Whose Culture?: The Promise of Museums and the Debate over Antiquities [Hardcover]

James Cuno (Editor)

Book Description

Publication Date: March 2, 2009 | ISBN-10: 0691133336 | ISBN-13: 978-0691133331

The international controversy over who "owns" antiquities has pitted museums against archaeologists and source countries where ancient artifacts are found. In his book Who Owns Antiquity?, James Cuno argued that antiquities are the cultural property of humankind, not of the countries that lay exclusive claim to them. Now in Whose Culture?, Cuno assembles preeminent museum directors, curators, and scholars to explain for themselves what's at stake in this struggle--and why the museums' critics couldn't be more wrong.

Source countries and archaeologists favor tough cultural property laws restricting the export of antiquities, have fought for the return of artifacts from museums worldwide, and claim the acquisition of undocumented antiquities encourages looting of archaeological sites. In Whose Culture?, leading figures from universities and museums in the United States and Britain argue that modern nation-states have at best a dubious connection with the ancient cultures they claim to represent, and that archaeology has been misused by nationalistic identity politics. They explain why exhibition is essential to responsible acquisitions, why our shared art heritage trumps nationalist agendas, why restrictive cultural property laws put antiquities at risk from unstable governments--and more. Defending the principles of art as the legacy of all humankind and museums as instruments of inquiry and tolerance, Whose Culture? brings reasoned argument to an issue that for too long has been distorted by politics and emotionalism.

In addition to the editor, the contributors are Kwame Anthony Appiah, Sir John Boardman, Michael F. Brown, Derek Gillman, Neil MacGregor, John Henry Merryman, Philippe de Montebello, David I. Owen, and James C. Y. Watt.

Editorial Reviews

Review

In this new collection of essays, Cuno has also assembled a group of broadly like-minded colleagues, both museum curators and academics, all of whom affirm, from a variety of perspectives, why great encyclopaedic collections can, and ought, to exist. . . . [The volume] marks an important advance. After an uncertain, not to say timorous, few decades, the leadership of at least some of our major institutions has found its voice. More than that, it has rediscovered something approaching a set of shared values--and, as Whose Culture? makes clear, it is ready to take on all comers in their defence. -- John Adamson, Standpoint Magazine

[Cuno] has emerged as the champion of museums who want to keep their holdings--and not a moment too soon. . . . Cuno speaks the cosmopolitan language of cultural pluralism. The other side, insisting that art remain where it happened to be found, deploys the rhetoric of jealous nationalism in the service of government. Culture matters more than concocted national pride, as curators and museum directors know. At last they're re-asserting their principles, after an embarrassing period of passivity and pusillanimity. -- Robert Fulford, The National Post

For the general reader seeking to get up to speed on this critically important debate, this volume is destined to become an indispensable guide. Each contributor makes salient points in favour of their museological argument. -- Tom Mullaney, The Art Newspaper

The issues raised will certainly draw controversy and debate, especially in the current environment. Issues of cultural heritage remain targets of ethical, legal, political, and cultural controversies surrounding cultural property. Museum professionals, university scholars, and others deeply interested in cultural heritage will find the work a necessary read. -- Choice

In stressing the multiple meanings--aesthetic, textual, political, ritual--that an object may have, these contributors oppose the claim that art divorced from its archaeological setting is a cosa morta ('dead thing'). -- Hugh Eakin, New York Review of Books

A welcome challenge to repatriation policies underpinned by identity politics. . . . Whose Culture? is a long-needed intervention in the debate about the role of museums. Cultural institutions have been on the defensive for decades, poorly firefighting accusations of didacticism, elitism, colonisation and looting, with ill-thought through mumbling and evasion. . . . Museums need to defend openly their use and purpose and make a strong case for the invaluable role they play in the preservation, presentation and study of artefacts. Cuno does just that. -- Tiffany Jenkins, Spiked Magazine

Far from being an esoteric, jargon-filled look at a debate between archaeologists and collectors of antiquities, these essays, some from conference presentations, some philosophical, and some impassioned, show that the whose-cultural-property debate runs parallel to and intersects other problem areas in the modern world. -- N.S. Gill, About.com

From the Inside Flap

"Whose Culture? makes the strongest case yet for an internationalist approach to the protection and ownership of ancient cultural heritage, and against its nationalization by modern states on political and ideological grounds. Cuno argues that effective measures against the looting of ancient sites do not require exclusively nationalistic ownership, and that a more enlightened international framework would allow cultural heritage to continue to serve an ambassadorial role as a stimulus to artistic and cultural interaction. This book is essential reading for anyone interested in this increasingly important debate."--Timothy Potts, director of the Fitzwilliam Museum, University of Cambridge

"This book stands in opposition to widespread claims--primarily from the archaeological community--that museums' collecting of ancient works encourages looting and the illegal trade in antiquities. It thus advances what in the current climate is a sectarian position, but one supported by most museum curators and directors. Given the stature of the editor and distinguished contributors, Whose Culture? presents this perspective at the highest level of discussion."--Bruce Altshuler, director of the Program in Museum Studies at New York University

"This is a very timely book. Events like the leveling of criminal charges by the Italian government against a former curator at the J. Paul Getty Museum and the widespread pillaging of antiquities in Iraq have transformed the longstanding international controversy over who legitimately 'owns' antiquities into a hot topic. This book will provide a basis for informed, intelligent debate."--Jerome J. Pollitt, professor emeritus, Yale University

"A balanced and illuminating overview of a hotly contested issue, Whose Culture? focuses on the debate among museum officials, archaeologists, and government leaders about the movement of insufficiently documented antiquities from their countries of origin to international art markets and the museums of other countries. This is a high-stakes problem for all involved and the book offers a multifaceted discussion about the handling of such antiquities now and policy implications for the future."--Jeffrey Abt, author of A Museum on the Verge

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 232 pages
• Publisher: Princeton University Press (March 2, 2009)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0691133336
• ISBN-13: 978-0691133331
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6.2 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #877,449 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

8 of 17 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars THE "UNIVERSAL MUSEUM" OF THE RICH AND POWERFUL., May 1, 2009

By 

K. Opoku - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Whose Culture?: The Promise of Museums and the Debate over Antiquities (Hardcover)

THE "UNIVERSAL MUSEUM" OF THE RICH AND POWERFUL., May 1, 2009

Cuno ends his introduction to Whose Culrure? with a statement which many of us could easily subscribe to in so far as it appears to be a call for dialogue: "This book will not be the final word in the debate over antiquities. But we hope it will add a new angle to the frame within which the discussion henceforth takes place. Nothing is more important to the fate of the preservation and greater understanding of our world's common ancient past and antique legacy than we resolve the differences that divide the various parties in the dispute. Warfare and sectarian violence, which is destroying evidence of the past faster and more surely than the destruction of archaeological sites by looters, is beyond our control. Differences among museum professionals, university- and museum-based scholars, archaeologists, their sympathizers, national politicians, and international agencies should not be."

Clearly museum professionals and other scholars should be able to solve the issues of cultural property if there is goodwill on both sides. But is there? This reasonable appeal should be seen in the context of the recent writings of Cuno and the rest of the introduction. Before this conciliatory appeal, the same author makes this interesting declaration: "It is the purpose of this book to challenge the perception of museums as rapacious acquisitors of ill-gotten goods and to argue instead that our public museums build their antiquities collections responsibly and for the public's benefit. Some readers will be disappointed that not "all sides" of the debate are presented here. It is our view that other books already do this and well enough that we needn't repeat the "both sides of the argument" formula here. And, perhaps more to the point, other books are partisan in opposition to the museum's position as we are presenting it and need to be responded to."

The above statement of Cuno sounds like an open abandonment of all pretence to objectivity and impartiality. The mask of impartial scholarship which considers all aspects and views on a subject matter, including the views of opponents, is openly abandoned. Should we follow the author's qualification of the writings of Lord Renfrew as "sensational" and qualify the views in this book as mainly "propaganda", seeing that the editor has admitted abandoning any attempt to consider all sides of the issue of restitution and cultural property?

Good consequences could flow from the abandonment of pretence to impartiality and objectivity. This may lead to giving up the pretension that the so-called universal museums - British Museum, Louvre, Art Institute of Chicago and the Ethnology Museum of Berlin are open to the whole world and serve mankind when most people live thousands of miles away from those institutions. Moreover, the governments of the countries where the museums are located are actively making it difficult for outsiders to visit those countries through immigration rules.

Perhaps there will soon be the realization that the thousands of Benin bronzes and other cultural objects languishing in the museum depots do not serve mankind. On recognizing the reality they have up to now denied, the museums may be willing to share those artefacts and thus serve humanity. They may then be able to consider, for example, sharing with the people of Benin the Benin Bronzes: Berlin - Ethnologisches Museum 580.
Chicago - Art Institute of Chicago 20, Field Museum 400.
Cologne - Rautenstrauch-Joest-Museum 73.
Hamburg - Museum für Völkerkunde, Museum fur Kunst und Gewerbe 196.
Dresden - Staatliches Museum für Völkerkunde 182.
Leipzig - Museum für Völkerkunde 87.
Leiden - Rijksmuseum voor Volkenkunde 98.
London - British Museum 700.
New York - Metropolitan Museum of Fine Art 163.
Oxford - Pitt-Rivers Museum/ Pitt-Rivers country residence, Rushmore in Farnham/Dorset 327.
Stuttgart - Linden Museum-Staatliches Museum für Völkerkunde 80.
Vienna - Museum für Völkerkunde 167.

The Western museums will, with a new realism, perhaps understand that they are not bound to defend the past evils of colonialism and imperialism. They are however responsible for continuing to hold on to ill-gotten artefacts from the colonial period and for refusal even to discuss or disclose the number of items involved. Having liberated themselves from the colonial heritage, the Western museums would no longer need to invent explanations of fantasy to justify the possession of stolen goods.

The museums of the Western nations would thus, for the first time, become amenable to the idea of a true "Museum of Mankind" or "World Museum" to which all peoples and States will contribute and thus finally create a truly Universal Museum, in the true sense of universality of governance, contribution and representation. This will not be the kind of imperialist and neo-colonialist museum which is only "universal" from the fact of having thousands of looted/stolen artefacts from the universe but only there to serve a few nations that have since the 17th century dominated mankind and the universe.

Some of the authors of contributions seem to have followed Cuno's tone and style by heaping criticisms on their colleagues. Very little room is left for possible compromise. Attacks on Lord Renfrew which go as far as to consider his writings as sensational are clearly not conducive to achieving a compromise on the question of unprovenanced antiquities.

The contributions to Whose Culture? seem to have been written a long time ago and therefore could not have taken account of recent events. From this book, there is very little mention of the recent wave of restitutions to Egypt, Ethiopia, Italy, Greece and other countries. As usual, there is no discussion on demands for restitution from other African countries.

One cannot help feeling that there is no attempt in this book to offer anything new. Cuno could surely not hope to introduce a new perspective with his introduction that abandons all attempts to understand opposing views and with articles that are several years old.

This book is surely not the last word on the debate on restitution and the location of antiquities but one would hope it is the last of its kind. Cuno's recent book, Who Owns Antiquity? (2008) was met with many serious criticisms which have not yet been adequately answered.(65) Thereafter the same author wrote articles that reproduced similar arguments (66). The publication of Whose Culture? (2009) so soon makes us wonder what the real aims of these writings are.


Peter Stone, in reviewing Cuno's Who Owns Antiquity? spoke for all of us in the rest of the world, outside the "universal "or "encyclopaedic" museums when he made this statement:
"I assume that many will hope and some I know will pray that this book represents the last death throes of a failed traditional world-view: the dominance of the many by the (very) few; the dominance of a Western scientific tradition over all others; the dominance of a closed view clinging, perhaps subconsciously, to what can only be described as colonial oppression. Perhaps if a dinosaur could have written a book arguing against its extinction, it would have read like this".

Could this statement also be applicable to Whose Culture? which is a companion volume to Who Owns Antiquity?


Kwame Opoku, 1 May, 2009.