Fifteenth International Conference on The Inclusive Museum

Abstract

The Sande ritual mask controversy at the Baltimore Museum of Art invites solutions to address the female circumcision of initiates. Conservatives have accused curators of moral abdication by not referencing circumcision. Solutions to this social inequity may be found in competently curated displays of associated cultural objects. Such curation encourages empathy while firmly advocating for women’s rights and dignity both here and in abroad. This paper demonstrates how American museums can be instruments of understanding given their role as public archives. The author makes the case that museums have more to gain by being as transparent and open as possible on collections that invite controversy because they can be more dynamic in challenging bias–the first step in equitable dialogue. The author asserts that museums are more effective than advocates for positive law regimes seeking to stamp out female circumcision by force. Professionals hesitant to castigate are quicker to create spaces to educate and advocate empathetically. Curators resist conservative attempts at ending exposure, decontextualizing controversial works, stifling debate, and punishing pluralism by threatening to withhold the public purse. Disturbing practices may be banned by positive law, but how we relate to the materiality of the practice or invented traditions emerging from the practice should not be. Though not bias-free, museums provide some crucial intellectual and administrative cover for resistance to censure and censorship. Museums promote critique rather cultural chauvinism or moral relativism. Moreover, museums are demonstrably better at handling and contextualizing controversial issues because museums, unlike positive law, are dynamic.