The intense public
debate regarding the creation of a “museum of the discoveries” has slowed down in
recent months. However, it significantly and, it seems to me, irreversibly marked
the discussion about the role of museums in the Portuguese society, the ways in
which one can and should look into the past, the reasons why this past is
preserved and researched.
Throughout this debate,
the argument and accusation of "historical revisionism" or "judging
the past based on moral standards of the present" have been repeatedly heard.
In an article
written last October, António Barreto stated: “To define good and evil by
decree, to condemn history which is a hundred or a thousand years old, to legally
blame historical events and apologise for far-off facts: it's stupid, but it's
fashionable.” This is not only a misinterpretation of the demands made by part
of our society today (and, curiously, the sources of the criticised demands are
rarely cited), but an argument that always sounded absurd to me. Moreover, the
claims of those who argue that one should not feel guilty about something that
happened a hundred or a thousand years ago sounded inconsistent, because those
same people repeatedly affirm their pride in things that also happened a
hundred or a thousand years ago (read here
or here
or here).
Time and again, these
arguments have made me wonder whether our ancestors (all of them) had seen and
accepted as natural what is now seen as barbarism, whether it is the slave
trade 500 years ago or the alleged acts of sexual harassment and assualt by
Placido Domingo forty years ago or less. Domingos's
statement that “the rules and standards by which we are - and should be -
judged today are very different than they were in the past” doesn't sound
so different from those that argue that slavery was not viewed as inhuman or
immoral in the 16th century.
 |
| “Coexistence. Plural Lisbon. 1147-1910”, Museu de Lisboa - Palácio Pimenta |
Yesterday, I found a possible answer to my questions on the walls of an exhibition at the Museum of Lisbon - Palácio Pimenta:
“We were the inventors
of such bad treatment, never practised or heard of among humans. No human
reason had been found which permits that there should ever exist in the world a
public and free policy to buy and sell free and peaceful men, as if they were buying
and selling beats, cattle or horses, and the like.”
This is an excerpt from
the work “Art of the War of the Sea”, written in 1555 by Father Fernando
Oliveira, part of the exhibition “Coexistence.
Plural Lisbon. 1147-1910” (curated by Paulo Almeida Fernandes and Ana Paula
Antunes, open until December 22 and, curiously, little or not discussed in my circle
of friends and colleagues). In the same exhibition, we have the possibility to
watch the video “O Atlântico dos Outros: escravatura negra no império
português” (The Atlantic of
Others: Black Slavery in the Portuguese Empire, a project of the Calouste
Gulbenkian Foundation), which includes an excerpt from Gomes Eanes de Zurara's
“Chronicle of Guinea”, completed in 1453:
 |
| “Coexistence. Plural Lisbon. 1147-1910”, Museu de Lisboa - Palácio Pimenta |
“being separated (...);
the sons from the fathers, and the wives from the husbands, and brothers from
each other... the women held the other children in their arms, and fell upon
them face down, getting wounded, with little pity for their flesh, so that they
are not taken away from them!”
After all, some people
in the 15th or 16th centuries had considered these practices inhuman. Their views
on what was happening were not so different from today’s. And throughout this
time, the victims never considered that what they were going through was
“natural”. Even though, their riots and uprisings are rarely mentioned to us
(it was not until 2011 that I first heard about Toussaint Louverture at the National Museum of African Art, Washington DC; and only in March this year did I
first hear about the Maroons of Jamaica, at the Wilberforce House Museum, Hull).
 |
| “Coexistence. Plural Lisbon. 1147-1910”, Museum of Lisbon - Palácio Pimenta. Top-down and clockwise: "Portrait of a black man", Veloso Salgado, 1887; "Tobacco holder", unknown author, 1920s; "Bust of 'Father Paulino'", Rafael Bordalo Pinheiro, 1893; "The blacks of Saint George", unknown author, 19th century; "Begging for the festival of N.S. da Atalaia", unknown artist, 1826; "Brotherhood of Black Men in the procession of Corpus Christi", Damantino Tojal, 1948. |
Now, finally, a
Portuguese museum, a city museum, the Museum of Lisbon, proposes to reflect on
the role that “foreigner residents and religious minorities played in building
the image of the Lisbon” and on “a city that rejected, segregated and expelled
those people, but also tolerated, mingled with and integrates them”. The
exhibition shares knowledge and raises necessary questions about topics that
occupy the public space and are of concern to the public opinion, but that
Portuguese museums in general avoid tackling. It does so consciously, with a
sense of responsibility and, it seems to me, with courage.
Focusing specifically on
“The Lisbon of the Africans”, slavery, working and living conditions, prejudice
are not subjects to be avoided. On the contrary, the objects (coming from the
museum collection and from other museums) are not only described, as they
usually are, but serve to tell a story (the History), without euphemisms. In
the same way and in this context, the exhibition does not avoid talking about
people from Africa who, unlike those that had been enslaved, were rich and had
another social status (which was the case of Dona Simoa Godinha, whose will,
belonging to the archives of the Santa Casa da Misericórdia of Lisbon, is here
exhibited). At the same time, when it is not possible to exhibit objects which
are relevant to this narrative, the Museum of Lisbon presents them in
photographs (such as the painting “Rua Nova dos Mercadores”, which was presented
“without any comment” in 2017 in the exhibition “The Global
City” at the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga).
 |
| “Coexistence. Plural Lisbon. 1147-1910”, Museum of Lisbon - Palácio Pimenta. |
What part of society asks
for today is not “self-flagellation,” but a fuller, more honest and courageous
discussion also about the negative aspects of the past that we are so proud of,
including the voices of those who, even when speaking, were largely ignored.
History is always told from a certain point of view. However, it is not a
sacred and untouchable book, because research does not stop, does not freeze,
and the points of view are divrese and not homogeneous. This is not about
“inventing a democratic past” (which was the understanding of the director ofthe Museu de Arte Antiga), but to recognise that the past was not
democratic and was not respectful to all human beings, a fact that still
affects the lives of thousands of citizens in this country and our relations when
living together in society. Perhaps this is what is missing in the exhibition “Coexistence. Plural Lisbon. 1147-1910”: the reflection upon and consequences
of the story told in our social relations today - in Lisbon and in the country
-, as it happens at the Wilberforce House Museum in Hull. The museum may not
have objects in its collection to speak about this part, but there are many citizens
that could lend them, as well as offering their testimonies (the videos “Places
of Memory” - here
and here
- produced by Culturgest under the Colonial
Memories cycle, would have been a good addition). Perhaps this could be the
next, much needed, step.
 |
| Wilberforce House Museum, Hull |
More on this blog
More readings
António Barreto, Três museus, Público (1.9.2019)
Lucinda Canelas, Os museus devem promover a igualdade ou a sua missão
primordial (ainda) é outra?, Público (1.9.2019)
Maria Vlachou, Para que servem os museus?, Público (21.9.2019)
No comments:
Post a Comment