Advertisement

Architecture of the Contact Zone: Four Post-colonial Museums

  • Paul Walker
Chapter

Abstract

Museums have become important locations for shaping and reshaping contemporary relations between post-colonial nations and indigenous cultures. The anthropologist James Clifford has used the term ‘contact zone’ to describe the indeterminacy and possibility that exists when the formal, anthropological knowledge held by curators and the embodied, evolving culture represented by indigenous groups encounter each other within the orbit of the contemporary museum. Clifford’s use of the term ‘contact zone’ is borrowed from the work of Mary Louise Pratt who used it rather in an historical sense to describe the strangeness and unanticipated outcomes for epistemology of encounters on the frontiers of European imperial expansion in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This chapter will examine the architecture of four museums which in their institutional missions have foregrounded relations between contemporary nation–states and the communities descended from colonised people. These museums are the Tjibaou Cultural Centre, Noumea (completed 1998); Te Papa Tongarewa/Museum of New Zealand, Wellington (1997); National Museum of Australia, Canberra (2001); and the Musée du quai Branly, Paris (2006). Each museum is based on a different idealisation or conception of the contemporary emerging from the colonial histories which it represents: rapprochement between coloniser and colonised at Tjibaou; the post-colonial nation as ‘bicultural’ at Te Papa; the post-colonial nation as multicultural ‘mosaic’ at the NMA; rapprochement between a former coloniser and the formerly colonised at quai Branly. In each museum, architecture was charged with the responsibility to make these idealisations physically and experientially manifest even as architecture itself struggles with its own inheritances of elite, monocultural knowledge. For both Clifford and Pratt, the term ‘zone’ primarily entails a spatial metaphor; the contact zone is an epistemological space. The term ‘zone’, however, can also be taken to refer literally to the physical spaces of an institution or the geographical spaces where colonial encounters with the other took place. Indeed, both Clifford and Pratt often discuss or allude to just such ostensible places in their work. The chapter will bring their discussions of the ‘contact zone’ to bear in critique and analysis of its four key examples to consider what architecture could be in such a place, how it too could become a more labile and less determinate thing.

References

  1. Amato, S. (2006). Quai Branly Museum: Representing France after empire. Race & Class, 47(4), 46–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong, C. (2006). Australian Indigenous art commission. Sydney: Art & Australia.Google Scholar
  3. Austin, M. (2000). The Tjibaou Culture Centre in New Caledonia. In M. Ostwald, & R. More (Eds.), Re-Framing architecture: Theory, science and myth (pp. 25–28). Sydney: Archadia Press.Google Scholar
  4. Austin, M. (2007). Pacific cultural centres and antipodean museums. In M. Ostwald, & S. Fleming (Eds.), Museum, gallery, and cultural architecture in Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Region: Essays in antipodean identity (pp. 149–159). Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bhatti, S. (2012). Translating museums: A counter history of South Asian museology. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bossley, P. (1998). Te Papa: An architectural adventure. Wellington: Te Papa Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brothers, C. (2009). Immigrants flock proudly to the Musée du Quai Branly. New York Times. 21 August. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/21/arts/design/21muse.html?scp=6&sq=Musée%20du%20quai%20branly&st=cse. Accessed 23 Oct 2016.
  8. Brown, D. (2009). Māori Architecture: From fale to wharenui and beyond. Auckland: Raupo.Google Scholar
  9. Brunt, P. (2012). Contemporary Pacific art and its globalization. In P. Brunt, & N. Thomas (Eds.), Art in Oceania: A new history (pp. 410–439). London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
  10. Casey, D. (2001). The National Museum of Australia: Exploring the past, illuminating the present and imagining the future. In D. McIntyre, & K. Wehner (Eds.), National Museums: Negotiating histories (pp. 3–11). Canberra: National Museum of Australia.Google Scholar
  11. Chemetzky, P. (2008). Not what we expected: The Jewish Museum Berlin in practice. Museum and Society, 6(3), 216–245.Google Scholar
  12. Chirac, J. (2006). Opening of the Musée du quai Branly, Speech by President Jacques Chirac. http://australiacouncil.gov.au/news/media-centre/speeches/opening-of-the-musee-du-quai-branly-speech-by-president-jacques-chirac/. Accessed 21 Oct 2016.
  13. Clifford, J. (1988). Histories of the tribal and the modern. In J. Clifford (Ed.), The predicament of culture: Twentieth-Century ethnography, literature, and art. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Clifford, J. (1997) Museums as contact zones. In J. Clifford (Ed.), Routes: Travel and translation in the late Twentieth Century (pp. 188–219). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Clifford, J. (2007). Quai Branly in Process, October, 120, 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Commonwealth of Australia. (1975). Museums in Australia 1975: Report of the Committee of the Inquiry on Museums and National Collections including the Report of the Planning Committee on the Gallery of Aboriginal Australia (The Piggott Report). Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
  17. Commonwealth of Australia. (2003). Review of the National Museum of Australia, Its Exhibitions and Public Programs: A Report to the Council of the National Museum of Australia (NMA Review). Canberra: Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts.Google Scholar
  18. Dalrymple, T. (1999). An amusement arcade masquerading as a museum. New Statesman, 12(542), 32–33.Google Scholar
  19. Dean, D., & Rider, P. (2005). Museums, nation and political history in the Australian National Museum and the Canadian Museum of Civilization. Museum and Society, 3(1), 35–50.Google Scholar
  20. Devine, M. (2001, March 21). Insult or a hidden code. Daily Telegraph, Sydney, 31.Google Scholar
  21. Dibley, B. (2007). Antipodean aesthetics, public policy & the museum: Te Papa, for example, Cultural Studies Review, 13(1), 129–149.Google Scholar
  22. Dutton, D. (1998). National treasure or dog’s breakfast? The Press, Christchurch, 20 May, 7. Reprinted as: New National Museum resembles a junk shop. New Zealand Herald, Auckland, May 21, A15; & Te Papa: National Embarrassment. The Weekend Australian, Sydney, June 6, 23.Google Scholar
  23. Ellis, N. (2016). A Whakapapa of tradition: 100 years of Ngāti Porou carving, 1830–1930. Auckland: Auckland University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Findley, L. (2005). Building change: Architecture, politics and cultural agency. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Gentry, K. (2015). History, heritage, and colonialism: Historical consciousness, Britishness, and cultural identity in New Zealand, 1870–1940. Manchester: Manchester University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jencks, C. (2001a). Un significato per l’Australia/The meaning of Australia. Domus, 837, 96–115.Google Scholar
  27. Jencks, C. (2001b). How to speak Australian. Architecture, 90(8), 82–91.Google Scholar
  28. John Andrews International Pty. Ltd., & Talbot, F. (1977). Museum of Australia: Site Location Study. Stage C Optimum Functional Relationships.Google Scholar
  29. Kasarherou, E. (1995). ‘Men of flesh and blood’: The Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Centre in Noumea. Art and Asia Pacific, 2(4), 90–95.Google Scholar
  30. Losche, D. (2003). Cultural forests and their objects in New Caledonia: The forest on Lifou. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Art, 4(1), 77–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Macarthur, J., & Stead, N. (2006). The National Museum of Australia as danse macarbre: Baroque allegories of the popular, In C. Healy & A Witcomb (Eds.), South Pacific Museums: Experiments in culture (pp. 19.1–19.3). Melbourne: Monash University ePress.Google Scholar
  32. MacKenzie, J. (2009). Museums and empire: Natural history, human cultures and colonial identities. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Martin, A. (2011). Quai Branly Museum and the aesthetic of otherness. St Andrews Journal of Art History and Museum Studies, 15, 53–63.Google Scholar
  34. McCarthy, C. (2007). Exhibiting Māori: A history of colonial cultures of display. Wellington: Te Papa Press.Google Scholar
  35. McCarthy, C. (2011). Museums and Māori: Heritage professionals, Indigenous collections, current practice. Wellington: Te Papa Press.Google Scholar
  36. McGill, D. (1985, February 5). Art world subtly shifts to corporate patronage. New York Times 27.Google Scholar
  37. Message, K. (2006). Contested sites of identity and the cult of the new: The Centre Culturel Tjibaou and the constitution of culture in New Caledonia. Recollections: Journal of the National Museum of Australia, 1(1): 7–28.Google Scholar
  38. Message, K. (2009). Culture, citizenship and Australian multiculturalism: The contest over identity formation at the National Museum of Australia. Humanities Research, 15(2), 23–48.Google Scholar
  39. Naumann, P. (2006). Naturally in Paris. Architecture Australia, 95(5), 88–95.Google Scholar
  40. Neill, A. (2004). National culture and the new museology. In A. Smith, & L. Wevers (Eds.), On display: New essays in cultural studies (pp. 180–196). Wellington: Victoria University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Nouvel, J. (2002). Museo de quai Branly/Museum on quai Branly, In J. Nouvel, & R. Levene (Eds.), Jean Nouvel 1994–2002: The symbolic order of matter = el croquis 112/113 (p. 202). Madrid: El Croquis.Google Scholar
  42. Piano, R. (1996). Renzo Piano building workshop: Cultural Center Jean Marie Tjibaou, Architecture + Urbanism 315, 92–102.Google Scholar
  43. Pieris, A. (2016). Indigenous cultural centers and museums: An illustrated international survey. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  44. Prakash, G. (1992). Science ‘Gone Native’ in Colonial India. Representations, 40, 153–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pratt, M. (2008). Imperial Eyes: Travel writing and transculturation, (2nd ed.) London: Routledge (1st ed. 1992).Google Scholar
  46. Price, S. (2007). Paris primitive: Jacques Chirac’s museum on the Quai Branly. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  47. Project Development Team for the National Museum of New Zealand Te Marae Taonga o Aotearoa. (1985). Nga Taonga o Te Motu/Treasures of the Nation—National Museum of New Zealand/Te Marae Taonga o Aotearoa: A plan for development. Wellington: Department of Internal Affairs.Google Scholar
  48. Reed, D. (2002). A volatile history. In D. Reed (ed.), Tangled histories: National Museum of Australia (p. 3). Musgrave: Images Publishing.Google Scholar
  49. Sauvage, A. (2007). Narratives of colonisation: The Musée du quai Branly in context. reCollections: Journal of the National Museum of Australia, 2(2), 135–152.Google Scholar
  50. Skinner, D. (2008). The carver and the artist: Māori art in the twentieth century. Auckland: Auckland University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Thomas, D. (2013). Museology and globalization: The quai Branly Museum. Africa and France: Postcolonial cultures, migration, and racism (pp. 14–41). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Thomas, N. (1999). Possessions: Indigenous art/colonial culture. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
  53. Thomas, N. (2016). Global reach, Apollo, 31–34Google Scholar
  54. Tramposch, W. (1998a). Te Papa: An invitation for redefinition. Museum International, 50(3), 28–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tramposch, W. (1998b). Te Papa: Reinventing the museum. Museum Management and Curatorship, 17(4), 339–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Walker, P. (1996). The ‘Maori house’ at the Canterbury Museum, Interstices, 4 (cd-rom).Google Scholar
  57. Walker, P. (2007). Institutional audiences and architectural style: The Napier Museum. In P. Scriver, & V. Prakash (Eds.), Colonial modernities: Building, dwelling and architecture in British India and Ceylon (pp. 127–147). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Walker, P. (2012). Culture. In G. Crysler, S. Cairns, & H. Heynen (Eds.), The Sage handbook of architectural theory (pp. 369–382). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Walker, P., & Clark, J. (2004). Museum and archive: Framing the Treaty. In A. Smith, & L. Wevers (Eds.), On display: New essays in cultural studies (pp. 162–179). Wellington: Victoria University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Weller, R. (2001). The National Museum Canberra, and its Garden of Australian Dreams. Studies in the History of Gardens and Designed Landscapes, 21(1), 66–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Williams, P. (2005). A breach on the beach: Te Papa and the fraying of biculturalism. Museum and Society, 3(2), 81–97.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations