Julia D. Harrison is Curator of the Ethnology Department of the Glenbow Museum, Calgary, Alberta. We publish after her article a reply by Bruce Trigger.

The exhibition The Spirit Sings: Artistic Traditions of Canada's First Peoples opened at the Glenbow Museum in Calgary, Alberta, on 14 January, 1988. An exhibition of over 650 Canadian native objects drawn largely from foreign collections, it was part of the Arts Festival of the 1988 Winter Olympics. In its conception, The Spirit Sings, organised by the Ethnology Department of the Glenbow, was designed as an important vehicle to educate the Canadian people about the native heritage of their country and to bring the wealth of Canadian native materials held in foreign museums to light. It proved to be popular with the general public, but was boycotted by some native organizations, some foreign institutions and the Executive of the Canadian Ethnology Society. This raises serious questions about the future of anthropological exhibits and the relations between academic anthropologists and museums.

Work first began on the exhibition by Glenbow staff in 1983 with the formulation of a Curatorial Committee[1] Seven regional specialists were selected to work on the project. These people brought to the project a variety of academic backgrounds including art history, anthropology, philosophy and Canadian studies. This disciplinary mixing created in the end an exhibition which was holistic in its interpretation and exemplary of the direction that the study of native arts and culture, both historical and contemporary, likely is most productively pursued. Committee members also brought to the project a knowledge of foreign collections which, when pooled with the knowledge of a European advisor to the project, would identify the majority of the collections public and private, relevant to the exhibition[2].

'The Spirit Sings' exhibition, Plains Gallery. (Photo copurtesy of Glenbow Museum, Calgary, Canada.)

After the Committee's careful examination of the resources that existed in national and international museum collections, the exhibition, which eventually was named The Spirit Sings, evolved to have three distinct themes: to present the richness, diversity and complexity of Canada's native cultures as they were witnessed at the time of contact; to explore the common threads that link these cultures together which create a distinctive world-view, and to emphasize the adaptability and resilience of European cultures. To complement this historical focus, a Celebration of Native Cultures was organized to accompany The Spirit Sings. The Celebration allowed native peoples to present a variety of contemporary dance performances, traditional craft demonstrations (beadwork, quillwork, weaving, catlinite carving, food preparation, etc.), story telling, contemporary and traditional fashion shows, and readings by contemporary native authors. A variety of native peoples from western Canada participated.

The exhibition's title, The Spirit Sings[3], was deliberately kept in the present tense to express a continuity through time. It referred to the spirituality of the native and its positive tone reflected the continuing strength of that spirituality.

In early April 1986 a grant from Shell Oil Canada Limited in conjunction with previously committed sponsorship by the Federal and Provincial governments assured that The Spirit Sings project would become a reality. In mid-April 1986 the Lubicon Lake Cree in northern Alberta announced a boycott of the 1988 Winter Olympics to draw attention to their unresolved land claim[4]. Shortly thereafter their boycott focused on The Spirit Sings as it was an exhibition about native peoples, was sponsored by one of the oil companies which were drilling in the area claimed by the Lubicon as their traditional lands. The expected greater support among the museum community of the world rather than the sports people who could be expected to have less interest in native issues. The Lubicon claimed that the sponsorship by Shell and both levels of governments was an attempt to make the sponsors appear supportive of native peoples whereas they were actually destroying their very existence with drilling activities and taking a hard line stance on the Lubicon land claim negotiations[5].

The boycott effort was initiated by a massive letter writing campaign by Lubicon supporters and staff. Organizations such as the World Council of Churches, the European Parliament, some national and regional native political bodies, and some members of the academic community added their support for the boycott. It is interesting to note that none of these organizations contacted the Glenbow directly to verify the statements made by the Lubicon concerning the nature and purpose of the exhibition. Nor did the museum ever receive any written communication from the Lubicon. The entire campaign was conducted through the media. Newspaper articles which in any way could be interpreted to reflect negatively on the Federal government, the Alberta government, the oil industry, the Glenbow or the Olympics, were distributed far and wide throughout Europe and North America. Several trips to Europe were made by the Lubicon chief and advisors to muster European support for the boycott. In the end twelve institutions out of the 110 approached by the Glenbow supported the boycott and did not, therefore, lend to The Spirit Sings.

Once funding for the project was confirmed, the Glenbow forwarded to native individuals and organizations on local and national levels an invitation to participate in a Liaison Committee which would `work with Glenbow on various aspects of [the] project'[6]. Those who responded to the invitation and continued to show an active interest in the project were, for the large part, interested in participating in the Celebration of Native Cultures. Others who showed an initial interest in the exhibition and the Liaison Committee included representatives of local band councils and national political bodies such as the Native Council of Canada[7]. Others who responded included representatives of agencies and government departments which worked in some way with native peoples. The Lubicon did not respond to the invitation.

Funds were only available to bring local representatives to the meeting of the Native Liaison Committee held in the late summer of 1986. Other individuals or groups from outside Alberta who expressed interest in participating were sent copies of the minutes of these meetings and asked for comments.

Two specific suggestions came from the meetings of the Native Liaison Committee. the Committee felt in response to the Glenbow's proposal to host a panel discussion on the topic of native contemporary peoples and the resource industry, involving representatives from government, the oil industry and native groups, that this would only introduce politics into something that they wished to see concentrate on the cultural dimensions of native life. The Committee was opposed to raising the issue of the oil development currently under way on land claimed by the Lubicon.

Glenbow was advised by the Committee to meet with local band councils. Unfortunately, the attempts to set up such meetings were unsuccessful due to an inability to find mutually agreeable meeting times[8].

In July 1986 Glenbow staff and the Lubicon representatives met and the Lubicon, at that time, registered no objection to the content of an exhibition but only to its sponsorship and association with the Calgary Olympics which they were boycotting. It was agreed at that time that both the Lubicon and Glenbow would each continue in their respective directions. Some groups which earlier supported the objectives of the exhibition, for example the Native Council of Canada,[9] subsequently switched over to support the Lubicon boycott.

Glenbow staff had, on a number of occasions, declared support for a swift and just settlement of the Lubicon land claim. But they were powerless to do anything which would move along the negotiations between the Lubicon and the government. Contrary to the thinking of the Lubicon supporters, museum staff have little influence on those who hold power in Canada. Also, the Glenbow Board of Governors would have been in a breach of contract with sponsors had they pulled out ofThe Spirit Sings at any time. Furthermore, the staff at the museum fundamentally believed that the messages in the exhibition were socially relevant and that the production of The Spirit Sings was a responsible action. The museum was (and is) committed to the idea that museums must remain independent of external political pressures so that they can determine their own political stands, which in this case was to promote a wider understanding of the continuing relevance of native heritage.

Glenbow came under heavy criticism from the Canadian academic anthropological community; criticism largely channelled through the Canadian Ethnology Society (CESCE), a professional association of about 300 members drawn almost entirely from universities. The most vocal members of the Society wanted Glenbow to take some kind of action which would bring attention (and assumedly support) for the plight of the Lubicon. To show support for the Lubicon CESCE Executive in November of 1987 passed a motion which read:

Whereas the Executive of the CANADIAN ETHNOLOGY SOCIETY/LA SOCIETE CANADIENNE D'ETHNOLOGIE (CESCE) supports the resolution of the General Assembly of the International Congress of Museums (ICOM) that `museums which are engaged in activities relating to living ethnic groups should, whenever possible, consult with appropriate members of those groups, and such museums should avoid using ethnic materials in any way which might be detrimental and/or offensive to such groups', we, the Executive of the CESCE, support he Lubicon Lake Cree people and other Native peoples in Canada in their opposition to the Olympic exhibition, `The Spirit Sings'.

The Executive asked museums to consider this motion when deciding whether or not to lend to The Spirit Sings.
The International Council of Museums (ICOM) resolution was passed at its triennial meeting in October of 1987. The CESCE Executive, along with other Lubicon supporters, claimed Glenbow in violation of this resolution. Both the Secretary General and the President of the arm of ICOM which brought forward the resolution, however, denied that it was intended to be used in this matter[10].

The only two published references to the CESCE motion refer to it as a motion of the society as a whole[11]. Any efforts the Executive may have made to state that it reflected the opinion of the Executive alone (not the membership) went completely unnoticed by the press.

If any of the potential lenders to The Spirit Sings responded to the CESCE letter it was not reported to Glenbow. In any case, the letter came too late in the negotiation process to have much effect except among the media. If the CESCE Executive had any familiarity with museums or had bothered to contact their members at the Glenbow before circulating their motion, they would have known this.

The action on the part of the CESCE Executive to advocate the suppression of a research project which ought to bring together information to further the understanding of Canada's Native peoples raises several important issues[12], about the relations between anthropologists in universities and museums.

The Spirit Sings was not an attempt to keep Native peoples in the past, as critics claimed without seeing the exhibition or bothering to discuss its objectives with the organizer. (Those who made such prejudgements included the media, politicians and members of the academic community.) The educational impact of The Spirit Sings, the involvement of Native peoples in the Celebration of Native Cultures, and the direct relevance of the historical perspective of the exhibition for understanding the present situation, surely must be considered as useful contributions.

It could be asked at this point if anyone has the right to forcibly inject his or her own politics into someone else's business. Glenbow undertook to be socially responsible rather than to be politically active, i.e. to advocate a better and wider understanding of a situation rather than one particular solution to it. While it may be legitimate to mount political action round activity undertaken by a public institution, it would destroy the legitimacy of those institutions if they were forced to espouse the political cause of one pressure group after another. Museums, like universities, are expected by their constitutions to remain non-partisan.

Lubicon supporters claimed that Glenbow had taken a political stand because it had accepted money from an oil company which had drilled on land claimed as part of the traditional land of the band. In this era of declining government support, cultural institutions (including universities) have no option but to seek outside support for projects they undertake. This does not mean that corporate sponsors play editorial roles in the theme and focus of the projects that they fund. Nor is there any evidence that the public confuses corporate support for a museum as a museum's support for corporate policy.

What was the public response to the exhibition? The total number of tickets sold was 126,506 which is the largest number of people that have ever visited a Glenbow exhibition. It more than doubled the museum's previous record. The opening was one of the largest that Glenbow has had with an estimated 3,500 people in attendance. The media paid a lot of attention to the fact that about 150 people demonstrated outside Glenbow on the day of the opening but neglected to suggest how that compared with the much larger number attending inside the museum.

Visitors were invited to fill out written comment cards after leaving the exhibition. Over 7,000 of the visitors took the time to do this. This relatively high number is probably reflective of the impact that the exhibition had on visitors. Respondents often noted how deeply moved they were not only by the sheer beauty of the objects, but by the strength of the cultural traditions which produced this material. Others expressed mixed emotions as they strongly supported the Lubicon but felt that they could learn something by coming to the exhibition which would ground their support in more than emotion - they might come to understand the native culture better. It became clear to many that there is no one Indian, which helped them to understand the complexity of native issues. The presentation of cultural diversity made some write with amazement as to how native cultures could ever have been so trivialized by Hollywood and the other media. Many felt embarrassed and chagrined at their ignorance about native peoples. Many questioned the deficiencies in their education and suggested strategies for change. Others wanted to know more about native peoples today. This request is not necessarily a criticism of The Spirit Sings as no one exhibition can cover everything. If The Spirit Sings instilled an interest in the contemporary native cultures, then it was eminently successful. a common question asked was why this material was scattered around the globe. Some pleaded for its return; others thanked the museums of the world for preserving it so that they could see and learn from it today. The fact that people even thought about these issue is a step in the right direction to resolving the complex questions of repatriation. Many of the comments reflected a desire to action to ensure that what they had learnt would not be forgotten. As one visitor put it:

We must all remember to carry the respect we feel on seeing (this exhibition)... into the street where these... people still express themselves among us.

Another visitor's statement reflected a positive stance in relation to the controversy concerning The Spirit Sings and the Lubicon:

Let's use some of the power in this exhibit to point the way to a just settlement of the Lubicon Land claim.
More Native people attended The Spirit Sings than any exhibition that Glenbow has ever mounted. Their comments included: `It makes me proud to be an Indian', `We are a proud yet humble people and our culture is so very important to us', `I am one who had denied her Indian blood... [now] I feel proud and will stop my apologizing', `This is truly an advance for the understanding of the cultural significance of various tribes'. `I can only hope that others appreciate the value that natives can give to Canadian culture', `I've never been more proud of my ancestry than I am now', `This exhibit should be seen by all Canadians, `The complete show was very moving', `This has been extremely important in linking up with our native past and present...'.

Not everyone, native and non-native, was pleased with what they saw. Concern was expressed that much of the material would leave Canada again when in their eyes it belonged here; to some this material was sadly all that was left of some parts of native culture; the exhibit made some people anxious as everything was behind glass ad denied life; others came only looking to reinforce their stereotypes and were disappointed when there were not more weapons of war, for example; others were convinced that the only items that Indians made were stone arrowheads; others chided Glenbow for being too kind to the actions of the first Europeans.

In a project as large as The Spirit Sings there are many voices which offer opinions as to what could or should have been done. The politicization of a museum exhibition was unprecedented in Canada; thus there were no precedents upon which to formulate a counter-strategy. Differences between European and North American ethnographic museums became apparent, which lead to different perceptions of what actions were appropriate. In Europe some ethnographic museums see their role as being that of a spokesperson for the under-dog; in North America the days have long past where white institutions see their role as that of spokespersons for the Native peoples. Canada's native peoples can and do speak for themselves.

Special interest groups were quick to criticize and yet unwilling to talk directly to Glenbow to understand what their objectives, commitments and responsibilities were. The problem that Glenbow faced was to whom do they listen? They did consult with native peoples who demonstrated an interest in the intent of the project and their advice was followed.
It was obvious from the comments and actions of individual anthropologists and the actions of the CESCE Executive that members of the academic anthropological community did not think that Glenbow was doing the right thing. But two questions can be asked of them: do they suspend their anthropological method when they become adyocates? Does not the anthropological approach require more than one informant and an attempt to understand the point of view of the other? Glenbow was never consulted by individual anthropologists or the CESCE Executive before they took public stand against the exhibition[13]. From an insider's perspective it appears that the academic anthropologists who opposed The Spirit Sings responded ethnocentrically and with cultural parochialism. How much do they really understand about the culture of museums? When viewed from within the museum community every action that Glenbow took made sense. This is not to suggest that every move was the correct one but it was rational in the terms of culture of museums. Presumably, academic anthropologists should make an attempt to understand that culture that culture before attempting to judge it.

What is the future of anthropology when anthropologists let their personal biases and opinions override the basic tenets of their discipline? Anthropologists are supposed to work to understand other cultures by thorough investigation of them through participant observation, interviewing and cross-checking of information. The culture of museums is little understood by academic anthropologists. And yet, unlike many `third' and `fourth' world subjects, most museums would readily welcome academic anthropologists in their midst. Museum anthropologists would appreciate the understanding and also likely benefit from the academic point of view to improve their effectiveness in society. They would only ask that the academic anthropologist do as good anthropologists should do: learn the language and observe the courtesies of research on human subjects by working with them rather than observing only from the outside, and attacking them on the basis of prejudgements.

As Strator Crowfoot, the current chief of the Blackfoot, said upon leaving the exhibition, what Glenbow had done was important. He said that the large numbers of people visiting the exhibition could only benefit the position of Native people. One of the reasons that he came to the exhibition, he said, was to be able to advise his people who were asking whether or not they should come to see The Spirit Sings. Mr. Crowfoot felt that he could not properly advise them until he had been to the exhibition himself. I could only wish that the academic community had paid Glenbow the same courtesy.

[1] The Curatorial Committee included Ted Brasser, Canadian Museum of Civilization; Bernadette Driscoll, John Hopkins University; Dr. Ruth Phillips, Carleton University; Dr. Martine Reid, Independent Scholar; Judy Thompson, Canadian Museum of Civilization; Ruth Whitehead, Nova Scotia Museum; and Bill Reid, Haida Artist, who attended some of the committee meetings.
[2]Dr. Christian Feest, Curator of the North American Vienna collections at the Museum für Völkerkunde served as the European special advisor to the project.
[3]A working title `Forget Not My World' was used in the early stages of planning for the exhibition.
[4]For a full discussion of the Lubicon Lake Cree and their land claim struggle see Goddard, J. Forked Tongues. Saturday Night 103(2) 8-45.
[5]According to Bernard Ominayak, chief of the Lubicon, `The irony of using a display of North American Indian artefacts to attract people to the Winter Olympics being organized by interests who are still actively seeking to destroy Indian people seems painfully obvious'. Smith, W. Glenbow Museum faces Lubicon boycott threat. Calgary Herald, 17 May, 1986.
[6]Letter to native individuals and organizations dated 20 March, 1986, from Julia D. Harrison, Coordinating Curator, Native Liaison Committee, The Spirit Sings files, Ethnology Department, Glenbow Museum. This letter was sent out to a wide variety of local and national native individuals and organizations.
[7]Some of these groups attended the meeting of the Native Liaison Committee in an attempt to grapple with the political milieu which developed over the Lubicon boycott. Native groups in Southern Alberta struggled up to the final days before the opening of the Olympics with the reality of the economic benefits to be gained from their participation and a desire to stand united with the Lubicon. In the end, most Southern Alberta groups participated in the Olympics.
[8]Minutes of 12 September 1986 meeting, Native Liaison Committee, The Spirit Sings, Ethnology Department, Glenbow Museum.
[9]Letter from Smokey Bruyere to Julia Harrison, 30 April, 1986. Native Liaison Committee, The Spirit Sings files, Ethnology Department, Glenbow Museum.
[10]Personal communication with H. Gansylmayr (President, International Committee of Museum Ethnology). Letter from Lewis G. to H. Gansylmayr 26 August, 1987, ICOM, Ethnology Department files, Glenbow Museum.
[11]Warner, H. Spring 1988. Look What They've Done To My Song. Canadian Art. Kirzner, E. December 1987. Lubicon Olympic land stand NOW.
[12]Subsequent discussion with members of the CESCE Executive clarified their major objection to The Spirit Sings was in fact its sponsorship by an oil company. Unfortunately, this was not reflected in the wording of their motion. For an elaboration on this debate see Tom Hill (ed.) First Nations and Museums, Special Issues of Canadian Museums Association Muse, Fall (in press); Ames, M. and Trigger B., Share the Blame. Vanguard 17(2); 15-19; Trigger B., A Present of Their Past? Anthropologists, Native People and their Heritage, and Ames, M. The Liberation of Anthropology: A Rejoinder to Professor Trigger's A Present of Their Past? Culture 8(1) (in press).
[13]The one exception was Dr Joan Ryan, at that time Professor of Anthropology at the University of Calgary, who did raise the issue with the Program Committee of the Glenbow Board of Governors, of which she was a member-at-large. Unable to resolve the conflict between her support for the Lubicon and her membership on the Program Committee, Ryan resigned from the latter in the fall of 1986.

Return to museums and museum studies