Abstract
The Enlightenment era names an 18th-century European philosophical movement whereby reason or human intellect informed what was considered knowledge and understanding of the world. As collecting institutions, museums founded with these logics use processes of acquisition to collect items, objects, and specimens to understand the world, supposedly to move humanity forward in the name of progress. Mechanisms that (re)named and classified the world enabled Euro-Enlightenment minds to feel they (we) knew and understood the world, through this mastery of placing complex beings within predefined structures. This annotated bibliography presents resources for museum professionals to understand the errors of the past in our inherited present so we can move towards more equitable, decolonizing, and Indigenizing futures.
Citation: Phillips, Laura. “(Mostly) Indigenous Readings that Challenge Imposed Euro-Enlightenment [aka Colonial] Perspectives in Museums” The Jugaad Project, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2023, www.thejugaadproject.pub/indigenous-readings[date of access]
Introduction
Subhandra Das and Miranda Lowe (2018) cite the Enlightenment era as the start of scientific racism and museums as locations where this became firmly entrenched. Europeans understood our/themselves as the highest level of human achievement and saw all Others as striving to meet this fabricated echelon. The flaw in this is Indigenous ways of knowing were not appreciated as equally valid ways of understanding the world. Enlightenment thinkers focused on knowing the world by using their own definitions of reason, logic, and observable facts to unlock universal truths as the sum of so-called objective knowledge. Anishinaabek scholar Dolleen Manning (2017) observed that the challenge with this self-recognition is that Indigenous (and other non-western) scholars who attempt to engage with Euro-centric Enlightenment-based thought systems cannot be recognized in their own right, nor are Indigenous world views understood outside the framework by which Enlightenment thinkers recognize knowledge (101).
This annotated bibliography presents my personal selection of mostly Indigenous authors and thinkers who have identified this disconnect between Euro-centric and Indigenous ways of seeing and understanding the world for decades, if not centuries[1]. In this age of decolonizing and Indigenizing museums, these resources can help museum professionals internalize processes required to activate change, in and beyond museums. Museums will not change themselves, it is up to the people working in them – people are policymakers and revisors, and people decide on access and repatriation requests. Some of these resources have very clear links to museum work, while others focus on the attitudes and perspectives of the people doing the work, who need to internalize new ways of being in our day-to-day lives as well as in our workplaces.
As noted by Tuck and Yang (2012), “Decolonization is not a Metaphor”. The resources I include below showed me how to de-metaphorize this process for museums. By decolonizing, I mean undertaking actions that move us away from the colonial structures that surround us. Decolonizing is critiqued because it continues to centre colonialism in the very act of detachment. The term Indigenizing is preferred by many, as it centres actions to bring in, promote, and centre Indigenous voices, knowledge, and ways of being (Ng and AyAyQwaYakSheelth 2018). My hope is this annotated bibliography will be useful for museum professionals in Turtle Island who do not yet understand the extent of our colonial inheritance, and how we (non-Indigenous museum professionals) are implicated in perpetuating this legacy. For those located in Europe, who care for belongings extracted from Turtle Island, I hope you will appreciate this as a resource to help you to understand these Nations and cultures from the perspective of the people themselves, rather than imposed Euro-centric notions. For our European colleagues, I also implore you to stop having conferences and discussions about the Indigenous belongings you currently care for without actively involving Indigenous Nations from the beginning. I believe this is what Indigenous people mean when they say “Nothing About Us, Without Us”. Finally, I hope this bibliography will help to activate the echoing calls for turning over authority found in multiple articles of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) (UNDRIP).
Dickason, Olive P. The myth of the savage and the beginnings of French colonialism in the Americas. University of Alberta Press, 1984.
Métis scholar Olive Dickason’s book is based on her Ph.D. research in libraries and archives in Europe, examining documentary records that re-presented Indigenous people to Europeans. This publication demonstrates the extent to which the power and agency of Indigenous Nations were (and is) overlooked and underappreciated in Euro-centric perspectives. Not only does Dickason show the subjectivity of written words, and how we should question what is presented as fact, but she highlights how writing for mainstream cultural consumption was (and is) often written from perspectives that centre Euro-centric norms, in both Europe and contemporary North America/Turtle Island.
In her own words:
“Part of the difficulty can be attributed to the fact that much of the written European commentary about the New World, including some of the best, was the work of men who had never crossed the ocean – Montaigne and Charron being outstanding examples…geographers could and did accumulate information that permitted them to draw increasingly accurate maps, often without sallying forth themselves”. (57)
Deloria, Vine. Red Earth, White Lies Native Americans and the Myth of Scientific Fact. Fulcrum Publishing, 1995.
The year this book was published I was in the final year of my undergraduate degree, learning that the ‘Peopling of the New World’ occurred when a corridor of ice on the northwest coast melted so people could move from Asia into what we know now as the Americas. Habitation sites that predated this window of opportunity were (are) discounted as contaminated or otherwise unreliable. Standing Rock Sioux scholar Vine Deloria Jr. presents a clear challenge to the ongoing presence of Enlightenment-era concepts that construct ‘scientific’ foundations for archaeology and anthropology on this Land. On Turtle Island, and exhibits about this Land, museum narratives must be clear about what is imposed on this Land and what has been known since time immemorial.
Deloria builds his argument by explaining how Euro-centric thought-based science claims to be objective, yet discounts the knowledge that grew on Turtle Island, in favour of their own mythologies, in their own vocabularies, that then back up their own theories and ideas. Deloria demonstrates that Euro-science is simply another form of religion, using words and rituals to back up what is presented as fact. Deloria shows that entangled and embedded Euro-based scientific knowledge continues to contain world views that are becoming the norm across the world. We are all living with the dangers that ignoring the environment brings to our planet, and the destructive realities caused by capitalism and individual accumulation. Deloria brings Christianity into the frame, calls Enlightenment thinkers to account, points out the flaws in the aforementioned land bridge theory, shows how oral knowledge has been discounted by Enlightenment science in favour of their own knowledge (much of which comes to similar results and observations) and, cites many examples of Indigenous knowledge of their Land that uses their own words for concepts like geology, physics, palaeontology, hydrology, plate tectonics, and so on.
In his own words:
“More importantly for our purposes, while not forgetting the horrors of some scientific behavior, is the impact of scientific doctrine on the status of Indians in American society. Regardless of what Indians have said concerning their origins, their migrations, their experiences with birds, animals, lands, waters, mountains, and other peoples, the scientists have maintained a stranglehold on the definitions of what respectable and reliable human experiences are (7).”
Doxtator, Deborah. “Inclusive and Exclusive Perceptions of Difference Native and Euro-Based Concepts of Time History and Change.” In Germaine Warkentin and Carolyn Podruchny, eds, Decentring the Renaissance: Canada and Europe in Multidisciplinary Perspective, 1500-1700, (University of Toronto Press, Scholarly Publishing Division, 2001): 33-47.
Bay of Quinte Mohawk scholar and curator Deborah Doxtator confronts processes of knowledge generation in the period now known as the European Renaissance from a worldview that names and qualifies Eurocentric assumptions. She argues that European minds had limited capacity for accurately comprehending the multitude of Nations and world views present in the so-called Americas, leading to long-standing misconceptions like Indigenous Nations had no forms of writing, no agriculture, no religion, no engineering, no place names, and so on. Renaissance scholars self-referenced these views, using what they perceived as objective language, to organise and present their research as historical ‘facts’. Doxtator’s observations and arguments in this collected volume present decolonizing and Indigenizing critiques that, in my opinion, were not fully comprehended or appreciated in 2001. More than 20 years later, our society is ready for her cutting-edge, forward-thinking ideas.
In her own words:
“seventeenth-century [European] record keepers failed to recognize that wampum belts and pictographs were valid kinds of recording systems. In the minutes of innumerable council meetings with Native nations, only passing mention is made of wampum belts…references to wampum are more concerned with quantity than in the patterns or intellectual imagery of the belts and strings” (41).
Watts, Vanessa. “Indigenous Place-Thought and Agency Amongst Humans and Non Humans (First Woman and Sky Woman Go On a European World Tour!),” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, vol. 2, no. 1, 2013: 20-34.
Haudenosaunee and Anishinaabek scholar Vanessa Watts presents the epistemologies and ontologies of her ancestries that centre Place-Thought, delineating differences between these world views and those of Europeans. Watts tells of how this Land was born from a union of Sky Woman and Turtle, according to the Haudenosaunee. The Anishinaabe include the Earth's origins in their Seven Fires of Creation: Gizhe-Mnidoo inserted thoughts into seeds and made a place for the seeds to grow within the Earth/First Woman. This resource is important because it shows that we need to move beyond acknowledgments of whose Land we are on, to positions of humbled respect for original knowledge, languages, and world views grown here from time immemorial. Watts’s work is essential reading for museum professionals, especially those working on, and with belongings from, Turtle Island. Watts rejects the patronizing ways that museums present Indigenous knowledge as myth, rather than fact, and insists on the sovereignty of Indigenous knowledge of their Land and their histories. Every timeline, every contextual narrative, and every interpretive panel needs scrutiny to ensure Indigenous knowledge and beliefs are presented as fact, not a story or legend.
In her own words:
“It is not my contention that Euro-Western thinkers are inherently colonial, Rather, the epistemological-ontological distinction is oftentimes the assumptive basis by which Euro-Western arguments are presented upon. It is this assumption that I argue, creates space for colonial practices to appear (28).”
Kimmerer, Robin Wall. Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teaching of Plants. Milkweed Press, 2013.
Citizen Potawatomi Nation scholar Robin Kimmerer writes of different ways of knowing this Land from her unique perspective as both a botanist trained in the European tradition, and being Indigenous to the Land she studies, writes of, and speaks with. She tells of learning her Potawatomi language, and her realization that the language is mostly verbs, rather than noun-based like European languages. Potawatomi makes the world animate and alive, while European languages assign animacy only to humans–and divide us by gender pronouns that simply do not exist in Potawatomi.
Kimmerer explains botanical concepts of plants that arrive from elsewhere – it is never possible to become Indigenous to another place. A plant dies if the climate is inhospitable, or, becomes invasive–using all available resources, spreading uncontrolled, or, becomes naturalised–able to live in harmony within the new environment. This is a crucial concept for settlers to understand – will you choose to be all-consuming and invasive? Or respectful, humble, and willing to adapt to thrive alongside Indigenous hosts? While this may not have an obvious connection to museums, this concept is important for non-Indigenous people working in museums on Turtle Island to digest. We must understand our choices- we can be naturalised in our relationship to this Land, working to respect and live in harmony with what was here before us, or invasive beings, spreading like Japanese knotweed by the winds of colonialism. Museums everywhere can ensure their texts, databases, and treatment of Indigenous belongings respect the animacy of the Land and the Ancestors created here, and encourage respectful ways of being for settlers that do not overwrite or erase Indigenous presence.
In her own words:
“Science can be a language of distance which reduces a being to its working parts; it is a language of objects. The language scientists speak, however precise, is based on a profound error in grammar, an omission, a grave loss in translation from the native languages of these shores.” (49)
Morin, Peter. “My Life as a Museum, or, Performing Indigenous Epistemologies.” In Sarah Brophy and Janice Hladki (eds), Embodied Politics in Visual Autobiography (University of Toronto Press, 2014): 137-152.
In this and other works ranging from curatorial projects to installations and performances, Tahltan scholar, artist, curator, and bannock-maker extraordinaire Peter Morin challenges colonial norms embedded in restrictive structures of museums. His words flow like a river of Tahltan-ness, an embodied movement carving paths of new futurities through Euro-Enlightenment containers. He relays conversations with Tahltan belongings, creations, and Ancestors and his experiences of hearing aunties laughing when he sees their creations through glass vitrines. His words defy imposed colonial structures by foregrounding lived experiences and relational actions. Morin activates ways for museums to respect the contemporary needs of Indigenous communities by understanding that these belongings carry inalienable meanings between generations.
In his words:
“The challenge to the museum is how to shift this Western paradigm to allow for enough Indigenous epistemological practice to alter and co-create the space inside the museum. These artists sat together to work on beadwork, they shared stories, they shared tears, and they shared much laughter. These artists collaborated with each other to create this work. These artists collaborated with me to create a new artwork. The silence in the museum needs to shift if we are going to hear the laughter. (146)”
Garneau, David. “Imaginary Spaces of Conciliation and Reconciliation: Art, Curation, and Healing.” In Dylan Robinson and Keavy Martin (eds), Arts of Engagement: Taking Aesthetic Action In and Beyond the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (Wilfred Laurier University Press, 2016): 21–41.
One of the many striking elements in this publication is when Métis scholar, curator, and artist David Garneau calls for dedicated spaces of Indigeneity, away from the need to perform for settler eyes. It seems museums might be starting to listen - in the recent exhibition Being Legendary by Cree artist Kent Monkman at the Royal Ontario Museum, an Indigenous-only lounge space is present (though presumably, this was Monkman’s idea). Other striking elements are Garneau’s definition of scopophilia as the condition that museums perpetuate, and the explanation of how “screen” objects (a pipe, for example, that looks exactly like a sacred pipe, but has a hole to prevent it from being used), now cared for in museum collections, were purposefully created as acts of resistance. Garneau explains that the word Reconciliation (the process in which the federal government in Canada is encouraging society to participate) is nonsensical because it suggests a fictional time when Indigenous and settler-colonists were conciled. He prefers ‘perpetual conciliation’ because this process is ongoing and needs continual renewal. Garneau states that once settlers behave as uninvited guests, Indigenous Nations can take up their role as hosts—a shift in societal perception that is essential to the future of this Land.
In his own words:
“The colonial attitude is characterized not only by scopophilia, a drive to look, but also by an urge to penetrate, to traverse, to know, to translate, to own and exploit. The attitude assumes that everything should be accessible to those with the means and will to access them; everything is ultimately comprehensible, a potential commodity, resource, or salvage. The academic branch of the enterprise collects and analyzes the experiences and things of others; it transforms story into text and objects-in-relation into artifacts to be catalogued and stored or displayed. (23)”
Archibald Q’Um Q’Um Xiiem, Jo-ann et al. Decolonizing Research: Indigenous Storywork as Methodology. Zed Books, 2019.
In this edited volume, Jo-Ann Archiband Q’Um Q’Um Xiien (Stó:lō) presents essays and case studies by Indigenous scholars to demonstrate theoretical and practical extensions of storywork principles: reverence, responsibility, holism, respect, reciprocity, synergy, and interrelatedness (Archibald Q’Um Q’Um Xiien 2008). In “He Would Not Listen to a Woman”: Decolonizing Gender through the Power of Pūrākau” (Cavino), stories are presented as legal facts in a colonial court case to show ownership of disputed land. In “Lilyology as a Transformative Framework for Decolonizing Ethical Spaces within the Academy,” stories are the points of connection in a web of rhizomatic knowledge that is presented as an alternative to bricks of disciplines in the Academic wall (Blair). The overall argument in this volume is that storywork is an important methodology for Indigenous research. When I use this book in my teaching of decolonizing museums in practice to non-Indigenous museum professionals, many of them come away with the understanding that what we do in museums is different forms of storywork – whether we are presenting Euro-centric stories, Enlightenment knowledge as stories, or disciplinary-specific stories.
In her own words:
“A critical tool of colonization was research, of which Indigenous story-taking and story-making was a vital part. Colonial Western research of our traditional stories and research stories of our peoples was used to define, destroy, and deter the valuing of Indigenous knowledge, people, and practices”. (5)
Pickering, Michael. “The Supernatural and Sensitive Indigenous Materials: A Workplace Health and Safety Issue?” Museum Management and Curatorship, vol. 35, no. 5, Sept. 2020, pp. 532–50.
Michael Pickering is a non-Indigenous researcher and curator working for the National Museum of Australia in Canberra. This is the only work by a non-Indigenous author in my annotated bibliography and it is included here because Pickering is presenting stories he has observed in his time working at museums with Indigenous colleagues. His Indigenous colleagues, for the reasons outlined in the article, did not have the opportunity or desire to share what they have experienced. This article documents the many forms of physical and intellectual violence and trauma that his Indigenous colleagues faced in their workplaces.
For example, Pickering recounts experiences of working with Indigenous colleagues and the challenges they face in colonial environments, especially concerning sensitive materials. He provides anonymised examples to demonstrate the harms non-Indigenous staff can inflict when they do not fully comprehend the implications of their requests to Indigenous colleagues. Importantly, Pickering includes a section for Human Resources departments to clarify job duties and expectations of working with sensitive materials. His intention is to create workplaces where Indigenous staff members feel their beliefs and cultural protocols are respected.
In his own words:
“All sensitive materials therefore have a capacity to retain supernatural attributes. These attributes can be ghosts, spirits or a spiritual essence. They can be benevolent, neutral or harmful, depending upon the status and authority of the person who comes into contact with them. In addition, not only did/do internal protocols apply to accessing remains, objects and knowledge that belonged to the cultural group, conditions were/are also applied to materials owned by others outside of the cultural group.” (537)
Reed, Trevor. “Indigenous Dignity and the Right to Be Forgotten”. Dignity in Law Symposium 46, 2021: 1119–1146.
Trevor Reed puts his academic training in American and international law into conversation with his lived experience of Hopi laws and protocols. He calls out ways that colonial laws conflict with Indigenous worldviews, perspectives, and community-based laws. Reed argues that the current and future management of Indigenous data—including, but not limited to, what was extracted during the late 19th to mid-20th century frenzy that founded Anthropology (also known as salvage anthropology)—should centre the rights of contemporary Indigenous Nations – including their right to request destruction.
In his own words:
“What is relevant here for those who establish policy for the care of Indigenous voices, knowledges, and other forms of Indigenous culture is that the lives of these materials and the networks of which they are a part are often purposefully and profoundly finite, at least from our limited point of view, and that Indigenous refusals to extend these voices, knowledges, and cultural forms in time or space or theory are in themselves generative acts reserved for Indigenous authorities.” (1137)
References
Das, S., & Lowe, M. (2018). Nature Read in Black and White: Decolonial approaches to interpreting natural history collections. Journal of Natural Science Collections, 6, 4–14.
Manning, D. T. (2017). Mnidoo-Worlding: Merleau-Ponty and Anishinaabe Philosophical Translations [Ph.D. Dissertation]. Western University.
Ng, Wendy, AyAyQwaYakSheelth, J’Net. (2018). Decolonize and Indigenize: A Reflective Dialogue. Viewfinder: Reflecting on Museum Education, 12 June 2018. https://medium.com/viewfinder-reflecting-on-museum-education/decolonize-and-indigenize-a-reflective-dialogue-3de78fa76442.
Tuck, Eve, and K. Wayne Yang. (2012). “Decolonization Is Not a Metaphor.” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society 1 (1): 1–40.
Notes
[1] Please note, these are resources I found to be extremely important and useful in my own decolonizing and Indigenizing journey. This is not a comprehensive bibliography.
