AAMD’s “Sacred Object” Statement: No Guidance on Givebacks

The Association of Art Museum Directors has done it again: In its just-released report on The Acquisition and Stewardship of Sacred Objects, AAMD suggests that a hot-button issue be addressed with “special consideration” and “sensitivity,” but asserts, as always, that museums should ultimately do as they see fit:
In the absence of applicable legal requirements, these decisions ultimately rest entirely with the [individual] museum….Art museums should make decisions regarding sacred objects on a case-by-case basis and should share their decisions with the individuals and group(s) with whom they have engaged in dialogue.
Most problematically, the report nowhere addresses the greatest controversy surrounding collections of sacred objects from indigenous cultures: whether, and under what circumstances, objects already owned by museums should be returned to the societies from whence they came.
AAMD says that its new report was inspired by a desire “to adopt special stewardship or interpretive responsibilities for sacred objects that are not covered by NAGPRA [the U.S. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act] and are not subject to specific national or international laws or treaties. Such works include those of non-federally recognized tribes, First Nation cultures in Canada, indigenous Mexican cultures, as well as other groups worldwide.”
But NAGPRA spells out circumstances under which objects should be returned from museums. On this, AAMD is notably silent.
In Hugh Eakin’s article published today, based on “an advance copy…provided to The New York Times” (because other art reporters, obviously, are less worthy), we are informed that indigenous leaders “were not consulted on the [AAMD] report.” It seems paradoxical that a text urging museums to “consult with cultural and religious leaders of indigenous societies” about objects’ acquisition and care was itself written without such consultation.
This is just another manifestation of an AAMD malady previously diagnosed by CultureGrrl (here and here): AAMD’s penchant for issuing statements “more remarkable for what they don’t say than for what they do.”
MORE ON THIS SOON.