Browse Items (1 total)

• 
  TextNeocolonial Politics in the MuseumResearch and Development Center for Bantu and Black African Art

  Creación de un centro de investigación y desarrollo del arte Bantú y Negroafricano

  “The idea behind the project is evidently the promotion of authentic art that is being lost with the internationalization of culture and aesthetic and artistic habits. For this reason, the future Research and Development Center for Bantu and Black African Art will be made up of different areas dedicated to research, promotion, training, as well as the exhibition of works of art. With respect to these different functions of the planned center, the consultant foresees that the following services should be created: a library on Bantu and Black African art, a photo library that also includes documents on Western and Asian art, and a sound library on Bantu music. In the area of ​​training, the consultant recommends that the following workshops be created: ceramics, painting, fiber, screen printing, foundry, ivory and wood carving workshops; in addition to a didactic workshop, a living museum workshop and a printing press. Finally, the center will include a museum, a room for temporary exhibitions, as well as a conference room.” Agustín de la Casa Rivas, Spanish Consultant
  
  The document outlining the "Plans for the Creation of a ‘Research and Development Center for Bantu and Black African Art" is a technical report drafted by Spanish architect and consultant Agustín de la Casa Rivas as part of the Programs of Participation and Technical Cooperation promoted by the Office of Education, Science, and Culture of the United Nations in 1990. While the Center was never built, the document serves as an engaging example of how neocolonial politics operates on the international stage in the fields of art, science, and education. The document prepared by La Casa Rivas presents several issues that warrant a critical decolonial examination, particularly regarding how the museum space is conceptualized through dominant approaches to art and cultural preservation. This critique aims to unpack these problems and highlight the implications for the representation of Bantu and Black African art within this proposed center.
  
  One of the primary issues with the document is its adherence to a Western model of what a museum should be. The proposed center is structured around traditional Western divisions and functions, such as libraries, photo libraries, sound libraries, and various workshops. The creation of specific workshops for ceramics, painting, fiber, screen printing, foundry, ivory and wood carving, and the inclusion of a didactic workshop, a living museum workshop, and a printing press all point to a compartmentalized approach typical of Western art institutions as well. This format emulates international museum standards, which may not be entirely appropriate for the representation of Bantu and Black African art. This segmentation can strip the art of its cultural and historical context, reducing it to mere aesthetic objects rather than expressions of living traditions and practices. The imposition of these Western categories on a center dedicated to African art risks reinforcing a colonial mindset that prioritizes Western epistemologies and modes of organization over local ones, especially considering that no local artists or cultural agents were involved in the project design or its conceptualization.
  
  On the other hand, the center's focus on Bantu art, as promoted by the Obiang regime, places this particular identity in a privileged institutional status. This approach can be problematic as it may marginalize other cultural expressions and identities within Equatorial Guinea and the broader African context. The promotion of a homogenized Bantu identity as representative of Black Art echoes the regime's political agenda of creating a unified national identity, which often glosses over the rich cultural diversity of the region. By institutionalizing Bantu art in this manner, the center could risk becoming a tool for political propaganda rather than a space for genuine cultural and artistic expression.
  
  Finally, the consultant's recommendation to include documents on Western and Asian art in the photo library underscores the pervasive influence of international, particularly Western, perspectives. This inclusion suggests an underlying assumption that Bantu and Black African art needs to be contextualized within a broader, predominantly Western, art historical framework. Such an approach can undermine the autonomy and integrity of African art by constantly measuring it against foreign standards.
  
  In summary, the plans for the Research and Development Center for Bantu and Black African Art reflect a deep-seated reliance on Western models of museum spaces and art organization. This approach not only reproduces colonial mentalities but also risks perpetuating the marginalization of Guinean forms of knowledge and cultural expression. The institutional privileging of Bantu identity, aligned with the political agenda of the Obiang regime, further complicates the center's role as a space for authentic artistic representation. To honor and promote Black African art, it is essential to develop new models that break away from these Western paradigms and embrace the diverse and dynamic nature of African cultural expressions.