You will
all have heard of the fire that gutted the National Museum in Rio de
Janeiro. Following discussions amongst
interested parties as to what could be done to help, the RAI convened a
roundtable meeting to discuss possible support.
Attendees
came from universities, national and university museums, RBG Kew, British
Council, National Archives, AHRC and Canning House. MEG was invited as a representative of the
museum sector.
Professor
João Pacheco de Oliveira of the National Museum, Rio de Janeiro, addressed the
meeting, with simultaneous translation for the non-Portuguese-speaking
delegates. He spoke very movingly of the
huge loss that people feel – not just the staff and academics who worked,
collected and carried out their research there, but also many ordinary people
for whom the 200 year old museum represents the national identity of Brazil.
Staff
have not yet been allowed into the building to assess the damage, so actual
losses are unknown. Some material may
have survived underneath the collapsing building, or it may be that everything
was destroyed. The building itself is
unsafe, and police have closed the remains as a possible crime scene.
The fire
has meant a huge cultural loss: the anthropology collections, being in large
part organic materials, are assumed lost, especially the material from
indigenous Brazilian communities.
The
archives are also assumed lost: there was no support for digitisation, so
digital copies only exist where researchers had made their own for their own
work – therefore it is random selections and perhaps not good quality.
The fire
is creating opportunities. Indigenous
communities have already offered to make new objects for the museum – they see
the museum as important for their cultures and histories. Much of the lost collections had no or little
data, so this is an opportunity to collect data as well as objects, working in
close and respectful collaboration with indigenous communities. But, some of the lost material represented a
meeting of cultures, indigenous and colonial, 200 years ago, and that cannot be
replaced. Indigenous communities are not fossilised, they are changing over
time, so the material culture changes.
The professor gave the example of feather cloaks: the 16th
century cloaks in the collection were made with red feathers. That red bird is now extinct, and 21st
century cloaks are made with raven feathers.
It was
agreed that the lead should come from the Museum: they are not in a position
yet to accept help or new accessions.
Once they can access the building, the need will be for forensic
archaeologists to excavate the ruins and salvage what can be saved. Staff will then know better what has been
lost, and can start to plan the rebuilding of the museum.
It may be
that part of that rebuilding is digital: research from academics who used the
collection in the past, photos from visitors of the displays, images of objects
in other museums, oral histories from staff, researchers and visitors. Then there may be a point where the museum
asks for loans or transfers from other collections, but that point is a long
way off yet.
I
suggested that MEG could help with organising digital images from non-national
and non-university museums, using data from the various surveys and our
professional network to find material in the UK. MEG members had responded to the request for
ideas with suggestions for oral histories and testimonies, crowdsourcing of
digital images used to curate online galleries, restore collective memory and
create education resources.
As there
is more news we will pass it on.
Sue Gies (MEG Chair)
