Interrupting the gaze: on reconsidering authority in the museum

Abstract

Thinking about the museum’s engagement in educational programmes is increasingly adopting a more critical perspective on the implications of a programme in authorizing and defining particular knowledge. While objects are still invoked to define history and culture and to underscore their authority, the museum’s claim to educational purposes is being questioned by the museum itself. This has resulted in changes to the ways in which student learning occurs within the museum. Using data gathered during a year‐long study of the changing role of a Canadian regional history and ethnology museum, this paper argues that the changing role of the museum prompts reconsideration of their roles not only as sites of knowledge but also as sites of knowledge‐production.

Keywords:

• critical theory
• cultural literacy
• first nations (Canada)
• history education
• museum educational programmes
• non‐formal learning

Notes

1. To identify themselves, indigenous peoples in Canada use a variety of context‐dependent terms, including ‘Native’, ‘First Nations’, and ‘Aboriginal’. Throughout this paper I use the term ‘indigenous’ to identify Canadian Aboriginal communities. Ames (1992: 173), in examining the politics of interpretation in museums, says that ‘no single term for the Aboriginal peoples of North America is universally accepted’.

2. The decision to identify the Glenbow in this paper rather than to use a pseudonym was influenced by several factors. The Glenbow has a strong institutional identity both within the Canadian museum world and internationally; this identity has been influenced by, among other things, its current mandate, its practices, and its holdings specific to indigenous representation. Whether named or not the Glenbow would be easily identified. The schools, the teachers, and the students have been given pseudonyms.

3. The history of the museum that I present in this paper is condensed, and acknowledges several sources that have contributed to the general field: see, for example, Hooper‐Greenhill (1992), Crimp (1993), Bennett (1995), and Conn (1998) for the development of European and US museums.

4. In 1992, the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) and the Canadian Museum Association (CMA) created a task force to ‘develop an ethical framework and strategies for Aboriginal Nations to represent their history and culture in concert with cultural institutions’ (Canadian Museum Association 1992: 1). The result of these consultations was the publication of Turning the Page: Forging New Partnerships between Museums and First Peoples (Canadian Museum Association 1992). This report included requests from First Nations for ‘greater public education and awareness of the significant cultural contributions made by First Peoples’ addressing: (1) increased involvement of Aboriginal people in the interpretation of the culture and history by cultural institutions; (2) improved access to museum collections by Aboriginal peoples; and (3) the repatriation of artefacts and human remains (Canadian Museum Association 1992: 4, 1). In recent years, a number of consortiums and meetings have occurring between the AFN and the CMA dealing specifically with issues including the co‐management of artefacts, curatorial involvement in exhibitions, and ongoing consultation specific to objects, representation, and exhibitions.

5. The term High Plains, in this context, refers primarily to Treaty 7 First Nations, including the Blackfoot Confederacy and the Stoney First Nation. The Blackfoot Confederacy is made up of the Kainai (the Blood), the Pikunni (the Peigan), the Siksika (the Blackfoot), the South Peigan (Montana Blackfoot), and the T’suu T’ina (Sarcee).

6. The advisory council consists of representatives from the Treaty 7 First Nations, the ethnology curator, the Glenbow’s Treaty 7 liaison person, one Glenbow board member, and one staff member from each of the Glenbow’s disciplinary units. The role of the council is as follows: ‘advice regarding the collection, care and handling of First Nations materials; advice and assistance in the development of exhibits and programmes which are concerned with First Nations culture and history; [and] act as a resource for research on First Nations culture and history [and] serve as an active liaison between [the] Glenbow and their communities’ (First Nations Advisory Council Terms of Reference 1996).

7. In 1996, Chief and Council, and members of religious societies of the Blood community organized the Mookaakin Cultural Heritage Society. The purpose of the Society is: (a) to promote and preserve the spiritual doctrines and observances of the Blood/Kainai people; (b) to promote and preserve the unique language and history of the Blood/Kainai people; (c) to encourage an appreciation by the general public of the spiritual doctrines and observances, languages, and history of the Blood/Kainai people; (d) to encourage and actively pursue the repatriation of the objects and articles that facilitate the spiritual doctrines and observances of the Blood/Kainai people; to foster the preservation, protection and enhancement of Blood/Kainai customs, traditions, and beliefs; to do all such things as are incidental to or conducive to the attainment of the objects of the Mookaakin Society.

8. This programme brings together the curators from the ethnology department with the indigenous students from PICSS who work within the museum to plan, mount, and evaluate displays with themes specific to issues facing young indigenous individuals, including such previous themes as ‘Heros’, ‘Métis Celebrations’, etc.

9. The ‘Through Elders’ Eyes’ programme invites Elders from the region’s communities to select objects from the Glenbow collection and recount in a public setting stories and memories both related and inspired by them.

10. Examples of such programmes include: Inuit: The Land, The People (grade 2); Settlers West (grades 4–6); and the Settlement and the Canadian West (grades 7–9).

11. I have abbreviated the formal name of the programme for the sake of brevity when referring to the school in this paper. The Glenbow partnered with Chevron, a US‐based oil and gas company, to form the Open Minds School programme. The Glenbow is one of three sites Open Minds sites; the other two are the Chevron Open Minds Zoo School and the Chevron Open Minds Science Centre School.

12. In addition, I interviewed 12 museum personnel, including the president and CEO, curators (ethnology, art, history), members of the Advisory group, Board members, and educators.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

B. Trofanenko

Her research interests focus on issues of cultural identities within a critical framework, with her recent work directed on questioning what constitutes public pedagogy.