The Cultural Sustainability residency exceeded my wildest expectations. I have always wanted to be in a place where my passions were shared by others, a place where I didn’t have to constantly fight for my right to be respected, a place where I finally felt like I belonged. The residency created that place for me – I have never felt more welcome or cared for by a group of people (other than my family) in my entire life.
Upon my enrollment in the MACS program, I had hesitations about whether or not my immediate field of study would actually be applicable to the ideals and values behind the concept of sustaining culture. After talking at length with members of my class, I have had the opportunity to build on my core foundations of interest. While I absolutely love working at the Archives, I have felt like I’ve been out of touch with a very important part of myself. And during the residency, I figured out what that part was: I want to communicate with humanity. I’ve always cared more about people than I have about things – more about relationships than artifacts – more about contact and interaction than static, ineffectual showcase.
But until the residency, this feeling had been something I had been unable to articulate. After two particular discussions (one with Susan Anderson, one with Jane Kamau), I had a profound personal realization about the various things I wish to accomplish and how much they mean to me as an individual. I can bring my skills to the table – I can offer my abilities to organize, process, catalog, and arrange – but on a deeper level than objects resting silently in an exhibit case. The artifacts themselves are living; they are equally as alive and breathing as the people themselves. Rather than being “incorporated” into a “historic” exhibit lying within often sterile walls or glass shelves of a museum, these physical objects need to be reconnected with the community. These artifacts are embodying the idea, the connection, the collaborative dialogue of the communities they came from. They should have never been separated – it is not the intention of the group that produced the artifact for these objects to be showcased for public consumption. This lofty idea got me thinking – what about if we simply (yet sadly) introduced the basic, fundamental idea of observation and interaction with these material representations in their own element: at the places of their own conception.
While this concept of putting the artifacts back in the communities they came from is a seemingly wonderful idea, the reality of the situation is that the communities themselves do not have the ability or the means to control or overpower the institutions which possess their artifacts. So, it is vital to create a harmonious balance between communities and academic institutions. For me, I want to strive to create a dialogue between the two parties so that these “exhibits” become more about the people than the things – so that the integrity of these communities is not compromised. That’s what it has always been about for me, I just didn’t quite realize it until after talking to my fellow classmates.
Because of this realization, I must reinvent my role as mediator between the community and the institution. It does not always have to be a negative or authoritative interaction; in fact, I want to encourage communities to take advantage of the resources offered by larger institutions. If a partnership can be initiated between both parties, imagine the wealth of knowledge we could share together – collectively, collaboratively, genuinely – infinitely.
Recent Comments