Thought #1: On May 5, 2013
the Arab American National Museum was the first among various American museums
to wish its orthodox friends Happy Easter Sunday on Facebook. I remember
smiling and thinking that I’ve been living in Portugal for 18 years, but no museum
ever acknowldged my being in this country also as an orthodox, celebrating
special days together with dozens of other Greeks and probably thousands of
Russians, Ukrainians, Romanians or Serbs; permanent residents in Portugal whose
visit the museums would be very happy to receive, I am sure, but whose culture
is not reflected in the museums’ collecting, programming or communicating
policies. What kind of a relationship could/should be developed between the
parts?
Thought #2: In Canada,
immigrants acquiring Canadian citizenship give their oath as “new Canadian
citizens” in a ceremony taking place in museums: the Canadian Museum of Immigration in Halifax,
for instance, or the Canadian Museum of History (formerly known as Canadian
Museum of Civilization - more readings at the end of this post) in Quebec. I have no idea what the content of the oath is, but when I first heard about
this, I was touched by the symbolic choice of place, museums being (ideally)
places that may be representative of our identity (or rather, our multiple
identities) and those of others, allowing us to learn about each other, be with
each other. I imagined these people’s stories, the stories of the new Canadian
citizens, becoming part of the history of Canada. Could this be one way of
forging a relationship?
 |
| Image taken from the website of the Canadian Museum of Immigration. |
Thought #3: A couple of years
ago, in a conference entitled “Programming for Diversity” which took place in
Portugal, I was convening a panel that included an Iranian refugee. I remember
him saying how much he felt at home when visiting the Gulbenkian Museum, where he could see objects coming from his country. I liked that idea of
feeling at home, but I was left thinking if this is the only way of getting
people interested and involved, by showing them what’s known to them. Can there
be a relationship when one only looks for what is familiar to them? Is it a
lack of curiosity regarding one’s “new home”? Or maybe the fact that the new
home doesn’t feel like “home”? And why doesn´t it?
These loose thoughts and many
more questions are coming up as I am preparing to moderate a debate this week
regarding the relationship of Portuguese cultural institutions with the
communities of immigrants and those of refugees now living in the country.
Living in a society that is becoming increasingly diverse, I am often asking
myself if there is actually a relationship, if there is an interest, to start
with, on either side to come together, to be part of each other´s lives and if
yes, what´s the best way of developing and maintaining this relationship. I am
saying this because it seems to me that most iniatiatives (at least among the
ones I am aware of) are one-off projects, assigned to a specific period of time
that eventually comes to an end. The “festival-kind” of project, where ones
come to perform and the others to watch the exotic and never meet again
until... next time; if there is a next time. Is this worthwhile? Does it have
any kind of impact? Should we aim for something else, something that might last
more? Why? Who’s interested? And whose initiative should this be?
 |
| Museu d' Història de Catalunya, Barcelona. Catalonia in the 21st century, part of the permanent exhibition. (Photo: Maria Vlachou) |
Looking abroad, we see big
institutions operating within large multicultural societies (the Victoria and
Albert Museum in London or the Kennedy Center in Washington, to name just two)
dedicating big exhibitions and special programmes to specific communities and their
cultures. The aim is to present a people’s culture and arts to anyone who might
be interested, to promote learning and hopefully also some understanding about
them. The aim is also to make that specific community feel included, and the
truth is that this kind of exhibitions and festivals do attract large numbers
of representatives of the celebrated culture. The question that remains is:
then what? What happens to those people who came to learn and enjoy? What stays
with them? Are there any changes in the way they perceive the culture they just
learned about? And do people from the communities involved come back for
something else? I gave the example of big institutions abroad, but the same
could apply to smaller institutions within our borders. Are we developing
projects and policies that might answer the question “Then what”?
Are immigrants and refugees a
special group, different from others? Maybe not. They might be interested in
what cultural institutions have to offer or not; they might have a habit of
visiting / attending or not; they might feel represented or not; they might
feel that this is for them or not; they might feel welcome or not; they might
come or not; they might have the money or not. Just like anybody else. Unlike
certain other groups of (underepresented) people, though, some cultural
institutions – or projects - feel the need, from time to time, to ‘deal’ with
immigrants or refugees. Maybe out of genuine interest, maybe because it is
politically correct. My concern is that, most times, it seems to be a one-off
thing, a “special event” or a “special project”, something that eventually
makes the people involved also stand out as a “special group”, instead of
promoting their being acknowledged as an integral part of our society, with whom
the relationship should be of a more permanent nature. What once was “special”
might not be anymore, things change. Are we following the change?
Ideally for me, cultural
institutions are the place where a newcomer (like I was 18 years ago) can get to know what existed
before his/her arrival, what is being produced at the moment and how he/she can
leave his/her mark as well. They are places of constant negotiation and update.
In order for this not to be something “special”, the work must be continuous so
that the inclusion may come naturally.
Can it be? Is it possible? Is
it happening? What does it take? These are questions for which I hope to be
able to get some clues in Thursday’s debate.
More on this blog:
Further reading:
