Safeguarding the Sacred: Sensitivity or Censorship?

My thanks to CultureGrrl reader Sara Patel (who identifies herself as “a lecturer in museum studies in Greenwich London”) for sending this link to a thought-provoking article criticizing British museums for overzealousness in their care of sacred objects. Tiffany Jenkins, the author of the article (which appeared in the July 11, 2005 issue of the London-based magazine New Statesman), observed:
Soon no showcase or object will be safe from scrutiny. Already, the code of ethics issued by the UK’s Museums Association argues that this practice should operate across the board. It commands professionals to “consider restricting access to certain specified items, particularly those of ceremonial or religious importance, where unrestricted access may cause offence or distress to actual or cultural descendants.”
These are terrible guidelines for anyone working in museums. The very point of these institutions is to open up other worlds to people, not to lock the ones inside or shut the others out….We cannot find meaning and community through censorship and restriction, or when people are perceived as determined by some nebulous notion of different and separate cultures.
As I have previously observed, the Association of Art Museum Directors’ new “Sacred Objects” report is silent on whether museums should return objects demanded by their societies of origin. It also avoids the question of whether public access to certain museum-owned objects should be restricted, due to religious or ceremonial strictures.
MORE ON THIS TOMORROW.