Search the site...

SOL DE MEDIANOCHE
  • MARCH 2023
  • FEBRUARY 2023
  • JANUARY 2023
  • DECEMBER 2022
  • NOVEMBER 2022
  • OCTOBER 2022
  • SEPTEMBER 2022
  • AUGUST 2022
  • JULY 2022
  • JUNE 2022
  • MAY 2022
  • APRIL 2022
  • MARCH 2022
  • FEBRUARY 2022
  • JANUARY 2022
  • DECEMBER 2021
  • NOVEMBER 2021
  • OCTOBER 2021
  • SEPTEMBER 2021
  • AUGUST 2021
  • JULY 2021
  • JUNE 2021
  • MAY 2021
  • APRIL 2021
  • MARCH 2021
  • FEBRUARY 2021
  • JANUARY 2021
  • DECEMBER 2020
  • NOVEMBER 2020
  • Advertise with us!
  • OCTOBER 2020
  • SEPTEMBER 2020
  • AUGUST 2020
  • JULY 2020
  • JUNE 2020
  • MAY 2020
  • MAR - APR 2020
  • JAN - FEB 2020
  • NOVEMBER 2019
  • SEPTEMBER 2019
  • JULY 2019
  • MAY 2019
  • MARCH 2019
  • FEBRUARY 2019
  • NOVEMBER 2018
  • SEPTEMBER 2018
    • Yes on Salmon
    • Become a citizen
  • JUNE 2018
  • APRIL 2018
  • FEBRUARY 2018
  • DECEMBER 2017
  • SEPTEMBER 2017
  • JULY 2017
  • MAY 2017
  • Spring 2017 - No. 5
  • Winter 2016 - No. 4
  • Fall 2016 - No. 3
  • Summer 2016 - No. 2
  • Spring 2016 - No. 1
  • Contact
  • MARCH 2023
  • FEBRUARY 2023
  • JANUARY 2023
  • DECEMBER 2022
  • NOVEMBER 2022
  • OCTOBER 2022
  • SEPTEMBER 2022
  • AUGUST 2022
  • JULY 2022
  • JUNE 2022
  • MAY 2022
  • APRIL 2022
  • MARCH 2022
  • FEBRUARY 2022
  • JANUARY 2022
  • DECEMBER 2021
  • NOVEMBER 2021
  • OCTOBER 2021
  • SEPTEMBER 2021
  • AUGUST 2021
  • JULY 2021
  • JUNE 2021
  • MAY 2021
  • APRIL 2021
  • MARCH 2021
  • FEBRUARY 2021
  • JANUARY 2021
  • DECEMBER 2020
  • NOVEMBER 2020
  • Advertise with us!
  • OCTOBER 2020
  • SEPTEMBER 2020
  • AUGUST 2020
  • JULY 2020
  • JUNE 2020
  • MAY 2020
  • MAR - APR 2020
  • JAN - FEB 2020
  • NOVEMBER 2019
  • SEPTEMBER 2019
  • JULY 2019
  • MAY 2019
  • MARCH 2019
  • FEBRUARY 2019
  • NOVEMBER 2018
  • SEPTEMBER 2018
    • Yes on Salmon
    • Become a citizen
  • JUNE 2018
  • APRIL 2018
  • FEBRUARY 2018
  • DECEMBER 2017
  • SEPTEMBER 2017
  • JULY 2017
  • MAY 2017
  • Spring 2017 - No. 5
  • Winter 2016 - No. 4
  • Fall 2016 - No. 3
  • Summer 2016 - No. 2
  • Spring 2016 - No. 1
  • Contact

There is no universal heritage,
but there is a shared heritage


by carlos matías

Picture

James Clifford, Professor Emeritus of the Department of History of Consciousness University of California, Santa Cruz, talks to Sol de Medianoche about the tasks of recovering Alaska Native heritage, scattered in institutions and private collections in other countries, far from the people who created them and their territories, especially scattered throughout Europe. Professor Clifford is author of the book “Returns: Becoming Indigenous in the 21st Century.”

Professor James Clifford, from California, begins by talking with us about the open cooperative work between a small French museum and the Alutiiq community in Alaska. We make him see how interesting this collaboration is, which seems to us to be along the lines that there is no “exclusive heritage” of a community, but that today, in this globalized world, heritage is in a certain way “universal,” a little bit of everyone. And here arises the first discrepancy of the present interview.

James Clifford is clear and categorical on this first point: “I do not agree with the idea of a “universal” heritage, mentioned above. The “shared heritage” presupposes specific partners, alliances and negotiated reciprocities.”

- What is this French museum?
It is the Chateau Musée in Boulogne sur Mer, France. The Alutiiq materials found there are “The Pinart Collection.”

- Do you know if there are any other indigenous works from other Alaskan peoples in other museums in Europe?
There are many Alaskan cultural and artistic objects and artifacts in European collections. Usually, these are “Northwest Coast” or Yup’ik art. These are much better known than Alutiiq productions, which are rare.

- In your opinion, how should Alaska’s indigenous cultural heritage be treated? Should it all come back to Alaska or is it good to have exhibits in other countries, so that citizens of those countries outside of Alaska can learn about it and be interested in it?
This isn’t an either/or proposition. There is so much material in European and North American collections, there is much that could be shared. “Repatriation” is a very general term that includes objects returned, physically, to “homelands.” Usually to a museum or an indigenous cultural center, or to a “national museum in Africa.”
Then we have the circulation and long-term loan of collections; or the granting of special access and authority to “communities of origin” for collections remaining in Europe and North America.

We have “digital repatriation,” which makes collections accessible remotely. Similarly, there are the partnerships negotiated between indigenous and metropolitan institutions to circulate and exchange heritage, including old and new “art” and ceremonial objects.  Which of these options, or a combination of them, is chosen depends on many factors, local, political, historical, financial? There is no “one size fits all” repatriation.

The opinion of the “indigenous” varies. In some cases, it is better to leave the heritage in a place where it can be properly stored, with special access and authority over interpretation, in other cases, some objects (especially “sacred” ones) should be physically returned. Human remains should always be returned for reburial. Many consider that it is good to have high quality examples of their heritage in faraway places: “ambassadors” of their culture. But the current situation, where funding is heavily weighted towards former imperial nations, is not acceptable.

There must be some kind of rebalancing, redistribution and sharing of this diverse and rich heritage. Personally, I think it would be tragic if there were not rich collections of African, Arctic, Pacific Native, and so on, art and artifacts in places like Europe and North America.

​These arts are crucial inspirations for future creativity, and records of “human art history.” But, as I have said, there is more than enough to be widely shared, when the practical details of provenance and local control can be worked out.

- Since you don’t believe in a “universal heritage,” who has intellectual property over an ethnic heritage? The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) published a study by Molly Torsen and Jane Anderson in which they comment that “the Alutiiq Museum in Kodiak has sound recordings of the Alutiiq language, interviews with elders, recordings of events, etcetera, the rights to which belong to the institution and not to the Alutiiq natives. Do you agree?
The individuals are often deceased. Their communities should have access to the recorded materials if they wish. The institutions that made the recording should retain the rights but respect the protocols of secrecy and authority expressed by qualified representatives of the communities of origin.

Common ground must be found for negotiation in particular cases and situations of colonial, neocolonial and postcolonial history. ​

PROUDLY POWERED BY SOL DE MEDIANOCHE NEWS, LLC.
Sol de Medianoche is a monthly publication of the Latino community in Anchorage, Alaska