89MUSEUM
STUDIES
DOI 10.31250/2618-8619-2021-3(13)-06-15 УДК 069:39
Saleh Seid Adem
Arba Minch University; The South Omo Research Center and Ethnographic Museum
Arba Minch, Ethiopia ORCID: 0000-0002-1867-5933 E-mail: [email protected]
Challenges Facing Ethnographic Museums in Ethiopia
ABSTRACT. As much as we think museums as a place where things of the past are preserved and exhibited, they are the reflections and a tool in analyzing the present socio-economic and political aspects of the society. This fact and the subsequent challenges are more evident in cases of ethnographic museums situated in multi-ethnic areas such as South Omo Rift Valley, South Ethiopia. Drawing on the specific case of the South Omo Research Center (SORC) and Ethnographic Museum, this paper provides an exploratory analysis of the major challenges and opportunities facing the ethnographic museum, which originate in the local and national socio-economic and political processes. It also sheds light on the commercialization and commodification of the local culture and heritage as a result of cultural tourism in the South Omo Rift Valley and the Museum. The findings show that the major challenges of the center are related to the lack of well-trained manpower/staff, ethnic federalism, diversity and ownership of ethnographic museums, representation of the ethnic diversity (that is, the quantity and quality), the challenge of showcasing a living culture, local identity and commodification, development projects and, the last but not the least, the lack of funding and related issues.
KEYWORDS: Ethiopia, South Omo, ethnographic museum, cultural tourism
FOR CITATION: Adem S. S. Challenges Facing Ethnographic Museums in Ethiopia. Kunstkamera. 2021. 3(13): 06-15. doi 10.31250/2618-8619-2021-3(13)-06-15
МУЗЕЕВЕДЕНИЕ
Салех Сеид Адем
Арба-Мынч, Эфиопия Университет Арба-Мынча Исследовательский центр и этнографический музей Южного Омо
ORCID: 0000-0002-1867-5933 E-mail: [email protected]
Вызовы, с которыми сталкиваются этнографические музеи в Эфиопии
АННОТАЦИЯ. Как бы мы ни воспринимали музеи как место, где хранят и экспонируют вещи из прошлого, они являются отражением и инструментом анализа современных социально-экономических и политических аспектов жизни общества. Этот факт и проистекающие из него вызовы тем более ярко проявляются в случаях, когда музеи располагаются в многоэтничных районах, таких как рифтовая долина Южный Омо, Южная Эфиопия. На примере Исследовательского центра SORC и Этнографического музея Южного Омо анализируются основные вызовы и возможности, с которыми сталкивается этнографический музей в силу местных и общегосударственных социально-экономических и политических процессов. Автор также рассматривает проблему коммерциализации и коммодификации местной культуры и культурного наследия в результате развития культурного туризма в Южном Омо и самом музее. Он приходит к выводу, что основные вызовы, с которыми сталкивается центр, связаны с нехваткой хорошо подготовленных кадров, этническим федерализмом, репрезентацией этнического многообразия, с качеством и количеством экспонатов, находящихся в собственности этнографических музеев, музеефицированием живой культуры, местной идентичностью и коммодификацией, проектами развития и, наконец, с недостаточным финансированием и сопряженными с ним проблемами.
КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: Эфиопия, Южный Омо, этнографический музей, культурный туризм
ДЛЯ ЦИТИРОВАНИЯ: Адем С. C. Вызовы, с которыми сталкиваются этнографические музеи в Эфиопии. Кунсткамера. 2021. 3(13): 06-15. (Англ.). doi 10.31250/2618-8619-2021-3(13)-06-15
КУНСТКАМЕРА | KUNSTKAMERA № 3 (13) ■ 2021 INTRODUCTION
Museums and cultural centers are becoming analytical instruments in the socio-economic and political life of people in contemporary society. As ethnicity and native movements have intensified, the role of museums, especially ethnographic ones, is ever increasing in their capacity for both negative and positive influence on the coexistence of different ethnic groups (Black 2005; Cerquetti 2016). In an extremely diverse society such as Ethiopia, ethnographic museums have become a greatly contested arena of politics and economy (Turgeon & Dubuc 2002). The establishment of ethnographic museums and critical analysis of the challenges and opportunities they face have been of continuing concern within academia and politics. It is at the heart of our understanding of the past, present and future of our coexistence.
In the light of the events of the last two decades in Ethiopia, it has become challenging to ignore the existence of a contested ethnic tension in museums and cultural centers. Almost every ethnic group in Ethiopia is claiming its ethnographic museum, which it considers as one of its ethnic rights. Addressing these political claims politically but not professionally is the major challenge facing ethnographic museums in the country. There is an urgent need to address the challenges caused by the aggressive political presence in ethnographic museums. The existing research recognizes the critical role played by politics and politicians in the functioning of museums in general and ethnographic museums in particular (Herle 1997). More recently, literature has emerged that offers contradictory findings on the impact of nationstate building and diversity on ethnographic museums (Desai 2000). However, this paper argues that only few scholars have been able to bring any systematic research into the specific case of the ethnographic museum in Ethiopia. There has been no detailed examination of the challenges faced by ethnographic museums trying to display a living culture in a multi-diverse situation. It is now well established that ethnographic museums are vital instruments in the country's political and economic life. However, the influence of the political and economic structure on the ethnographic museum's functioning has remained unclear.
In this essay, I attempt to provide an account of a glimpse into the major challenges and opportunities faced by the ethnographic museum, which result from the local and national politics, and discuss them in the specific context of the South Omo Research Center (SORC) and Ethnographic Museum. This case study seeks to showcase the current status of SORC and the museum regarding its challenges and prospects. The paper is exploratory and interpretative. Understanding the link between the political and economic system and ethnographic museums will help us to refine a strategic alliance and running of museums in a very diverse situation. It also sheds light on the commercialization and commodification of local culture and heritage as a result of cultural tourism in the Southern Omo Refit Valley and the Museum.
Due to the practical constraints, this paper cannot provide a comprehensive review of the challenges and opportunities facing the museums of Ethiopia. The paper has been driven by my experience of working as a leading expert in a team of five people responsible for preparing a document for Arba Minch University in order to take over the administration of SORC and the Museum. In the following sections, the paper first describes a brief background and main achievements of SORC and the Museum. It then proceeds with a discussion of the major source of challenges and prospects of SORC and the Museum. In the conclusion, the paper remarks and recommendations for future research and practices related to museums.
ETHNIC DIVERSITY IN THE SOUTH OMO VALLEY
Ethiopia is a multi-ethnic state boasting its cultural diversity, which Conti Rossini dubbed as "un museo di popoli" (a museum of peoples). The manner in which the modern state of multi-ethnic Ethiopia evolved resulted in political, socio-economic and cultural interactions. Despite the harmonious relations among the people, the interactions have also been beset by perennial intra- and inter-group conflicts.
One of the areas known for their cultural, linguistic, and ethnic diversity is the South Omo Valley. Sixteen ethnic groups are found in this single zone (fig. 1, see inset). People in the South Omo Zone are predominantly dependent on agro-pastoralism and pastoral modes of production. The valley is one of the most ethnically diverse parts of Africa. It is a land of warriors, hunters, and pastoralists whose distinct age-old lifestyles are being changed by the outside world. Still, they are people whose daily existence and ways of life are ruled by tradition.
South Omo possesses various natural and historical resources and attractions such as tunnels, waterfalls, forests, and historical sites. However, the day-to-day life of South Omo ethnic groups is indeed the heart and soul of the valley. Special ritual ceremonies include ukuli cattle jumping by Hamar and Banna men as a rite of passage, keal, Bodi fatness competition, and donga, Mursi stick fight competition (Addisalem 2015).
The South Omo Zone is home to more than 16 ethnic groups whose populations number between 1,000 and 300,000 people. The native customs and environments of these groups are varied. South Omo ethnic groups include Ari, Arbore, Bacha, Banna, Bodi, Brile (Ongota), Dassanech, Dime, Hamar, Kara, Kwegu, Maale, Murle, Mursi, Nyangatom, and Tsemay. Each group has its own language belonging to one of the three language families: Nilotic languages are spoken by Bodi, Kwegu, Murle, Mursi and Nyangatom; Omotic languages are spoken by Ari, Banna, Bashada, Dime, Hamar, Kara and Maale; and Cushitic languages are spoken by Arbore, Brile, Dassanech and Tsemay (Addisalem 2015).
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SORC AND THE MUSEUM
The South Omo Research Center (SORC) is an Ethiopian institution established with the objective of undertaking basic and applied research, maintaining an ethnographic museum, and promoting intercultural understanding. The idea of having a museum and research center in Jinka was conceived in 1990—the year when instructors and postgraduate students of the Social Anthropology program at Addis Ababa University visited South Omo area and discussed the possibility of establishing a research center with the local officials. Shortly after this, the South Omo Zone Administration (SOZA) requested the Institute of Ethiopian Studies (IES) at Addis Ababa University to help with the establishment and management of SORC.
Professor Ivo Strecker played a key role in the design of the museum building and in securing resources for the construction. The idea of establishing a research center and museum by Professor Ivo was based on the challenges he faced searching for related literature while conducting his study among the Hammer. Soon afterwards, he conceived the idea of establishing a center to collect and document various studies conducted so far on the area, with the aim of facilitating literature for future researchers. The center was established with active community participation, although later this trend changed. Strecker managed SORC until 2006 without any significant involvement of the local actors. In 2006, however, the IES and SOZA claimed full control over the center and constituted a Management Board consisting of six local and four international partners.
It is evident that, like any other emerging research center, SORC initially started its activities with minimal human resources and very few collections of ethnographic objects. Over the years, however, its collections grew in leaps and bounds, thereby making the Museum somewhat diversified and attractive. Both local and foreign tourists enjoyed visiting the center and the museum. The human resources also increased due to the expansion of SORC itself and the complexity of its activities.
Thus, in relative terms, the center is currently the seat of the most extensive and most representative collection of the zone's ethnographic objects in public hands. The center consists of three distinct sections: (1) the South Omo Ethnographic Museum, which possesses an extensive collection of ethnographic objects belonging to various ethnic groups of the zone (fig. 2); (2) the research section, where basic and applied research is conducted and which possesses several guesthouses and other facilities supporting research work (fig. 3); and (3) the library, which is the first public library of Jinka town and serves both researchers and local students.
KYHCTKAMEPA I KUNSTKAMERA № 3 (13) ■ 2021
Fig. 2. Partial views of SORC ethnographic museum display. 2018
As it is under the trusteeship of a research institute, i.e. the IES and Addis Ababa University at large, the center aspires to play a pivotal role in creating linkages between theory and practice in teaching-learning process by providing the students of material and spiritual cultures, such as anthropologists, archaeologists and art historians, with ample opportunity to carry out practical research using the Museum's collections and the library.
MAIN OBJECTIVES
SORC and Museum serve as:
• An educational facility for schools and the general public in South Omo.
• An institution for learning and enlightenment for the citizens and visitors of Southern Ethiopia.
• A forum for debates about the cultural diversity and transcultural understanding in Southern Ethiopia. These debates may be organized and conducted by the authorities of South Omo, the Southern Nations and Nationalities Regional State, the Institute of Ethiopian Studies, and scholars from abroad.
• A facility for academic research in all fields of scholarship, including anthropology, archaeology, historical linguistics, botany, zoology, geology, and the like.
• A museum and documentary center with library, cultural and natural exhibits, and all forms of contemporary data collections (i.e. video, sound tapes, computer databases, photographs, and the like).
Fig. 3. The South Omo Research center. 2018
MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS
• The museum section houses a good artifact collection;
• The center carries out research projects in South Omo Zone together with other partners;
• SORC has the only public library in South Omo Zone;
• Commercialization of artifacts: running income generating projects for the surrounding community through selling their artifacts on a mutual benefit base;
• Promoting South Omo cultural and natural diversity;
• Providing facilities for researchers.
MAJOR CHALLENGES
Due to the scope limitation of this paper, it does not discuss all the internal and external challenges faced by the SORC ethnographic museum.
LACK OF WELL-TRAINED HUMAN RESOURCES / STAFF
The nature of an ethnographic museum and the idea of showcasing a living culture require highlevel professionalism and profound knowledge of the dynamics of the local culture and politics. Like many museums in Africa and in Ethiopia in particular, SORC suffers from a lack of well-trained workforce. This problem could be attributed to different factors that are internal and external to SORC. The supply of museum professionals in Ethiopia is minimal, academic museology programs being nascent there. In Ethiopia's higher education, the academic programs related to museums are archaeology, history, anthropology, and heritage management. Within these programs, museum related courses are very limited. Most museums in the country are managed by people with no formal professional museum training.
The geographical location of a working place affects the willingness of professionals to work there. Consequently, the very few museum-related graduates are not willing to work in institutions such as SORC, which is located 800 km away from the capital in a tiny town. This is unattractive for the semiprofessionals from Addis Ababa.
ETHNIC FEDERALISM, DIVERSITY AND OWNERSHIP OF ETHNOGRAPHIC MUSEUMS
After the fall of the socialist military government in 1991, Ethiopia's economic and political topography was constructed according to the principles of ethnic federalism. This led to the country being divided into nine regional states and two chartered cities. Ethnic identity was the primary if not the only criterion employed in demarcating the regional states. The ethnic federalism and subsequent claims for economic and political rights have created a considerable influx of autochthony. Questions such as "who is native?" arise.
Cultural and ethnic diversity is a fertile ground for museums and cultural tourism in terms of attracting tourists. However, this very same opportunity, if not managed properly, could have a disastrous impact on ethnographic museums. This challenge can be even more exacerbated within a system in which every benefit and share of the resource is claimed and distributed as based on ethnic lineages and identity. The question of ownership is still pending when it comes to SORC and the Museum.
To sum up, autochthony, being a result of ethnic federalism in the Ethiopian case, is a major source of tension for ethnographic museums in the fields of ownership, collecting and exhibiting. In the specific case of SORC, even though it houses the most extensive and most representative collection of the Zone's ethnographic objects in public hands, the situation is even more critical given the ethnic diversity the museum is trying to represent in its collection and exhibitions.
REPRESENTATION—QUANTITY AND QUALITY
One of the implications of ethnic federalism can be seen in the issues facing the ethnographic museum with regard to who is represented and how their culture is represented. Lesser representation of the diversity of the zone and over-representations of particular ethnic group or groups in the museums have always been a source of discontent. Some groups are well-represented, while others are less or under-represented or even entirely omitted in the museum material collections and research coverage.
The absence of fair representation of the diversity in the museum can be attributed to factors such as the way the material was acquired by the museum, which depended on accessibility, exposure to researchers and other factors. Infrastructural issues related to exhibition rooms and showcasing the collections, as well as the dominance of an ethnic group in the tourism industry are also factors accounting for the differences in representation. Ethnographic museums as commercial organizations working towards profit maximization instead of professional representation in a consumer-centered system have to comply with the interests of their visitors. In SORC, visitors' interests and inclinations have contributed partly to the museum's choice of what to showcase in its exhibitions.
THE CHALLENGE OF SHOWCASING A LIVING CULTURE
The issue of representation concerns not only the extent to which ethnic groups are represented, but also the way they are represented. This applies, in particular, to ethnographic museums exhibiting an active living culture and located in the midst of the bearers of that culture, who actively practice it on daily basis—which is the case in SORC. In this case, the way that the objects are presented in the display is crucial, and any mistake could result in an aggressive backlash from the community. There have been many incidents of this kind in SORC, when materials were not appropriately described in the catalogue or misinterpreted by the guides.
The presence of manifest similarities of the material culture of the 16 ethnic groups, with minor differences marking their identity and uniqueness, makes it very challenging for the museum. Ignoring or misreading these little differences would mean ignoring the diversity and the uniqueness of each ethnic group in the valley. In some cases, there exists a contention among ethnic groups over who owns a specific material culture, even though the object is part of daily life for more than one ethnic group. The ethnographic museum becomes in some way an arena of conflict hosting these claims of owning a specific material object. Exhibiting such objects in one of the ethnic group corners of the exhibition room means that the group is the source and owner of the object. As a response to strong repercussion in such conflicts, the museum is planning a special exhibition corner showcasing cultural materials shared by the valley's ethnic groups. This could promote coexistence and peace in the area known for bloody conflicts between different peoples.
These challenges of diversity prove that ethnographic museums such as SORC can be seen as a highly contested arena of local and national politics, where the political economy of museums becomes a critical public issue in terms of ownership, representation and benefits. The shreds of evidence support one of the arguments of this paper, namely that museums are more of the present than the past. Museums are no longer representations of our past; instead, they are the reflections of our present state of mind, and they could also be placed where the future is being crafted.
ETHNOGRAPHIC MUSEUM, LOCAL IDENTITY AND CULTURAL COMMODIFICATION
Most ethnic groups worldwide are considering commercializing and commodifying their indigenous cultures and heritage. As the Comaroffs (2009: 1) point out, "while it is increasingly the stuff of existential passion, of the self-conscious fashioning of meaningful, morally anchored selfhood, ethnicity is also becoming more corporate, more commodified, more implicated than ever before in the economics of everyday life."
Cultural tourism is one of the areas where ethnicity is often highly commodified. In this paper, commodification is seen as a result of the impact that cultural tourism has on local cultures. Mass tourism based on consumerism is treating cultural values as a commodity to be consumed. Tourism is part of the globalization process that wipes out economic, political and cultural demarcations and offers a free flow of humans, goods, capital, information, communication, and lifestyle (Cohen 2012).
In this time of mass tourism, tourist destinations like ethnographic museums are competing more than ever to attract mass mobility and visitors, which results in the commodification of local identity and material collections (Urry 1999). This competition forces local communities to surrender to the tourist affection (Urry 1990). Cohen (1988) defines commodification as a process where cultural values and materials are priced according to their exchange value and treated as goods and services in the market. Similarly, commodification is an inevitable outcome of modern capitalism where products, experiences, and pleasures are standardized (Watson and Kopachevsky 1994).
However, sometimes maximizing the satisfaction of the tourist means doing whatever it takes, even if it means to reshape or contradict cultural beliefs and customs. Consequently, fake or staged identities are presented that are far from the authentic culture. Extreme cases of staged authenticity as a result of commodification can in the long run affect cultural tourism and the museum itself by making it less attractive, unique, genuine, and exotic.
Ethnographic museum as part of cultural tourism can generate the locals' pride in who they are and their way of life. Cole (2007) contends that locals in marginalized primitive societies that have been labeled as isolated and backward by their government can generate a sense of self-pride and identity through the authenticating agent of cultural tourism. This has been the case for the pastoralist communities of South Omo Rift Valley, who for many years have been labeled by the central government as backward, uncivilized, and needing to be developed through interventions. As a manifestation of this labeling, the federal government is working on altering or changing their traditional way of life, which is the source
of their tourism attractiveness or income. However, there is a counter argument that the locals are not feeling proud and confident of their identity for its intrinsic value, which should be the case, but for its economic value brought up externally by the tourism industry. So that identity is still being jeopardized by commodification.
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND THE MUSEUM
It is a marked reality that there have been numerically increasing records of violent intra- and inter-ethnic conflict in the South Omo Valley. Unless these conflicts are dealt in a proper way, it will hurdle any development endeavor of the country, as many mega projects have been flourishing in this area. The future exhibition corner that will be showcasing shared cultural materials of the valley could demonstrate how these fighting groups actually have a great deal in common and are not that different from each other, so that by this means, the museum could contribute to the promotion of peace and stability in the valley.
When it comes to "harmful" traditional practices, cultural tourism and development intervention in South Omo, the government is always in confusion and dilemma. They are not mutually exclusive or cannot just coexist in the South Omo context. Even at the federal level, there is a conflict of mission between the ministry of culture and tourism and the ministry of pastoralist development affairs.
Promoting cultural conservation, rather than working on developmental issues and social change, could be a point where development projects and the Museum meet on opposing sides. Most of the activities, especially the research focus of SORC, are less development oriented and more about preserving the cultural diversity of the valley. As some of the local government officials point out, the center is conservative as it focuses mainly on the preservation of the culture, instead of opening it up to change and new ideas. They insist that the museum presents challenges to the aggressively progressive government development plans.
LACK OF FUNDING AND THE RELATED ISSUES
These anti-development and change positions reflected in SORC are directly related to the external influence of other stakeholders. This influence from outside makes its way to the museum through funding. Parallel to many other museums and cultural centers in Ethiopia, SORC has a severe financial constraint in improving the center. Local, national, and international sources of funding are crucial for running the museum. Such kind of dependency and reliance on outside funds forces the center to adhere to the interests and ideologies of the financial sources. This is because in most cases the funding does not come alone. There are always some strings attached to it, even if the source is ICOM or UNESCO.
OTHER CHALLENGES
• Failed or weak promotion of the center in the region and globally;
• The problem of implementing research and studies. Most of research done in the center did not go
elsewhere other than the library bookshelf;
• Limited involvement of the community;
• The absence of strong domestic and local partnership;
• Lack of trust, transparency, and communication with the zonal government and city municipality;
• More emphasis on the museum collection than working on its proper exhibiting.
CONCLUSION
This paper set out to provide a general introduction to the South Omo Research Center and Ethnographic Museum and the context in which the museum is operating. The second aim of this study
was to shed some light on the major internal and external challenges and obstacles that have been affecting the museum's operation and existence as such. The author has used his critical observations during his tenure at the museum, as well as documentary analysis in order to achieve the aims of this study.
The most apparent finding to emerge from this study is that SORC and the Ethnographic Museum have been suffering from socio-politically and economically related challenges since their establishment. Some of these challenges are shared with other similar institutions in the country, while other challenges are unique to the museum because of its particular political and economic context. The study has shown that the major challenges of the center are related to the lack of well-trained manpower/staff, ethnic federalism, diversity and ownership of ethnographic museums, representation of the ethnic diversity (that is, the quantity and the quality), the challenge of showcasing a living culture, local identity and commodification, development projects and, the last but not the least, the lack of funding and related issues.
Although this study focuses on SORC, the findings may have a bearing on other similar institutions in the country. In general, therefore, it seems that museums in Ethiopia are troubled institutions due to a variety of reasons. Given the current socio-political change in the country, the findings should be of interest to any stakeholder, including museums, to craft a better future for museums and cultural centers. Being limited to SORC, this study may lack generalizability and applicability to other museums. More empirical work on the challenges facing museums in Ethiopia would help us to reach a higher degree of accuracy on this matter. There are many significant changes and adjustments which need to be made.
REFERENCES
Addisalem. A Guide to the Tribes of South Omo Valley. 2015.
Black G. The Engaging Museum: Developing Museums for Visitor Involvement. Abingdon: Routledge, 2005.
Cerquetti M. More is Better! Current Issues and Challenges for Museum Audience Development: A literature Review. ENCATC Journal of Cultural Management and Policy, 2016, no. 6(1), pp. 30-43.
Cohen E. Authenticity and Commoditization in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 1988, no. 15(3), pp. 371-386.
Cohen E. Globalization, Global Crises, and Tourism. Tourism Recreation Research, 2012, no. 37(2), pp. 103-111.
Cole S. Beyond Authenticity and Commodification. Annals of Tourism Research, 2007, no. 34(4), pp. 943-960.
Comaroff John & Comaroff Jean. Ethnicity, Inc. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009.
Desai D. Imaging Difference: The Politics of Representation in Multicultural Art Education. Studies in Art Education, 2000, no. 41(2), pp. 114-129.
Herle A. Museums, Politics and Representation. Journal of Museum Ethnography, 1997, no. 9, pp. 65-78.
Turgeon L. & Dubuc É. Ethnology Museums: New Challenges and New Directions. Ethnologies, 2002, no. 24 (2), pp. 19-32.
Watson G. L and Kopachevsky J. S. Interpretations of Tourism as Commodity. Annals of Tourism Research, 1994, no. 21(3), pp. 643-660.
Urry J. The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage, 1990.
Urry J. Consuming Places. London: Routledge, 1999.
Submitted: Accepted: Published:
05.06.2021 01.09.2021 10.10.2021
K cmambe S. S. Adem
Fig. 1. Map of the South Omo Zone ethnic groups. Source: South Omo Zone Culture and Tourism Office
