We've all heard about formerly colonized people requesting the return of their artifacts from museums. This is not a simple request - there are many factors to be considered and I had never thought of most of them.
"The Museum of Other People" is the title the author gives to museums formerly known as museums of anthropolgy, or similar names. This is a very interesting history of how those museums evolved and why they are so problematic today. One example that comes up frequently are the famous Benin bronzes, from what is now Nigeria. Demands have been made for their return - even if they were purchased rather than looted. Ok. But who should they be returned to? Nigeria as a nation didn't exist when they were created. Should they go to a museum? Which one? One royal family of Nigeria is insisting they be returned to them personally. Is that fair? And, if they are returned, Nigeria's museums are notorious for their lack of good security. Musem robberies are very common. Are there items that are so important that they are a vital part of the history of the world and should be safeguarded by those best able to do that?
The author is very upset about the current state of these museums ("World Culture Museums" was one possible title I liked). He really dislikes the Smithsonian Museum of the American Indian, where each tribe was allowed to tell its own story. The result is apparently an unorganized, non-historic, non-scientific holdge podge of platitudes and PR messages. As a result, visitors are few and the ones who do go don't learn much of anything, according to the author.
There are far too many issues for me to summarize them all here, but if you have any interest in this topic at all, I'd highly recommend this book.

Depicting the whole history of ethnography and anthropology as disciplines, Adam Kuper's The Museum of Other People: From Colonial Acquisitions to Cosmopolitan Exhibitions begins with the colonial era pursuit of both representative bodies and artifacts, establishment of anthropological institutions and their organizing schema and ends with ruminations and discussions of the present day challenges of repatriating these objects and their racist and exploitative histories.

And while comprehensive, only sporadically did I find the content engaging. Instead of presenting events chronologically, it meanders moving from nation to nation covering the development of anthropology in Britain (British Museum, Pitt Rivers), France and Germany before switching to the United States (Smithsonian). Amongst the nation foci Kuper inserts the different colonial, military or exploration campaigns that sourced many of the objects through trade, theft or military campaign. Many of the key figures are detailed, their origins, education and professional accomplishments. Much is tied to ideas of empire, what constitutes civilization and the still contentious ideas of evolution.

Kuper shows anthropology and ethnography to have had a deeply racist and controlling history, but it is the third section that is most impactful. Here, Kuper shows many of the contemporary notable cases such as the ownership of the Benin Bronzes or litigation for the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. Here Kuper especially emphasizes the issues of restitution in the face of records versus native expertise. It is for the evidence of the record that Kuper favors, as he too advocates for continuation of these institutions for the greater good of humanity.

Kuper asks and explains what constitutes ownership, the debate of what is 'art'? and the values of the objects to education and understanding of humanity.

A biased and meandering history that does ask some very important questions but stumbles on their answers.

Recommended for those exploring the history of anthropology or looking for sources exploring representation, free speech or working in or serving as a trustee of a museum.

During his distinguished career in anthropology, Adam Kuper has thrived not just in the academic world but also as a writer of books for nonspecialists about the history, ideas, trends, and controversies in his field. I have read a couple of these books. They are lucid, witty, and backed by deep reading in the primary and secondary literature. In other words, they are rewarding and a pleasure to read.
His new book has the same virtues. But this time, instead of focusing on anthropology itself, he takes a long and critical look at what can—and should—be learned not from books about anthropology but from the materials of anthropology: the vast collections of objects displayed in “Museums of Other People.”

Kuper tells us that these museums began to appear the 1830s and 1840s, mainly in Britain, France, and Germany, and were intended to introduce Europeans to an exotic world of “other people” who lived faraway or long ago. Kuper then goes on to tell us how these museums increased in size and number—and with them how the discipline of anthropology itself grew and evolved—over the next hundred years, as various voices tried to command the conversation about “other people.”

In this part of Kuper’s narrative we encounter the voices of racists, geographical determinists, colonialists, biologists, anthropology’s founders, art historians, and others arguing about how to organize and interpret the artifacts and understand the worldviews of “other people.”

Eventually these voices are joined by voices that question whether any museum that tries to represent the worldview of “other people” can do so without being seen as racist or condescending or a power play.

This leads to the situation “museums of other people” are in today, when every decision about what to exhibit and what an exhibit means is the result of a tug of war between administrators, donors, dealers, outside experts, activists, and the natives—the indigenous people—who are the subjects of the exhibits.

One way of coping with this situation has been to create and build “identity” museums, for example the National Museum of the American Indian, and the National Museum of African American History and Culture.

But Kuper ultimately wants us to envision a different kind of anthropology museum altogether. It would be a museum that downplays ethnic and national identities and instead juxtaposes and challenges all perspectives and viewpoints. It would be a museum that dispenses with the idea that there are “other people.”

Wouldn’t that be nice?

Sadly, I doubt that the museum Kuper envisions is possible in today’s world. Still, I enjoyed the journey I took with Kuper to arrive at his vision. For one thing, the cast of characters included not just people I expected to appear in this book—Lyell, Darwin, Spencer, E.B. Tylor, Franz Boas, Levi-Strauss, Foucault—but also many many others I didn’t expect—artists (Picasso, Braque, Rivera, Kahlo, Kandinsky, Matisse, Duchamp), writers (Henry Adams, Andre Malraux, Wole Soyinka, Octavio Paz), politicians (De Gaulle, Macron), a wealthy donor who doubled as a politician (Nelson Rockefeller), even a movie character (Eric “Killmonger” Stevens from Black Panther), and more.

Also, I enjoyed accompanying Kuper in his visits to more than thirty museums all over the world. He made me want to visit the collections Kuper mentions that I have visited before--to look at them in a new way. And he made me want to visit as many of the others as I can. More than that he made me newly appreciate and want to visit any kind of museum and look at it through Kuper’s penetrating eyes.. That alone will make reading the book a valuable experience for anyone.

Thank you Knopf, Pantheon, Vintage and Anchor for providing an advance copy in galley form for review consideration via NetGalley. Please note: Quotes taken from a galley may change in the final version. (Opinions expressed here are my own.)

There’s some interesting information in this book, but it’s so disorganized that I can’t follow it. DNF

Thanks, NetGalley, for the ARC.

I enjoyed the interesting tales of history that shaped the creation of the museums, but they were often told in quite a disorganized fashion. This disorganization may be appropriate for the field of anthropology, as museums started with, "sprawling, poorly documented, incoherent assemblage(s)." However, there are points of interest contained in this disorganized work, especially when the author is not endlessly quoting others. Kuper has a great ability to ask the reader important questions and sometimes shares personal thoughts that bring some semblance of organization to a disorganized work. Importantly, the movement towards a unified "World Culture Museum" may someday be able to amplify this unity and organization, as "Every people has a particular message to deliver to the world which can enrich humanity and contribute its portion to beauty and the truth". If nothing else, this book provides the reader with a better understanding of museology and a deeper appreciation for those involved in this work.