatively, a recognized representative may wish that the museum continue to hold an object for the benefit of the other party, in which case there should be clarity in the "terms and responsibilities of such holding." Boyd notes that in a collection-based museum, deaccession is an issue that is "exceedingly contentious" and "much more so than the decision to acquire."