From where I’m standing
Petrie exhibition stops short of answering question
I found it refreshing that the curator of the temporary exhibition Typecast (to 22 December) at the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology at the University College London was brave enough to reveal herself within the interpretation of the exhibition.
I’m sure many curators are baulking at this, but as Debbie Challis says on the first of 15 panels, “… who I am informs this exhibition”. What she is saying to visitors is that this isn’t the truth but a version of it.
The exhibition takes place one hundred years after the death of Francis Galton, the man who gave us eugenics, and focuses on identity: of the ancient Egyptians, those of Petrie and Galton, and on the fact that how we see ourselves shapes our response to history.
But the bulk of the exhibition skirts around the issue of the ancient Egyptians being Africans. Instead it talks in multicultural, multi-ethnic terms. It is a fact that most museums are fearful of going there. (The Fitzwilliam in Cambridge is leading the way and taking quiet steps to show historical Egypt as African.)
I am pleased by the Petrie’s future plans to challenge how Egyptology has become Europeanised – a kind of accepted part of European culture. This was exemplified on my visit when three European visitors were loudly discussing the tomb of a Pharaoh and in which museums certain objects are held.
The conversation was so heartfelt, it sounded like they were discussing something inherent to their way of life. The exhibition will be using some of the comments it receives to change content.
This could be a good thing if well selected. On the feedback board there was a comment that the curator should not refer to whites as Caucasian as this was offensive.
I didn’t know whether this was meant tongue in cheek but another visitor took it seriously responding that they should “get over it” and that European wasn’t a technically correct term.
I wasn’t aware that such discussions were exercising the white (probably safest to use here) community. This could be an interesting debate to draw out alongside the Galton exhibition.
I’m sure many curators are baulking at this, but as Debbie Challis says on the first of 15 panels, “… who I am informs this exhibition”. What she is saying to visitors is that this isn’t the truth but a version of it.
The exhibition takes place one hundred years after the death of Francis Galton, the man who gave us eugenics, and focuses on identity: of the ancient Egyptians, those of Petrie and Galton, and on the fact that how we see ourselves shapes our response to history.
But the bulk of the exhibition skirts around the issue of the ancient Egyptians being Africans. Instead it talks in multicultural, multi-ethnic terms. It is a fact that most museums are fearful of going there. (The Fitzwilliam in Cambridge is leading the way and taking quiet steps to show historical Egypt as African.)
I am pleased by the Petrie’s future plans to challenge how Egyptology has become Europeanised – a kind of accepted part of European culture. This was exemplified on my visit when three European visitors were loudly discussing the tomb of a Pharaoh and in which museums certain objects are held.
The conversation was so heartfelt, it sounded like they were discussing something inherent to their way of life. The exhibition will be using some of the comments it receives to change content.
This could be a good thing if well selected. On the feedback board there was a comment that the curator should not refer to whites as Caucasian as this was offensive.
I didn’t know whether this was meant tongue in cheek but another visitor took it seriously responding that they should “get over it” and that European wasn’t a technically correct term.
I wasn’t aware that such discussions were exercising the white (probably safest to use here) community. This could be an interesting debate to draw out alongside the Galton exhibition.