ABSTRACT
The debates around Into the Heart of Africa extended far beyond the exhibit itself. Most people involved in, or touched by the controversy, positioned themselves in complex ways in relation to the exhibit, Cannizzo, and the CFTA. Consequently, many people I interviewed expressed differently nuanced evaluations of the controversy, rarely situating themselves squarely on one side of the debate. However, fluidity was not apparent in dominant constructions of the controversy. The ROM, the media, and the CFTA, contributed to creating a highly polarized “us versus them” debate. This chapter begins by examining how the ROM and the media marginalized and radicalized the CFTA. Following this, I will consider the more complex responses of academics and members of the black community to the CFTA. As will become clear, people in these communities approached the controversy with a sense of multiplicity and awareness of competing ideologies and political priorities. In a larger sense, the CFTA was a catalyst for discussion and reflection about minority rights, resistance, complicity, and academic freedom. Finally, I will consider alternative voices from within the ROM—staff members who distanced themselves from the ROM’s “official” discourse, and identified museological issues raised by the controversy. In this way, the richness of the ROM controversy can be better appreciated.
