Recently our class lectures, discussions, and readings have focused on the significance of material objects in life and in museums. We explored this topic in depth when we each created a personal “shoebox” exhibit, meant to accurately illustrate who we are. As soon as I began thinking about what objects constitute me, I felt overwhelmed. What could I possibly fit into one small shoebox that sums up all of me? I ended up putting tons of small items in my box, like an acorn to show how much I love the outdoors and a box of sand from my favorite beach. What I discovered from this assignment is that it’s really difficult to summarize an entire person in one exhibit, let alone an entire socially body like museums must do. Most people misunderstood
…show more content…
I have coins from all over the world from many different times, all of which I keep in a small box in my dorm. I have a few favorite coins, that I keep in a separate box. The discussions and readings from class have caused me to think about what my collection actually means. “The act of collection [is] a gathering up of properties in arbitrary systems of value and meaning” (Clifford 1985). This calls into question the idea that lots of collections, like mine, sort the objects into categories based on how we think of them, not based on the object 's actual significance. My simple individual coin collection can be an example of this. I assign arbitrary value based on personal aesthetics to organize my collection instead of actually putting the coins in context of their historical value or meaning. Because of this friction between collections and how they are presented, museums have to be conscious of how their collections will be representative of the object 's original …show more content…
When a museum takes these culturally significant objects and brings them into a new context, it’s important that they embody the culture and society they came from carefully and accurately. Most of the time “the life of objects once in a collection is notably different from their pre-collection existence” (MacDonald 2006). This difference in meaning is important for museums to take into consideration to avoid presenting the objects in an ethnocentric way. As one of the authors we read this week put it, the “social meaning is broken when an artifact is removed from its cultural setting and inserted within the visual symbol system of the museum (Classen and Howes 2006). An example of this are the Navajo sand paintings we discussed in class. In their original social context, sand paintings were disposed of after they served their purpose that day. It was common belief that if someone looked at the spiritual markings for too long they would become blind. When Western collectors became interested in these paintings they changed their culturally significant context and changed them into a painting that does not need to be destroyed (Classen and Howes 2006). This a perfect example of how collecting artifacts changed their meanings. The paintings that the Navajo use in sacred rituals, revere as extremely symbolic of their culture, and have important rituals associated
I have coins from all over the world from many different times, all of which I keep in a small box in my dorm. I have a few favorite coins, that I keep in a separate box. The discussions and readings from class have caused me to think about what my collection actually means. “The act of collection [is] a gathering up of properties in arbitrary systems of value and meaning” (Clifford 1985). This calls into question the idea that lots of collections, like mine, sort the objects into categories based on how we think of them, not based on the object 's actual significance. My simple individual coin collection can be an example of this. I assign arbitrary value based on personal aesthetics to organize my collection instead of actually putting the coins in context of their historical value or meaning. Because of this friction between collections and how they are presented, museums have to be conscious of how their collections will be representative of the object 's original …show more content…
When a museum takes these culturally significant objects and brings them into a new context, it’s important that they embody the culture and society they came from carefully and accurately. Most of the time “the life of objects once in a collection is notably different from their pre-collection existence” (MacDonald 2006). This difference in meaning is important for museums to take into consideration to avoid presenting the objects in an ethnocentric way. As one of the authors we read this week put it, the “social meaning is broken when an artifact is removed from its cultural setting and inserted within the visual symbol system of the museum (Classen and Howes 2006). An example of this are the Navajo sand paintings we discussed in class. In their original social context, sand paintings were disposed of after they served their purpose that day. It was common belief that if someone looked at the spiritual markings for too long they would become blind. When Western collectors became interested in these paintings they changed their culturally significant context and changed them into a painting that does not need to be destroyed (Classen and Howes 2006). This a perfect example of how collecting artifacts changed their meanings. The paintings that the Navajo use in sacred rituals, revere as extremely symbolic of their culture, and have important rituals associated