ABSTRACT
The development of ethnographic museums and galleries is well documented in museum studies literature. Durrans (1988) explains how ethnographic museums originally emerged as adjuncts of European expansion and colonialism; consequently representation of ethnic groups was often overtly or covertly racist or patronising. He describes how Western museums and art galleries tend to display ethnic objects in isolation, disconnected from any social context. This is in accordance with the aesthetic ‘auratic’ conventions of the west, whereas ethnographic museums focus more on an object’s original meaning, function and purpose. Kirschenblatt-Gimblett (1998: 18) discusses in some detail the problems of displaying ethnographic collections, stating that ‘Like the ruin, the ethnographic fragment is informed by the poetics of detachment’. Some interpretation may therefore be needed, as the cultural meanings attached to objects, events or traditions cannot usually be predicted from the objects alone. However, such interpretation needs to be managed carefully and sensitively, involving the appropriate ethnic community in its development.
