Hisham Wyne: Columnist, Copywriter

This article was written for Shawati, an arts and culture coffee table book that's published every three months by ADACH. Be warned, it's a bit of a read.  

[Image from Google]

What is a national museum? An artifice to bygone valour and glory? A genuine starting point of exploration into the world and its many cultures? A badge of national pride with aesthetics reminding us of disposable income? Or perhaps, it's an ever-iterating quest for an indefinable ideal wherein an entire nation's ambitions, valour and past can be condensed into a few thousand metres of space.

The answer could ostensibly be all of the above, or none. Yet all answers remain pertinent to the epistemological form the UAE’s Zayed National Museum will take when it finally opens its doors in 2014. The museum, being developed in Abu Dhabi’s Saadiyat Cultural District, will explore the history, heritage and culture of the UAE through the narrative of Sheikh Zayed’s life, achievements and values.

In times bygone, museums have often been accused of being treasure troves of assets gathered through dint of persuasion often involving the sharp end of a sword. Robert Neil McGregor, the eminent art historian, overachiever and current Director of the British Museum, admitted as much at a recent talk about the identity of national museums, at Manarat Al Sadiyaat, Abu Dhabi. “Any collection of objects is also the manifestation of an imbalance of power.” He meant that in the specific sense that only the powerful have the wherewithal to collect ideas, concepts and history neatly encapsulated within of physical artefacts from various cultures. It is perhaps for this reason that museums, particularly the well-established houses of accumulated lore, such as the Louvre in Paris or the British Museum in London, have on occasion had the taint of imperialism attached to them.

Every now and again, a particularly newsworthy case of purported usurpation breaks out, prompting a fresh cry of subdued indignation. A long-running feud between the British Museum and the Greek authorities, for instance, involves the Elgin or Parthenon marbles. The controversy dates back to the eighteenth century when the Duke of Elgin, British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, obtained controversial permission to remove engraved slabs from the Acropolis. The story, in summation, is one of possession being nine-tenths the law. Elgin brought the marble slabs back to the Empire, and they reside safely in the British Museum to be enjoyed by millions. The Greeks, seeing it as an essential part of their heritage, are none to happy about it. They demand return. But even Mr. McGregor, for all intents and purposes a mild-mannered, thoroughly knowledgeable man, is vehement in his desire that the Elgin marbles not be returned to Greece. His motives though, are unconventional.

McGregor believes that museums are no longer houses of hoarding, but have transitioned into educational spaces that play an essential role in educating the public on the collective human heritage. He says he does not want the marbles, priceless in their expression of a culture long lost, be locked up as a testament to national pride. McGregor thinks an excellent way to end the impasse is to loan the marbles to the Greeks, provided they keep them on display for the world to see and enjoy.

His stance forms the crux of the argument that national museums don’t need to be overtly nationalistic. Rather than celebrate the achievements of a particular nation-state, museums are now transiting into public space that celebrates and shares collective human achievement.

Micheal Kimmelman, art critic for the New York Times and accomplished pianist, agrees with McGregor on this point. Moderating the panel discussion on what identity a national museum should take, he noted that curators see their museums not as static collections but as a place of learning. The conventional idea of a museum as a treasure trove of precious things is fading, to be replaced by a new sensibility that sees national museums come into their own as spaces of interaction and learning.

“Most outsiders think museums centre on fancy objects and gaudy tourism. But here, we’re talking about museums as the new town square, the new gathering place for society. The very notion of museums has evolved. They’re not repositories anymore, but constructs that combine the physical and social,” he said. This of course means that contemporary museums are not defined as much by the number of artefacts they house, or the wealth they possess, but the social role they play.

Dr. Shobita Punja, CEO of the National Culture Fund, Ministry of Culture and Government of India, said during the panel discussion that the purpose of a national museum is an exploration of creative impulse through the ages, and serves as a place to educate. But she also noted it can be difficult to find the dividing line between cultures that have bled into one another for countries who have a colonial past.

“We occasionally have huge issues (of taxonomy) when it comes to museums’ identities and layouts. In India, for instance, we had just one word to describe creativity. It’s Western disciplines that have imposed categorization – pottery, archaeology or anthropology. In many ways, these boundaries are artificial to us. A debate on national museums would not be complete without trying to understand how cultural baggage informs the discussion,” she said.

Henri Loyrette, Director of the Musee du Louvre, also speaking at the panel, said it is inevitable that historical narrative chooses certain representations over others. “Often, there are arts and artefacts that represent conflict where one civilization has won over the other. Sometimes, only part of a cultural narrative from history is highlighted, at the expense of others.”

Nevertheless, it remains obvious that museums are changing, as are their raisons de etre. Loyrette concurred, saying that the idea of the museum has evolved, with these establishments becoming an essential element of social integration through arts and culture. They perform a societal role in melding together an increasingly pluralistic narrative. For instance, said Loyrette, the Louvre has created a Department for Islamic Arts to ensure adequate representation of Muslim culture.

Contemporary national museums by necessity are becoming more inclusive. As McGregor put it, “The 19^th century assumption of a national museum supposed that all people in a city are the same. However, modern cities, such as London, Abu Dhabi and Berlin, are incredibly diverse.” Hence, a national museum must explore the different narratives of the people living within a city space and wanting representation in the national ideological dialogue.

As the political nuances of identity and notion of belonging become increasingly important in a multi-polarized complex world, debates over which versions of history are chosen as legitimate are also coming to the foreground. McGregor fittingly cited the example of Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar, seeing as the talk was conducted against the backdrop of an art exhibition exploring ancient Mesopotamia. The monarch Nebuchadnezzar is considered the most important ruler of the Second Babylonian empire, and is recognized for his conquests as much as for the legendary, and possibly apocryphal, hanging gardens of Babylon. McGregor noted that Nebuchadnezzar revised the history of Babylon to facilitate its future. While restoring old religious monuments, he exercised judgment on the socio-political narratives he wanted to take forward; unwanted versions were relegated to the anonymous ignominy of historical footnotes. “There is a constant attempt to rewrite history to include new groups as social structures change,” said McGregor; possibly to make history more palatable, and perhaps congruent with future ambitions. If this is revisionism, it’s a practice we are all guilty of.

The modern national museum is not just defined by what narratives it represents, but also who chooses to visit there. There is obviously high correlation between the two issues, for a pluralistic museum will ideally attract a diverse audience. For Dr. Wafaa El Saddik, President of Children’s Alliance for Traditions and Social Engagement and former General Director of the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, the proof of the pudding lies in the visiting audience. “The mainstay of the modern national museum is its role in education. Younger generations should be enticed to museums so that they may learn through interaction and fascination,” she said during the discussion.  

The role of a modern national museum complements that of the schooling system. The latter relies on theory and analysis, while the former informs through the senses. “History can come alive through the hands, ears, tongue and nose,” said Dr. El Saadik, and museums are a vital nexus for exploring identity through interaction.

Loyrette agrees with the assessment of museums as houses for exploration and comprehension. He said, “If one understands the past, one tends to comprehend the present. It’s not a question of aesthetical hoarding per se, but of having an avenue to understand the world in which we’re evolving.” McGregor concurred. He said there is a retreat of aesthetics - gathering beautiful things for the sake of it. “People [are using museums to] re-examine how they achieved what they have, the nature of change, and thereby arrive at some understanding of what the future might hold,” he stated.  

In a strange evolution, museums, national or otherwise, have become devices to facilitate future development through historical understanding. Dr. Punja agreed with this assessment. “Museums are not just records of the past, but ideas for the future. In particular, they can create a generation of creative people who understand the past, and can deal with the future.” She recommends that the students and craftsmen of today should be introduced to museums to see what had been done many a year ago, so they may extrapolate to what may be accomplished in the far tomorrow.

National museums, in their new guise as houses of comprehension, not of vanity, as social spaces, not dusty repositories for usurped treasure, as progressive institutions, not wistfully nostalgic monuments to days of yore, still have many questions to answer. For instance, how can a static national museum cope with fluid movement of people across borders? How can they appeal to the wider public, not just in the cities they are based, but the world over? And how can they compete with new technologies that have created a generation addicted to the promise of instant single-click gratification?

McGregor, Loyrette, Dr. El Saadik and Dr. Punja are unanimous in their belief that contemporary museums have to work towards developing relationships with one another: they must ensure that collections, representations and exhibitions are as fluidly transportable as the audiences they are meant for. In fact, one of the most obvious improvements through technology has been the ability to safely transport priceless artefacts around the globe, wherever they might be required. This has resulted in the possibility of new collections spanning both temporal and geographical spaces, and new juxtapositions and compositions exploring broader themes. The same artefacts can be arranged and combined in different ways to yield new insight.

But why would people want to visit these painstakingly assembled collections if they can find pictures and videos of the artefacts online? Again, the assembled experts concurred that online technologies doesn’t offer the threat of substitution. On the contrary, they are excellent marketing tools. “People who see virtual representations of collections are motivated to experience them first hand,” said Dr. El Saadik.

Despite the pluralistic narrational renaissance that national museums are undergoing, there are still subjects too incendiary to discuss. The issue of what to include and what to shun is a particularly important one for museums in Abu Dhabi and the UAE as a whole, where the relentless march towards rationalist modernization is married with respect for conservative traditionalism. As Kimmelman stated, “The UAE might want to censor certain material. But then, don’t museums the world over have no-go areas of discussion?” Dr. Punja said she has hundreds of examples to offer on the topic of censorship. Several sensuous, beautiful figures are hidden away, she says, because new political groups insist that a five thousand year old naked dancing girl poses a threat to moral fibre. Dr. El Saadik noted that large collections from ancient Egypt and Rome involving sexual depictions are not allowed on display in Cairo.

Dr. McGregor sympathised, sharing anecdotes from the 18^th century when the British Museum first opened. “Some objects were considered so sexually dangerous that you could only look at them in the presence of the Archbishop of Canterbury.” While the British Museum may have gone past that particular taboo, McGregor noted that many political and racial discourses can’t be represented in his museum space. “Politics and racism is the new sex,” he said. “If the purpose of an exhibition is to have serious public debate, there are some areas where it isn’t possible because passions run too high. It’s a judgement call, because depicting violence could precipitate more violence.”

So what narrational shape could the Sheikh Zayed National Museum take? One of Sheikh Zayed’s ideals was that for the UAE to become the country that it should, it needs to know, and understand, its history. If that history is presented through the eyes and value system of the late ruler, it would probably take the route of narration through pluralism, hospitality, and an enlightened, open Islam.

Yet questions still remain for the museum to answer. The UAE is home to transnational population that was welcomed by Sheikh Zayed. It would be impossible for a museum to try and represent all intersecting narratives, but will a national museum try to reconcile global influences with local? And what epistemological language of narration will be favoured? As Kimmelman argued, “Aesthetics is one particular Western way of looking at things. History, and the objects associated with it, can be represented and interpreted in many different ways. Abu Dhabi presents a tabula rasa [a blank slate], which means there is tremendous opportunity to develop a specific idea of speaking about, and to, local culture.” Objects and collections needn’t be arranged around aesthetic configurations, but could perhaps be collated along historical, political and gendered lines.

In addition, the Zayed National Museum will need to figure out its association with the country’s educational apparatus. As McGregor said, “One of the key points of a national museum is to connect to national education structures. This will facilitate the development of categories of discussion and representation that are suitable to the national context of the UAE.”

The answers to these questions will not be easy, and neither will they be found overnight. Yet the very fact these questions are being asked out aloud, and in many ways are becoming embedded within the national narrative, heralds a promising time for socio-political and culture expression in the UAE. The National Zayed Museum is a definite step towards progression through a comprehension of historical identity from the viewpoint of a leader loved and revered. Whatever shape the national museum takes, it can’t go very far wrong as long as it channels the sprit of the late Zayed, not just through a collection of objects, but in his true spirit of promoting plurality, moderation, enlightenment and progress.

[Ends]

.