Civilizing Africa” in Portuguese Narratives of the 1870’S and 1880’S Luísa Leal De Faria
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Empire Building and Modernity Organização Adelaide Meira Serras Lisboa 2011 EMPIRE BUILDING AND MODERNITY ORGANIZAÇÃO Adelaide Meira Serras CAPA, PAGINAÇÃO E ARTE FINAL Inês Mateus Imagem na capa The British Empire, 1886, M. P. Formerly EDIÇÃO Centro de Estudos Anglísticos da Universidade de Lisboa IMPRESSÃO E ACABAMENTO TEXTYPE TIRAGEM 200 exemplares ISBN 978-972-8886-17-2 DEPÓSITO LEGAL 335129/11 PUBLICAÇÃO APOIADA PELA FUNDAÇÃO PARA A CIÊNCIA E A TECNOLOGIA ÍNDICE Foreword Luísa Leal de Faria . 7 Empire and cultural appropriation. African artifacts and the birth of museums Cristina Baptista . 9 Here nor there: writing outside the mother tongue Elleke Boehmer . 21 In Black and White. “Civilizing Africa” in Portuguese narratives of the 1870’s and 1880’s Luísa Leal de Faria . 31 Inverted Priorities: L. T. Hobhouse’s Critical Voice in the Context of Imperial Expansion Carla Larouco Gomes . 45 Ways of Reading Victoria’s Empire Teresa de Ataíde Malafaia . 57 “Buy the World a Coke:” Rang de Basanti and Coca-colonisation Ana Cristina Mendes . 67 New Imperialism, Colonial Masculinity and the Science of Race Iolanda Ramos . 77 Challenges and Deadlocks in the Making of the Third Portuguese Empire (1875-1930) José Miguel Sardica . 105 The History of the Sevarambians: The Colonial Utopian Novel, a Challenge to the 18th Century English Culture Adelaide Meira Serras . 129 Isaiah Berlin and the Anglo-American Predicament Elisabete Mendes Silva . 143 Nabobs and the Foundation of the British Empire in India Isabel Simões-Ferreira . 155 Foreword ollowing the organization, in 2009, of the first conference on The British Empire: Ideology, Perspectives, Perception, the Research Group dedicated Fto Culture Studies at the University of the Lisbon Centre for English Studies organized, in 2010, a second conference under the general title Empire Building and Modernity. This conference constitutes the second part of a three year project undertaken by the group, which will be followed, in 2011, by a third initiative, called Reviewing Imperial Conflicts. The proceedings of the second conference are now presented in this book. Empire Building and Modernity gives a larger scope to the original project, which was developed more strictly around the British Empire, and provides the opportunity to deal with questions related to the formation of modern European empires, namely the Portuguese Colonial Empire. The different chapters in this book reveal a variety of approaches that are very often at the cutting edge of the methodologies adopted in cultural studies, particularly in the field of post-colonial studies. The building of new perceptions on imperial issues interpreted through literature, the visual arts, history and political science, the role of museums, questions of gender and race and the construction of identity through language constitute the guidelines of the contributions presented in this volume. I hope you will enjoy reading it as much as we enjoyed discussing the issues that contributed to its making. Luísa Leal de Faria 7 Empire and cultural appropriation. African artifacts and the birth of museums Cristina Baptista University of Lisbon Centre for English Studies (ULICES) EMPIRE BUILDING AND MODERNITY, Lisboa, 2011 Empire and cultural appropriation. African artifacts and the birth of museums I – Introduction Colonial relationship allowed the British Empire to take possession of a vast spoil of artefacts in the colonies with the purpose of exhibiting it in museums at home. My purpose in this paper will be analysing the conditions and arguments that made possible and also legitimate the removal of artefacts from Egypt, during the imperial occupation, to «feed» the holdings of central museums in Britain, instrumental to Victorian culture and, therefore, crucial to Victorian identity. Theoretical production about this issue — cultural property — is paramount. I will try a Cultural Studies approach to it. Why a paper about museums, one might ask, in a conference under the title Empire Building and Modernity? And, furthermore, why Victorian museums? Concerning this issue, I will quote Barbara Black, in On Exhibit. Victorians and their museums, to enlighten the question, The museum served to legitimate Britain’s power at home and across the globe. It grew implicit with British imperialism, housing the spoils of colonization and guarding the growing perimeter of the British Empire. (Black 2000: 11) Therefore, the link between museums and modernity is inextricable — as Barbara Black stresses — in the sense that they are a response to the new world order, and an attempt of producing meaning, about what Victorians felt their role their time was; on the other hand, the fact of being open to visitors, a contro - versial issue in the Victorian Era, meets the concept of modernity. This meant breaking from the past, when objects of art, part of private collections, were kept from the reach of the population and enclosed in palaces and mansions. The museum provides a critical approach to the history of the past, through the exhibition of large collections of objects, formerly private, as the British Museum was the case, which at a given moment became public 11 EMPIRE BUILDING AND MODERNITY spaces with open access to the population. The shift of the placing of objects provides them with a whole different function, from objects of delight of just a few to powerful symbolic role in a narrative of the nation, intended for the whole population. As Maria Emília Fonseca stresses in The Tree of Life, what is at stake in the exhibitionary practice in a museum is that the work of art becomes a potential producer of internal articulation and of meaning(s). (Fonseca 2007: 10) II – Museums, empire and modernity. Victorians and their museums Museums represented thus an important role in British imperial identity, which included the colonies and occupied countries as part of a larger space that had to be represented in these exhibitionary spaces, turned into a reference of the global power, symbolic or effective, of that small country. When questioning the legitimacy of the appropriation of artefacts in the colonies, particularly in Egypt, one has to look at the colonial relation as an environment that presupposes and validates appropriation. The latter presumes European cultural superiority — defended by ideologists of imperialism, like Thomas Babington Macaulay, an example among many. As Tawadros states, it is in museums, namely, that this cultural superiority is most striking: The notion of western culture as inherently progressive, sophisticated and, above all, superior… remains firmly imbebbed in the cultural institutions of western Europe, not least in its museums. (Tawadros 1990: 30-1) This notion of cultural superiority and concepts like the guard, cataloging, identification and restoring, for further exhibition and, ultimately, the salvation of monuments and artefacts, namely African, legitimated the removal of these artefacts out of their original context, on behalf of a transposition to a new one, inside museums, were — Victorians believed — they should be, for it is there they are appreciated. Victorian museums provided thus a broad and diversified insight of the empire, materialized in the exhibition of artefacts of different origins and of an apparently unquestioned sense of belonging. Besides, Victorians loved collecting. Therefore, the museum, not only the space, as its holdings, fulfils the viewer’s imagination, moved by the beauty and the exotic of the exhibited artefacts. This is why, at the time, a museum was considered a «cabinet of curiosities», were the treasures of the nation were displayed, and were represented the attitudes and perspectives of the 12 EMPIRE AND CULTURAL APPROPRIATION. AFRICAN ARTIFACTS AND THE BIRTH OF MUSEUMS dominant cultures, consisting of a material proof of the cultural endeavours. This love of collections had given way to large private holdings, later sheltered in public museums, once the practice of collecting is profoundly rooted in European tradition, as Susan Pearce states. The motivation behind this attitude includes a range from the celebration of the triumph of war, to the practice of collecting art for the art. (Pearce 1995) Let’s now hear the arguments of the removal. In 1835, Saint-Maur, a member of the Comission Superiéure de Bâtiments à Vapeur, an entity belonging to the shipbuilding industry, is quoted by Reid, in resuming the main argument of the removal of artefacts from Egypt: France, snatching an obelisk from the ever heightening mud of the Nile, or the savage ignorance of the Turks, earns a right to the thanks of the learned of Europe, to whom belong all the monuments of antiquity, because they alone know how to appreciate them. Antiquity is a garden that belongs by natural right to those who cultivate and harvest its fruits. (Saint-Maur 1835 apud Reid 2002: 1) Being the process of appropriation crucial in the birth of museums — for without it they would not have part of their most important holdings —, it is therefore determined by the colonial relationship. Concepts like the ones used before appear within a conceptual framework of keywords as colonialism and imperialism we are all familiar with in the field of Postcolonial Studies, within the wider frame of Cultural Studies; anyway, I would quote David Spurr, in Ashcroft et al., in the definition of appropriation, described as a process: This process [the appropriation] is sometimes used to describe the strategy by which the dominant imperial power incorporates as its own the territory or culture that it surveys or invades. (Spurr 1993: 28 apud Ashcroft 2000/2004: 19) Appropriation, thus, is rooted in the general notion that the artefacts are left to neglect and lack of appreciation in the places of origin. To look into this argument, let’s search in Mr. Budge’s memoirs, for a specific example of how monuments and artefacts were removed from Egypt, and the attitude towards local heritage that this British subject encountered in his several missions in the East.