Laura Verstappen

10889302

Representing Cultural Diversity

Non-Western Ethnographic Collections in the Culturally Diverse Netherlands

Master Thesis

University of Amsterdam

Humanities Department

Arts and Culture: Cultural Analysis

Supervisor: Elmer E. P. Kolfin

2nd Reader: Thijs Weststeijn

24 August 2015

1 Representing Cultural Diversity

Representing Cultural Diversity

2 Representing Cultural Diversity Contents

Introduction 5 Parameters of the research question 6 Parameters of the research 7

Chapter 1: The History and Composition of Ethnographic 11 Collections in the Netherlands 1900-1990 15 Museum Profiles 18 Conclusions 22

Chapter 2: The History and Composition of Immigrant 24 Populations in the Netherlands Immigrant categories 25 Current Composition of the Immigrant Population in the Netherlands 28 Integration into Dutch Society 31

Chapter 3: Diversity Policy in Ethnographic Museums 33 A Historical Relation 34 Government and Museum Policy 38 Immigrant population-related programming of 44 ethnographic collections, 2011-2015 Conclusions 48

Chapter 4: Discussion 50

Conclusion 59

Bibliography 60

Appendix 1: Inquiry format 65

3 Representing Cultural Diversity List of tables and illustrations

Figure 1.1: Map of the colonies, trade posts and main countries of 12 origin of the immigrant population

Table 2.1: Total immigrant population in the Netherlands, 2014 28

Table 2.2: Composition of the non-Western immigrant population 28 in the Netherlands, 2014

4 Representing Cultural Diversity

Introduction

Two years ago I was living in the multi-cultural South of London and working as an intern in the ethnographic department of the British Museum. I became aware of a parallel between the Museums’ ethnographic collection and the cultures of local immigrants and asked to what extent the British Museum concerned itself with this context.

Upon inquiry Harvinder Bahra of the Community Partnership Team of the British Museum told me that they had recently started to address the Museum’s relation to local communities, including immigrant populations of cultures that were represented in the collection. She told me her team had been instated in 2009 as part of a new trend in museums. Specialized divisions as well as existing departments had started investigating and developing relations with local population sub-groups (Bahra).

When I moved back to the Netherlands, I exported my interest. Visiting Dutch museums always gave me a great sense of pride of the Dutch cultural history, art, scientific accomplishments, taste and the seeming willingness to acknowledge less admirable qualities. An image, of course, that is carefully directed by the museums: ‘conductors of our national memory.’1 Nevertheless, they shaped my cultural self-image and how foreign friends perceived my culture. I have always assumed that other cultures need similar points of reference for their (self-)image and sense of community. It follows that immigrant populations who had left the prime examples of their cultural heritage in their homelands would have difficulty defining their own culture, and so would ‘others’ in their new environment. What then, of the foreign ethnographic collections that are already in the Netherlands? Can they serve as a cultural backbone for the immigrant populations and as a repository for their new hybrid cultures?

It is an ambitious question with many facets, too ambitious in fact for a one-year master program in the Department of Literature.2 Still, I would like to make a start. In this thesis I investigate whether ethnographic museums in the Netherlands have the capacity to represent the cultural background of the immigrant population with ethnographic collections.

Leaving many issues out, I have formulated four questions that will be answered in four respective chapters:

1 De Jong ,“Dirigenten”. 2 At the University of Amsterdam

5 Representing Cultural Diversity 1. What is the current composition and origin of ethnographic collections in ethnographic museums in the Netherlands?

2. What is the current composition and origin of the Dutch immigrant population?

3. How do ethnographic museums represent the immigrant population with their ethnographic collection?

4. Discussion: Is there room for improvement?

At the outset of my research I expected to find less correspondence between the collections and the population than in the British Museum. Based on previous visits to ethnographic museums in the Netherlands I was sceptical about the prominence of the cultures of the immigrant population. My initial impression was that the ethnographic museums were preoccupied with the far and wide and had little interest in the different cultures that lived right under their noses.

Parameters of the questions

A museum, in the definition of the International Council of Museums (ICOM) is ‘a non-profit, permanent institution in the service of society and its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits the tangible and intangible heritage of humanity and its environment for the purposes of education, study and enjoyment.’3 An ethnographic museum specializes in material and immaterial culture that is relevant to the systematic study of people and cultures also known as ‘cultural anthropology’ (Kottak 5,9). 4 This thesis looks at explicitly ethnographic museums, volkenkundige musea in Dutch.5 Their practices will be analysed in light of their history and a changed demographic. The research questions could be applied to any type of museum, but because ethnographic collections are inherently linked with the study of cultures the question of cultural representation seemed all the more poignant there.6 In order to make a comparison with museums with other types of collections the focus will be only on their ethnographic collection.7

3 Museum is an unprotected term (Museum Vereniging “Museum Definitie”), this is the updated definition according to the ICOM Statutes, adopted during the 21st General Conference in Vienna, Austria, in 2007. 4 Anthropology is the study of mankind in general. It includes biological or physical anthropology and cultural anthropology. Ethnology is the comparative analysis of multiple cultures (Kottak 5,9). 5 In reality the translation of ‘ethnography’ is not as straightforward. A more refined definition relevant to the Netherlands will be given in Chapter 1. 6 Most art museums in the Netherlands also hold small to significant ethnographic collections, but have been left out of the equation because of their art historical, rather than ethnographic, approach. 7 This applies to the Museon, Den Haag and the Universiteitsmuseum, Groningen.

6 Representing Cultural Diversity The four research questions will be discussed in four respective chapters. The first two chapters treat the composition and origin of the subjects. First those of ethnographic collections in ethnographic museums in the Netherlands; second, those of the Dutch immigrant population. I will also discuss the historical and political contexts, which I presumed to be important factors.

The discussion of the composition of the immigrant population will be subject to the categories that are used in the field of human geography and will therefore be defined mostly in terms of nationality. In the Netherlands an immigrant is defined as a person born outside the Netherlands. The Dutch term allochtoon is used to describe people who were born outside of the Netherlands or who have one or two parents that were born outside the Netherlands (CBS “Begrippen”). English literature generally does not distinguish the allochtoon population, but differentiates between first and second generation immigrants – second generation referring to children of immigrant parent(s). I will adopt the English term immigrant to refer to both generations of the allochtoon population.

In the third chapter I ask how the composition of ethnographic collections in Dutch ethnographic Museums is related to the current composition of the country’s immigrant population and interpret the findings of the first two chapters. How museums represent immigrant cultures is discussed against the political background. This chapter makes use of policies and reports to surmise the discourse and activity that originate from the museum and its collection. Initiatives originating from the immigrant population are not included unless they are organized as a museum. This was necessary because I was unable to access sufficient information on the specific input and perspective of representatives from all the immigrant populations, and its discussion would have surpassed the range of this thesis.

The final chapter was conceived to vent my passion for the subject after a strenuous journey through museums, libraries and piles of documentation. It presents arguments for the relevance of cultural representation in ethnographic collections. Furthermore, it compares the findings with existing literature and with the way another museum deals with immigrant cultures. In answer to the fourth research question it critically assesses the capacity of the museums to provide a cultural backbone for the immigrant population.

Parameters of the research

The question that I had on the outset – can ethnographic collections serve as a cultural backbone for the immigrant population? – beckons far and wide answers, but I have had to confine the research field with more specific questions. Nevertheless, in dealing with an interdisciplinary subject I have taken on an interdisciplinary approach. During my bachelor degree I touched upon anthropology, sociology, museum studies, psychology of ethnic relations and art history. All of these proved relevant to the subject, but I was faced with my limited experience in each of them. In order to grasp what was going on I had to catch up with the field, especially museum studies. My present master program in Arts and

7 Representing Cultural Diversity Culture: Cultural Analysis teaches critical theory and comparative analysis that mostly informs abstract thinking. First, however, I want to ground this thesis in facts about the composition of ethnographic collections and the population and in evidence of the activities and discourse of the museum. My interpretation and analysis would ideally come second. In practice the two inform each other.

In the Netherlands ten museums proliferate themselves as ethnographic museums.8 Three of these have been omitted because of a strictly local focus that excluded the incorporation of other cultures.9 A fourth was omitted because of its restricted access and independent nature.10

I was left with six museums in six different locations across the country:

• Museon, Den Haag (Zuid-Holland)

• Universiteitsmuseum, Groningen (Groningen)

• Wereldmuseum, Rotterdam (Zuid-Holland)

The following museums are part of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen (National Museum for World Cultures)

• Afrika Museum, Berg en Dal (Gelderland)

• Rijksmuseum Volkenkunde, Leiden (Zuid-Holland)

• Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam (Noord-Holland)

Each of the museums was investigated separately, with exception of the current policy of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen.

The first objective of the research was to compile a general profile for each of the ethnographic museums that would inform Chapters 1, 3 and 4. The profile was based on museum publications and museum visits on which I recorded their layout, programming, and presentation. Eventually it included a history of each collection and museum, the general composition of their ethnographic collection, the composition of their permanent display, an inventory of relevant recent events (including exhibitions)

8 The museums profiled themselves as volkenkundig, etnografisch, volkskundig or with descriptions related to these terms in their marketing, website, mission and/ or collection plan and are registered as volkenkundig with the CBS. 9 The Zuiderzee Museum, Limburgs Museum and Nederlands Openluchtmuseum were excluded because their collections focus solely on regional and national culture. This type of local ethnography distinguishes them as volkskundig in Dutch, see also Chapter 1. 10 Natuurhistorisch en Volkenkundig Museum Oudenbosch has been excluded because it opens only two days per week on average and cannot be accessed using the Museum Jaarkaart, which grants free access to cardholders and accounts for a large part of museum visits.

8 Representing Cultural Diversity that pertain to the ethnographic collection, observations made during visits and statements by the museum.

Based on public documentation I established priorities in the discourse and practice of the museum. I then inquired about specific information that could not be retrieved from public sources. An inquiry according to the format reproduced in Appendix 1 was sent to representatives of all museums.11 I also requested meetings with members of staff who were involved with the subject of my research. This resulted in one interview in person, with Koos van Brakel of the Tropenmuseum and currently of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen.12 It also resulted in a correspondence with Marielle Pals, of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen and its ‘Diversity Team’, and with Eveline Kevenaar of the Wereldmuseum.13 Furthermore a long interview was conducted with professor Ad de Jong, formerly of the Openluchtmuseum, whose experience and knowledge were most insightful.14 Unfortunately, some important figures responsible for the very subject of interest were impossible to reach or unwilling to comment. However, their behaviour was also an illustration of the present relevance of, and uneasiness about the subject.

To find out how the organizational structure of the museums operated I reviewed documentation including the museum websites and publications, year reports from 2011 onwards and the most recent Collectieplan, Profiel or Beleidsplan (Collection Plan, Profile or Policy).15 I chose a window of five

11 The inquiry was also sent to the Openluchtmuseum. A number of respondents asked that I do not publish the correspondence, therefore only the blank inquiry is reproduced. The Wereldmuseum, Universiteitsmuseum and Openluchtmuseum responded and the Tropenmuseum and Museum Volkenkunde of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen referred to an answer from their joint department. The inquiry was sent out in Dutch. Irrelevant questions were omitted per museum and in some museum specific questions were added. The length of the answers was not specified. In some cases follow up questions were sent in a continued correspondence. The used responses are listed under ‘correspondence’ in the Bibliography. The Afrika Museum did not respond; instead the answer from the joint department was used. The Museon did not reply either, but some information was found on a repeat visit and through an informant, Michiel van Harskamp, intern in the educational department of the museum.

12 The interview was voice-recorded and semi-structured with questions based on key-words (‘merger’, ‘departmental structure’, ‘cultural diversity’, ‘community partnerships’, ‘priorities’, ‘national population’, ‘political influence’, ‘significance’, etc.). 13 The correspondence with Marielle Pals and Eveline Kevenaar provided the basic structure for the inquiry. 14 The interview was recorded in notes and semi-structured around three themes: Openluchtmuseum, Policy, and Collections & Immigrant Populations. 15 The collection plan or policy is a standardized document used by most museums to inventory the extent, management and use of their collection and to plan their objectives and responsibilities on a three to five year basis.

9 Representing Cultural Diversity years to review the ‘current state of affairs’ in terms of policies and programming. A relatively broad window was necessary because in some cases the most recent information was unavailable. Reports for 2014 and 2015 were not published yet, and more importantly the timing of my investigation coincided with a reorganization in most of the museums, in response to changes in government policy. Again, it proved difficult to gather information about the ongoing process.

Furthermore, I took note of regulations on a national level. The museums within my research are members of the Museum Vereniging (MV, Museum Association) and the Stichting Volkenkundige Collectie Nederland (SVCN, Foundation Ethnographic Collections Netherlands), the latter with exception of the Wereldmuseum. Both organizations coordinate policies and articulate and monitor standards. In addition the museums have to answer the local and national government. This led me to an investigation into Government policy and the effect thereof.

For material about the immigrant population in the Netherlands (Chapter 2) I obtained statistics from the Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (CBS, Central Bureau of Statistics). Their history and present situation was surmised using socio-historic and socio-economic literature, respectively. Literature from museum studies and general history was used to inform Chapter 1, while government and professional publications from the cultural sector were used for Chapter 3. Specialized literature pertaining to cultural subpopulations and cultural heritage were left out at first but eventually incorporated to contextualise the findings in its academic field in Chapter 4.

The investigation zoomed out instead of in, focussing on an overview and comparison of the six museums and their position in society. This meant disregarding the particulars of cases in the museums that had been recorded in the initial stages of the investigation, but allowed me to regard the joint capacity of the museums. Instead of discussing the interpretation of the ethnographic objects or collections I chose to discuss the discourse that precedes an encounter with an object or collection. I found that more often than not the cultural parameters of the research questions did not match with the discourse used in the museum or politics. Nevertheless, I have maintained my original premises because the absence of a certain discourse turned out to be an important finding as well.

It was a challenge bringing together information in so many different forms, requiring different tactics of interpretation, but in this thesis I hope to have surmised a complex subject that intersects many fields of study and parts of society.

10 Representing Cultural Diversity

Chapter 1

The History and Composition of Ethnographic Collections in the Netherlands

Collections are formed through the act of collecting material and immaterial items that are selected for their utilitarian or aesthetic qualities, or to ‘complete’ the collection. In addition they are formed deliberately or unconsciously around themes,16 in this case: ethnography. However, ethnography: ‘the systematic study of people and cultures’ had not always been systematic (Kottak 5). Instead the early ethnographic collections were formed out of curiosity and the objects of fancy thus called curiosa.

Ethnographic collecting in the Netherlands, like in the rest of Western Europe, began in the 16th century (Kistemaker et al. 8, Effert 15). The explorations of the previous century had expanded the horizons and explorers started collecting curiosa from the discovered areas (Buchli). The curiosa were placed in ‘curiosity cabinets’ where they could be kept and displayed under naturalia – objects from nature, and artificialia – manmade objects. The artificialia included the material culture of unfamiliar peoples (Kistemaker et al. 19).

The Netherlands was a trading nation that harboured large trading companies. The largest company, the VOC (United East Indies Company), was unequalled in the East Indies or anywhere around the world. Between 1600-1800 the company employed a million Europeans overseas and established European port towns. The territories they controlled were named the Batavian Republic with Batavia (now Jakarta) as its capital. The WIC (Dutch West India Company) established trade ports in Brazil, Surinam, the Antilles, Guyana, Cape of Good Hope and along the African coastline. They were responsible for a large part of the 17th century slave trade. When the VOC went bankrupt at the end of the 18th century and the WIC could no longer defend its monopoly, the Dutch East Indies, Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles were annexed by the Netherlands (Prak 125-36, see Figure 1.1).

The systematic study of culture and peoples emerged in tandem with Europe’s curiosity cabinets. The 18th century was the time of the Enlightenment or ‘the Age of Reason’ and the world was under scrutiny of analytical minds. Although no such field of study was yet defined, some people took

16 This definition is based on a literature review on the phenomenon of collecting (Belk 317-326).

11 Representing Cultural Diversity special interest in the analysis of exotic artificialia. In the Netherlands Nicolaes Witsen (1614-1717) amassed an important collection as an ambassador and through a network of traders in Amsterdam, to feed his interest in ethnography (Kistemaker et al. 153). He was among the people who recognized that the artificialia were not just fanciful objects, but evidence of different ways of life. In the course of the 17th century detailed accounts of cultural practices and beliefs as well as physical data (the field of physical anthropology) were added to the collections (Kistemaker et al. 153-192).

In the 18th century collections and related sciences began to specialize (Kistemaker et al. 19). Initially collections related to foreign peoples consisted of material culture and prints based on travel accounts, but as the field of ethnography developed immaterial culture such as familial and social relations, traditions and language became of interest as well. 17 Expeditions often recorded observations about the people they encountered in travel logs. The Dutch physician and geographer Olfert Dapper (1635/6-11689) used witness accounts from the archives of the VOC and WIC to describe cultural phenomena such as a ceremony (Kistemaker et al. 157). With the study of immaterial aspects the early ethnographers distinguished themselves from archaeologists who derive human biology and culture based solely on material evidence (Kottak 10).

In the first half of the 19th century the first professional titles related to ethnography appeared in the Netherlands and in 1851 the research institute Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land-, en Volkenkunde (Royal Institute for the study of Language, Land and People) was founded (Effert 3). Until then the study of people and cultures had to rely on the indiscriminate accounts and collections that had been accumulated by a wide range of ‘amateur anthropologists’: missionaries, tradesmen, scientists, rulers, private persons, government workers, travellers and explorers. But with its professionalization ethnographic collecting would happen in an increasingly systematic manner.

Exclusive at first, their collections entered the public sphere of the Netherlands in the 19th century. They were housed in museums and began to be used for the education of the public (Belk). The first museum with ethnographic material was the Koninklijk Kabinet van Zeldzaamheden (Royal Cabinet of Curiosities), which opened in Den Haag in 1816 (Effert 11). The first specialized ethnographic museum, the Rijks Ethnographisch Museum (National Ethnographic Museum), was opened in Leiden in 1859 and exists to this day as the Rijksmuseum Volkenkunde (National Museum for Ethnography). In 1883 the Museum voor Land- en Volkenkunde (Museum for Geography and Ethnology, now the Wereldmuseum) in Rotterdam was founded on the collection of members of the Royal Yacht Club who collected curiosities on their trips out of the Rotterdam harbour (Wereldmuseum, “Meerjarenbeleidsplan”).

17 When the collections became specialized in different fields, coins and medals, antiquities, art and rarities (hybrid forms), were separated from objects related to exotic people and cultures (Kistemaker 13-14).

12 Representing Cultural Diversity The displays in these types of early ethnographic museums and institutes illustrated how civilized European societies had evolved from ‘primitive’ people (Buchli 3-7). Western technology, art and culture exemplified superior civilization while those from the rest of the world were seen as backwards. The more remote, scattered and isolated the people, the more primitive they were believed to be. Along the lines of these evolutionary theories ethnographic collections were also part of zoos. One of the oldest ethnographic collections still in the Netherlands is perhaps the former Artis (Amsterdam Zoo) collection.18 Collecting began around the time of the zoo’s opening in 1838 and was done by a wide range of people, typical of 19th century European collectors. In 1861 the collection got its own Ethnografisch Museum in Artis to represent mankind: ‘the most advanced creature known to zoology’ (qtd. in Wijs).

The early ethnographic museums in the Netherlands were established in consequence and in service of colonialism (Effert 6-7). Most countries in 19th century Western Europe were in an imperialist race to expand their empires and secure trade (Kottak 556). The Netherlands expanded the East Indies to include most of Indonesia and took over coastal areas that were under control of the WIC, including Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles. Figure 1 shows the areas that were colonised by the Netherlands and the main historical trading posts. The Dutch East Indies formed the largest colony and were the pride of the nation. As foreign territories were brought under Dutch rule, foreign objects in the ethnographic collections became part of the Kingdom.

A primary task for ethnographic museums was to represent the cultures of the Dutch Empire. The museums demonstrated the nation’s expanses for the entertainment and education of its citizens. They also showcased the economic prospects of the colonies.19 In Haarlem the botanist Frederik Willem van Eeden had amassed so many curiosity collections, particularly from Indonesia, that he was able to open a Koloniaal Museum there in 1871 (Tropenmuseum, “Bezoekersgids” 11, Van Brakel and Legêne 7). Its growing collections provided illustrative and research tools for the preparation of missionaries, tradesmen, immigrants and government officials for their missions in the colonies (Effert 4). 20 Upon their return they expanded the colonial collections yet further. In museums like the former

18 Most of the old curiosity cabinets and earliest ethnographic collections in the Netherlands no longer exist in their original composition because they were disbanded by the heirs and through sales, scattering the objects over many countries and museums (Kistemaker et al.). 19 For example in the Museum voor Land- en Volkenkunde (Bremer). 20 In Delft the director of the Indische Instelling (Indonesian Institute) advertised with a request for donations of objects of cultural heritage for the purpose of educating potential civil servants. Thus he formed the collection of the former Ethnographic Museum Nusantara, Delft, founded in 1864 (Wentholt).

13 Representing Cultural Diversity

, trade posts and main olonies

c the of Map 1.1: Figure population immigrant the of origin of countries

14 Representing Cultural Diversity Tropisch Landbouwmuseum Deventer (Tropical Agricultural Museum)21 researchers sought to innovate the foreign artificialia for the efficient production and mining of naturalia in the colonies.

1900-1990

In the late 19th century the industrial revolution brought about rapid changes. People from the countryside moved to growing cities to find new jobs in the industry and mass-production quickly replaced common objects with new ones. For fear of losing local cultures local museums and locally oriented collections were founded. One of them was the Nederlands Openluchtmuseum (NOM, Dutch Open Air Museum) that opened on 24 april 1912 to collect and display a ‘memory of daily life’ in the Dutch country side (De Jong “Dirigenten” 13, Nederlands Openluchtmuseum, web.). At the same time the Open Air Museum was a way to forge national identity by showing cultural aspects that were supposedly specific to the Netherlands (De Jong, int.).22 The industrialisation not only replaced objects, it also led to a homogenization of material culture. To counteract this European countries chose local instances of folklore to distinguish their nation, for example on the World exhibitions that were held around the turn of the century (De Jong, int.). Imperialism was accompanied by nationalism and a new branch in ethnography was established.

Ethnography had predominantly been concerned with the world outside Europe, but facing the rapid disappearance of local cultural heritage, attention was turned inward. The anthropologists behind evolutionary theories of human kind and civilization had looked at people in remote areas to find their own origin; now, local European ethnographers went into the countryside to find communities unaffected by modernization that could represent the nation’s heritage (De Jong, “Dirigenten” 13-14). In the Netherlands, this caused interest in the more traditional and isolated communities. This type of ethnography was called volkskunde (Roodenburg) became an institutionalised discipline in the 20th century (De Jong “Dirigenten” 18). The term is closest to the English ‘folklore’ or what has been described as ‘European ethnography’ (De Jong, int., De Jong “Dirigenten” 18). The geographical area of study defines the distinction between what European ethnography (volkskunde) and plain ethnography (volkenkunde).23 The former collects and studies local cultures inside of Europe; the latter

21 Their collection is now part of the Universiteitsmuseum Groningen. 22 In an interview with the author professor Ad de Jong recalled the main points supported in his PhD dissertation Conductors of Memory (English title), published in 2001. De Jong is emeritus professor at the University of Amsterdam, specialized in national museum collections in relation with national identity. Furthermore, he was an important informant for this thesis on the practices of the Openluchtmuseum where he was head of research and collecting between 1981-91 and scientific member of the board until 2010. 23 The distinction was conceptualised in Germany and became associated with nationalism, but that connotation has worn off (De Jong, int., De Jong “Dirigenten” 17-8).

15 Representing Cultural Diversity continues to do so for the rest of the world. The subtle difference between the two Dutch words demarcates a resounding division in field, represented by different types of ethnographic museums. The museums that will be discussed in this thesis are volkenkundig.

After the Second World War colonial museums were under threat of disappearing amid de- colonisation. Museums needed to carve out a new name for themselves. The Koloniaal Instituut in Amsterdam, once founded on and for the profits of the colonies, no longer wished to be associated with colonialism. It changed its name to Indisch Instituut (Indonesian Institute), though only until Indonesia became a sovereignty and the name was changed to the more generic Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen (Royal Institute for the Tropics) (Van Brakel and Legêne 9, Tropenmuseum, “Bezoekersgids” 13-4). The ethnographic museums in Leiden, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and Den Haag widened their scope from the cultures of the colonies and the trade routes to the world at large and shifted their interest from produce to culture. The collections were extended with material from other regions such as Africa and South America, bought from local dealers by the museum staff (Tropenmuseum “Bezoekersgids” 13-4, Wereldmuseum, web., Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge).

Based on their more significant collections the museums had become important institutions with specialized fields of study.24 At the same time, however, the government – most museums were state funded – wanted to prioritize the public function of the museum, which had long been second to the collecting function. This ‘democratisation of museums’ was implemented during the 70s and meant that the composition and research of ethnographic collections became less important, while their attraction and educational value became more important (De Jong, int., Tropenmuseum, “Bezoekersgids”).25

During the twentieth century another process played out and made its mark on ethnographic collections. At the start of the century ethnographic material that was considered ‘primitive art’ had gained the interest of artists and art collectors (Belk), in the Netherlands the interest peaked in the post-war period thanks to the Cobra movement (Grootaers and Eisenburger 50). Subsequently ethnographic objects had entered art collections and museums for aesthetic reasons and were seen with renewed interest in the context of ethnographic collections. In fact, the Western aesthetic had always influenced collectors in their choice of objects and caused attention of ethnographers and museum to be lopsided towards the more elaborate, artful or familiar designs (Pasztory 8-12).

24 The institutes that were part of the Koloniaal Instituut focussed on particular colonies and collected from there. Their collections are now in the Tropenmuseum (Van Brakel and Legêne 8). 25 Koos van Brakel is currently Head of Collections at the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen. In an interview with the author he also related his knowledge of the Tropenmuseum where he was curator between 2000 and 2011.

16 Representing Cultural Diversity In the eighties the public function of the museum had been highlighted and now the message that was to be conveyed to the public came under scrutiny of the government. The public exhibitions were no longer outmoded, but the narratives were deemed out-dated. The governmentwanted to educate the public on the poor state of the world. 26 The old evolutionary theories were replaced by a new one: ‘primitive people’ were renamed inhabitants of ‘third world countries’ and developmental and social anthropology replaced a pure cultural anthropology. The ethnographic collections were to illustrate the backward and deprived situation in the third world so that the nation would become aware of regions in need. Museums started collecting quotidian objects from the ‘disadvantaged’ areas and acquired large quantities of inexpensive objects that were later seen as insignificant (Van Brakel, int.). All of the ethnographic museums adopted this policy to an extent.

In the 1990s the government began pushing museums into independence (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 6), causing many ethnographic museums to disappear and burdening the remaining museums with their collections.27 In 1993 the Museum Volkenkunde in Leiden absorbed the Volkenkundig Museum “Justinus van Nassau” that had been founded in 1956 to exhibit the ethnographic collection of the military academy in Breda (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 7-14). In 2013 Volkenkundig Museum Nusantara in Delft, specialized in Indonesia, could no longer compete with other Indonesian collections and closed for the public (Wentholt).28 The collection of the former Amerika Museum in Cuijk was given to the Wereldmuseum (Bremer). The Museum Gerardus van der Leeuw was placed in the depot of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (Schotanus, Arnoldus- Schröder and De Jong). And, most recently, the Moluks Historisch Museum Maluku in Utrecht closed and dispersed its ethnographic collection to other museums. Almost half of the ethnographic (volkenkundige) museums have disappeared, leaving six ethnographic museums in the Netherlands.

In the 21st century the financial crisis demanded yet more rigorous budget cuts from cultural institutions. Even though the remaining ethnographic museum’s had become more independent in the recent decades, they are still leaning on government funding and have been on the verge of keeling over. In 2013 the Tropenmuseum, Museum Volkenkunde and the Afrika Museum in Berg en Dal had to merge their institutions into the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen to sustain a foothold. To generate money the government advised museums to become more commercial, and to save money

26 Initiative of the then minister of Ontwikkelingssamenwerking (Developmental collaboration) Berend Jan Udink (Tropenmuseum, “Bezoekersgids” 14, 47). 27 In the early 1990s the government still formulated the Deltaplan voor Cultuurbehoud (Deltaplan for the Preservation of Culture). It introduced an assessment system to prioritize a fundamental Dutch collection (‘Collectie Nederland’) and offered financial support for its conservation, see Chapter 3. 28 It’s collections can still be accessed through the SVCN.

17 Representing Cultural Diversity made it possible to de-acquisition of less significant collections. For the first time in their history the ethnographic museums are looking to reduce, rather than expand their collections.

Chapter 3 will go deeper into the recent government policy and its implications for policy in the ethnographic museums. The end of this chapter is a brief overview of the different origins and compositions of the ethnographic collections in the museums under discussion, in order of their founding dates.

Museum Volkenkunde, Leiden (Zuid-Holland)

Museum Volkenkunde is the oldest ethnographic museum in the Netherlands, and among the three oldest ethnographic museums of scientific origin in the world (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 3). Its collection started with a number of private collections that had an emphasis on Japan, most importantly that of dr. Philip Franz von Siebold. The museum opened in 185929 as the Rijks Japansch Museum Von Siebold (National Japanese Museum) (Effert 11). The colonial collections extended in tandem with the expansion of the Dutch Kingdom.30 At the same time, the museum also made efforts to collect from other regions, such as the South Sea, Africa, America, Tibet and Siberia (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 5). With the addition of other collections the outlook was deliberately made more generic and in 1864 the museum changed its name to Rijks Ethnografisch Museum/ Rijksmuseum van Etnografie. The most important addition was made in 1883, when the museum merged with the ethnographic department of the Royal Cabinet of Rarities in Den Haag (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 4-5). In the post-war period museum staff went on expeditions all over the world, applying a range of observational anthropological methods and collecting and recording cultures (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 5). With 200.000 objects it is now the largest ethnographic collection in the Netherlands, notwithstanding photographs (Museum Volkenkunde, web.).

The Insular South-East Asian collections (including Japan) remained the largest and most significant, especially the Indonesian sub collection, which is its largest and one of the most important in the world (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 7-14). Leiden houses many other significant collections that overshadow those in the Netherlands and beyond. The Africa collection is relatively important on the national scale, both in quantity and quality, in part thanks to the addition of the

29 The collection was already accessible since 1837 under the names Verzameling Von Siebold and Japansch Museum, but was only officially merged with the Royal Cabinet of Curiosities in 1883. The present museum maintains 1859 as its official founding date (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 4-5). 30 The museum obtained the Dutch contribution to the International Colonial Exhibition held in Amsterdam in 1883 (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 19-20).

18 Representing Cultural Diversity African collection that was moved out of the Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam when it became the Indisch Instituut (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 34-5, Van Brakel and Legêne 9). Furthermore Leiden holds the largest collections of objects from China, Korea, Japan and the Americas in the Netherlands (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 51-80).

The photographic collection contains 13.000 photographs taken all over the world by Western photographers for ethnographic purposes (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 82), including unique collections from Iran, China, Japan, and West Asia (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 89).

Wereldmuseum Rotterdam, Rotterdam (Zuid-Holland)

The Wereldmuseum (Worldmuseum) is located in the building of the former Prince Hendrik’s Royal Yacht Club (Bremer 17). The exhibition space on the second floor was purpose-built to show the combined collections of scientists and tradesmen who were members the Club, and later contributions by shipping companies and missionaries. When the Prince died in 1879 the Club was disbanded, but the Museum remained and was officially opened in 1885 as the Museum voor Land- en Volkenkunde (Museum for Geography and Ethnology). The objective of its first director was to acquaint young tradesmen with the lives of ‘exotic peoples’ so they would be more inclined to see for themselves and be equipped to locate produce effectively (Bremer 23). The collections that were added in the 19th century consisted of ethnographic objects from the vicinity of Dutch trade routes to Asia and objects pertaining to maritime professions, showed in a separate museum on the first floor. In the course of 20th the museum abandoned its maritime collection and became representative of cultures around the world (Wereldmuseum, “Meerjarenbeleidsplan” 1). The museum sent its own ethnographic expeditions to North Africa and Asia (Bremer 29). Between the 1970s and 80s the museum actively addressed the ‘homelands’ of the immigrant population and collected many objects of daily use from countries including Morocco and Turkey (Bremer 31). The building underwent a number of rigorous refurbishments and expansions and was re-named Wereldmuseum in 2000. When it re-opened last, in 2009, it had restored its attentions towards the Rotterdam elite and proclaimed its Asian sub collection to be its most significant. With the 200.000 objects it is the third largest ethnographic collection in the Netherlands, though half of these are photographs (Wereldmuseum, “Meerjarenbeleidsplan” 1).

Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam (Noord-Holland)

The collection of the Koloniaal Museum in Haarlem (1871) got its character from its founder F.W. Van Eeden. Besides being a botanist Van Eeden was Secretary of Trade and had a particular interest in Indonesia. The collection was initially made up of raw materials and natural products and featured ethnographic objects to exemplify ‘local techniques’, mostly from the colonies, and Indonesia in

19 Representing Cultural Diversity particular (Van Brakel and Legêne 7). At the turn of the century the museum became a general ethnographic museum through additions by government officials, tradesmen and trade societies, but especially through the acquisition of the Artis collection in 1921 (over 11.000 objects, Van Duren 23, Wijs). The museum outgrew its location and moved into the new Koloniaal Instituut (Colonial Institute) in Amsterdam, which had an Ethnographical Department (Tropenmuseum, “Bezoekersgids” 11, Van Brakel and Legêne 7). In 1950 the Institute was renamed once more as Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen (Royal Tropical Institute). The museum became the Tropenmuseum and began an active collection policy in regions that were underrepresented in the collection, including countries in Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America (Van Brakel and Legêne 9). The ‘East-Asia’, ‘Latin American’ and ‘Sub-Saharan Africa’ collections date from after the 1950s, and were extended as part of the focus on ‘development countries’ (ontwikkelingslanden) during the final quart of the 20th century (Van Brakel and Legêne 9, 11, 16-9). Still, the collection dates predominantly from the colonial period (Van Brakel and Legêne 12). At present the collection contains 485.000 items, of which 170.000 are objects, and the remainder photographs.

The Tropenmuseum’s exceptionally large photographic collection is almost entirely concerned with the Dutch East Indies (see Figure 1), which make up 75%, followed by 10% from Surinam and 5% from the Netherlands Antilles (Aruba). The remaining 10% are fragmented collections from areas along Dutch travel routes (Van Brakel and Legêne 19).

Museon, Den Haag (Zuid-Holland)

The Museon opened in 1904 as a Museum ten bate van het Onderwijs (Museum for Education). Out of the six case studies it is the most broadly oriented museum, with a scientific, natural and ethnographic collection. The total collection is organized according to themes, with no specific department for ethnography. Just as the rest of the collection, the ethnographic objects were used as an educative tool. Its ethnographic collection was purposely purchased by staff on excursions and expanded with loans and bequests. Overall the collection has always had a worldly orientation with no specific regional acquisition policy, though it includes many objects from Indonesia. The prominent collections were acquired on opportunity. One of these is the Inuit collection of Dutch arctic explorer Willem Barentsz (1550?-1597). The Inuit collection is considered significant and one of the few cultural areas which the museum intends to complement (Van Harskamp, Museon, web.).

Afrika Museum, Berg en Dal (Gelderland)

The Africa Museum was founded in 1954 by missionaries (‘Spiritans’) of the Holy Spirit and the Immaculate Heart of Mary to inform their congregation about the ‘living experience’ (belevingswereld) of people from the area the Mission was active in (Grootaers and Eisenburger 10-

20 Representing Cultural Diversity 11, Afrika Museum, web.). The mission began expeditions to Africa in 1843, starting in the region that is now Senegal (Grootaers and Eisenburger 378). Missions were in the habit of organizing travelling exhibitions of objects that were collected by the missionaries (Afrika Museum, web.). In response to much interest the mission opened a permanent exhibition in 1954 in one of their out-houses in Berg and Dal. Father Jan van Croonenburg became director in 1955 and implemented an aesthetic perspective (Grootaers and Eisenburger 13). In 1958 the museum moved into a custom location with an ‘African village’ that was exhibited at the World Fair in Brussels of that year. Since 1985 the museum has been expanded with three more such villages and has proliferated itself as an outdoor museum (1987) where visitors can experience African life (Grootaers and Eisenburger 46-7, 12). The most important collections pertain to the Fon, Aja, and Yoruba cultures in the Benin and Nigeria region (Grootaers and Eisenburger 12, 203). The museum moved away somewhat from the artistic perspective towards the incorporation of their collection in a narrative about development (Grootaers and Eisenburger 12, 51). Nevertheless, the museum still places much emphasis on the aesthetic aspects of their collection and in 1968 began collecting modern and contemporary African art by African artists living in the Netherlands and other Western countries (Grootaers and Eisenburger 20-21), which was presented as such in the indoor facility while the more ethnographic approach was maintained outside. Today it is no longer a missionary museum, but an ethnographic museum with a regional focus that engages in collecting, research and education. Not including simulacra in the outdoor museum, the ethnographic collection contains 8000 objects.

Universiteitsmuseum Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen (Groningen)

The collection that is currently in the Universiteitsmuseum, Groningen was brought together in the 1960s out of four pre-existing ethnographic collections. The founding collection was that of Theodoor Pieter van Baaren (1912-1989), a professor of theology, poet, artist and also collector of ‘primitive art’. He bequeathed his collection of ‘primitive art’ to the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen under the condition that it would be exhibited. In effect it was a collection of intricately crafted ethnographic objects from Oceania, especially New Guinea (Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge 1). In the first decade the collection was expanded with a long-term loan of 600 objects from the Dutch Indies from the Princessenhof in Leeuwarden and with the collection of the Tropisch Landbouwmuseum Deventer. The latter consisted of 3000 objects of use from the former Dutch colonies. The majority of objects from the Colonies is from New Guinea. The collection reached beyond the colonies when the private collection of E.F. ten Houten, formed of objects from Borneo (Dayak) and West and Central Africa were given on long term loan (Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge 1). Together they formed the set on which the ethnographic museum was founded, and opened in 1978 as Museum

21 Representing Cultural Diversity Gerardus van der Leeuw31 under supervision of an anthropologist. The collection continued through a policy of accumulation and grew to include the Australia, South and Southeast Asia, the Southern Oceans, West, Central and South-Africa, North, Mid and South America, so that its collection came to cover the whole world outside Europe in a general sense (Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge 3).

The museum struggled financially and the local government could not see much use in the museum’s mission of ‘ethnographic education’. The museum had to close in 2003, but the collection of some 8000 objects was kept in the National University of Groningen. Since then the collection has been exhibited sporadically in the Groninger Universiteitsmuseum (Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge 1).

Conclusions

The six remaining ethnographic museums in the Netherlands are characterized by a wide scope that purports to acquaint the visitor or user of the collection with the entire world or an entire continent. The shared history of the ethnographic collections has been of the essence to the quantity and quality of certain themes, regions, cultures and types of object. Taking inventory of the collections in the six museums under discussion reveals the bias towards Southeast Asia, the cultural region of the Netherlands’ prized colony and the waters of its tradesmen (Kistemaker et al.). In the second halves of the 20th century Museums wanted to disassociate themselves from their colonial, trade and missionary motives. They redefined themselves as ‘world museums’ and made efforts to widen the scope of their collection.32 Later collection trends such as the quick and cheap accumulation of contemporary objects of use and photographs never matched the scale of the founding collections.

The historical developments of ethnographic collecting also resulted in a number of other overzealous interests. A preoccupation with ‘strange’ and ‘primitive’ cultures caused early collectors to overlook the urban cultures and those that were more similar to European ‘civilization’. Next to European ethnographers (volkskundigen), the colonial collectors were also inclined towards rural areas. Their interest in objects and modes of production led them to the countryside. This interest in what is considered ‘low culture’ runs parallel with a general tendency towards ‘high culture’ and ‘quality’. There has always been a bias for the finer examples of objects, the more aesthetic and significant, which could add to the status of the collection and the collector (Smith “Uses of Heritage”). Subsequently these ethnographic collections do not represent the norm of a culture or people, but the norm in Dutch ethnographic museums.

31 Gerardus van der Leeuw was a theologist under whom Van Baaren studied. 32 The Afrika Museum encompasses the entire African continent.

22 Representing Cultural Diversity In addition to these historical trends, the arbitrary nature of some of the collections is due to the whim of collectors. Similarly, museum acquisition policies have coincided with the interests and specializations of its ethnographers. People started their collections accidentally and incidentally (Belk 318-20), often with an object from a certain region that they were in some way affiliated with (Van Brakel, int). The motives for collecting were varied, including hording, souveneering, scientific interest, curiosity and status (Effert 16). The collections that resulted from this individual behaviour and the historical context formed the founding collections for the ethnographic museums.

Previous typologies for ethnographic museums were based on the origin of the museums, such as ‘scientific’, ‘colonial’ and ‘missionary’ (Effert 9), but none of these can be used exclusively. Amid globalisation, the museums converted into ‘world museums’. In reality, the collections can only fulfil this profile in general terms. Furthermore, a certain region is completely overlooked. The collections of the ‘world museums’ are only concerned with non-Western cultures, while the ‘national museums’ such as the Openluchtmuseum, are only concerned with the Netherlands. The local-global division in the field that is also implied in the distinction between European ethnography (volkskunde) and ethnography (volkenkunde) neglects neighbouring cultures. Neither type of museum is interested in European collections and ethnography, and non-native cultures of North America are disregarded as well.33

How, then, do these non-Western collections compare with the non-Western immigrants in the Netherlands? And how did the composition of the Dutch immigrant population develop?

33 For example, Museum Volkenkunde expanded its collection with modern Native American culture, but not with ‘Western culture’ (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 295).

23 Representing Cultural Diversity

Chapter 2:

The History and Composition of the Immigrant Population in the Netherlands

Ethnographic collecting preceded substantial immigration and was for a long time the only means by which the general Dutch population was acquainted with other cultures. In the course of the 19th century contact with travellers and immigrants from outside Europe became increasingly frequent. In the twentieth century immigration increased exponentially and immigrant cultures began to form large, visible contingents in Dutch society. Currently the Netherlands is an immigration country, with more people moving in than away (Zorlu and Hartog 2), but migration has come in waves from different areas.

In the Dutch Golden Age between the 16th and 17th century the Netherlands’ supposedly tolerant climate attracted political, social, religious and economic refugees from warzones and neighbouring regions with less tolerant regimes. At the time more people were immigrating to the Netherlands then there were emigrating (Zorlu and Hartog 2-3). When the Dutch Golden Age was over its height cultural and economic development of the country stagnated and so did immigration. From the mid 18th century immigration started to decline sharply and the existing immigrant population dissolved into society (Zorlu and Hartog 3). Immigration surpluses re-occurred for less fortunate reasons. During the First World War thousands of Belgian refugees flocked across the border, and before and during the Second World War opponents and people persecuted by the Nazi regime fled from Germany (Zorlu and Hartog 3). After a post-war period of emigration the Netherlands had 10 million inhabitants (Zorlu and Hartog 20).

In the second half of the twentieth century immigration flows fluctuated (Zorlu and Hartog 4) due to de-colonisation and economic and political unrest in specific areas of the world. Mobility had greatly increased and immigrants were arriving in large numbers from the peripheries of Europe and beyond, also from the far corners that had been explored in the Golden Age, along the trade routes and from the colonies. In order to examine parallels with the composition of ethnographic collections this chapter describes the history of their arrival and integration. The immigrants that settled in the Netherlands during the second half of the twentieth century and make up the current immigrant population are commonly described in three categories: from the former colonies, guest workers, and

24 Representing Cultural Diversity refugees. Each of the categories will be discussed in terms of history, composition and integration. Then, the composition of the immigrant population will be given according to the country of birth of the first generation and the country of birth of one or both of the parents of the second generation.

Post-colonial immigrants

The header of this section is ‘post-colonial immigrants’ rather than ‘immigrants from the colonies’, so as to include the Netherlands Antilles, the only former colony that has remained part of Dutch Kingdom.34 In his book ‘Postcolonial Netherlands: Sixty-five years of forgetting, commemorating, silencing’35 on post-colonial immigrants in the Netherlands, Gert Oostindie defines immigrants as ‘post-colonial’ in reference to the origin of the political, cultural and economic ties that resulted from colonisation by the Netherlands and led to immigration before, during and after decolonisation as well as from countries that remained part of the Kingdom (Oostindie 23-4). Henceforth, ‘post-colonial’ will be used to denote relations and practices that find their cause in historical Dutch colonialism.36

De-colonisation caused two large waves of migration from the former colonies: one from Indonesia around 1949 and another around 1975, from Surinam (Zorlu and Hartog 4). A third less abrupt wave came from the territories that remained part of the Dutch Kingdom (Oostindie 23). The ‘loss’ of other colonies before the twentieth century, such as the Cape, parts of Brazil, the New Netherlands and Formosa did not cause such immigration waves, since mobility across the Oceans was still limited (see Figure 1.1).

The largest segment of the post-colonial immigrants, and the first to arrive, were Indonesian. When Japan took control of the colony during the Second World War they overthrew and incarcerated the colonisers. In the following years Sukarno awakened a strong national sentiment for independence in the native Indonesians. Indonesia became independent under Sukarno in 1949. The events were loaded with resentment towards the colonisers and associates (Oostindie 26-7). The hostile situation led anyone who was classified as European to repatriate, out of disempowerment rather than willingness (Oostindie 26-8). From 1945 and in the decade after independence many people immigrated to the Netherlands. They were Dutch nationals and Indonesians of numerous ethnic minority groups that had

34 Except for Aruba. 35 Original title: ‘Postkoloniaal Nederland. Vijfenzestig jaar vergeten, herdenken, verdringen’ is Oostindie’s publication on a 4 year research program under his supervision collaboration with the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW), The International Institute of Social History (ISSH), The Meertens Institute (MI) and the Royal Netherlands Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies (KITLV). 36 In this context, the term ‘post-colonial’ is not meant to indicate Western relations of subjugation in general, as is often done.

25 Representing Cultural Diversity been involved with the colonisers. Among them were many children of Dutch or mixed parents who had been born in Indonesia (Zorlu and Hartog 4).

Moluccans of a subpopulation that inhabited a central constellation of islands in Indonesia moved at a later stage. Almost all of the Moluccan immigrants were people who served in the Koninklijk Nederlands Indonesisch Leger (KNIL, Royal Dutch East-Indian Army) and their families. They had supported the coloniser and later the efforts for an independent Moluccan country (Republik Maluku Selatan, RMS) (Oostindie 28). The Dutch government backed out of the conception of the RMS when it backed out of Indonesia and demobilized the KNIL in 1951. Associated with the coloniser and without their own state soldiers of the KNIL were forced to leave their country. They came to the Netherlands in the hopes of returning (Oostindie 28, Zorlu and Hartog 4). Another sub-population that immigrated to the Netherlands from Indonesia after independence were Chinese who had immigrated to in Indonesia in the late nineteenth century (De Jong, int.).37

For a while the Dutch Government maintained hopes of re-establishing authority in Indonesia, but in 1960s gave up on its colonial policy. Thus Surinam gained independence in 1975. Part of the reason had been to halt immigration (Oostindie 33-4), but a large immigration wave from Surinam occurred immediately after (Zorlu and Hartog 5). Eventually the size of the Surinamese immigrant population in the Netherlands equalled a third of the Surinamese population and a representative section of its demographics (Oostindie 33).

Immigration from the Netherlands Antilles started up last. The ethnic composition of the Islands is varied, yet mostly descendant from Africans who were brought over by the Dutch slave trade (Oostindie 38). Even more extensive than with Surinam, the size of the Antillean population in the Netherlands was half as big as the population that remained on the Netherlands Antilles. With exception of Aruba (independent since 1986) the Netherlands Antilles are still part of the Dutch Kingdom and thus entitled to live in the Netherlands (Oostindie 36-7).

Immigrants from the former colonies were often already acquainted with the Dutch language and culture (Zorlu and Hartog 11), though to different effect. The perenakan enjoyed the same education as the Dutch and integrated exceptionally successfully (Oostindie 28-9). Despite familiarity with their (former) colonisers, the Surinamese and Antilleans profited little more in terms of education than immigrants who were less accustomed to the culture (Zorlu and Hartog 22). Surinamese integration was partially successful in terms of employment and education, but varied according to the standing of different ethnic groups in Surinam (Oostindie 35-6). Integration of immigrants from the Netherlands

37 This group consisted of Indonesian-Chinese who maintained Chinese customs, and perenakan who adopted Malaysian customs to bridge the difference between Chinese and Indonesian culture. Another group of Chinese immigrants, hakkas, arrived through Surinam.

26 Representing Cultural Diversity Antilles has been ‘least successful’ and increasingly problematic (Oostindie 38, Zorlu and Hartog 13). The Moluccan integration used to be problematic and resulted in confrontation and terrorism (Zorlu and Hartog 22). As they intended to return to Indonesia or the RMS, which was never conceived, they initially did not to integrate in Dutch society (Zorlu and Hartog 4). At present the post-colonial immigrant population (first and second generation) is 867.379 people strong. Including Indonesia, they account for almost half the non-Western immigrant population (Tables 2.1-2.2).

Guest workers

In the post-war boom of the 1960s there was a need for unskilled ‘guest workers’ (gastarbeiders). The Dutch government set up international treaties that facilitated migration of labourers, mostly from countries around the Mediterranean, to accommodate the demands of employers. The guest workers were recruited or came on their own account. The employers and government had intended them to leave after their employment, but only 30% returned (Zorlu and Hartog 9). The arrival of people from Italy, Spain, Portugal, Turkey, Morocco, Yugoslavia and Tunisia boosted immigration, which has outnumbered migration since. When unemployment rates became high in the 1970s because of the first oil crisis, return rates actually decreased (Zorlu and Hartog 5). The facilitating policies were halted, but inflow continued, especially from Turkey and Morocco (Zorlu and Hartog 21). In the 1970s the guest workers were joined by their families and in the 1980s and 1990s new families were formed with new immigrants from the guest worker’s countries of origin (Zorlu and Hartog 5). When a second oil crisis occurred in the early 1980s the economic position of Moroccan and Turkish immigrant populations were most affected (Zorlu and Hartog 12-3). For the guest workers from Turkey and Morocco the level of schooling is lowest and shortest. They are also at the bottom of the labour market, largely because of discrimination (Zorlu and Hartog 12, 13). Guest workers from South European Mediterranean countries have integrated better, at least in terms of the labour market position (Zorlu and Hartog 12). There were fewer immigrants from other Mediterranean countries after the first oil crisis, but Moroccan and Turkish immigration continued due to family reunion and formation. Immigration also continued to increase due to a new, third immigrant category of refugees (Zorlu and Hartog 5). At the moment, the size of the combined Turkish and Moroccan immigrant population is 771.410. The Turkish immigrant population is slightly bigger (Table 2.2).

Refugees

In the 1980s there was a sharp increase of asylum requests with people fleeing violence and oppression in Turkey, Sri Lanka, Surinam, Poland, Ghana and Somalia. In the 1990s refugees came from Bosnia-Herzegovina, Iran, Irak, Sri Lanka, Yugoslavia and Somalia (Zorlu and Hartog 8). At present substantial numbers of refugees are coming from over thirty countries, many of them in

27 Representing Cultural Diversity Africa. The largest percentages of asylum requests are from Syria, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Serbia, Pakistan, Albania, Russia, Nigeria, Somalia, and Mali (VluchtelingenWerk Nederland, “Vluchtelingen”). Over this period the amount of rejected request has increased. Simultaneously immigration policies become ever tighter, especially for immigrants from non-European countries, while mobility in Europe has increased (Zorlu and Hartog 10-11). Despite entry into Europe becoming so difficult as to inspire extreme measures leading to horrible tragedies the population of undocumented people and illegal workers has grown (Zorlu and Hartog 11). In contrast with the guest workers the refugees that made it to the Netherlands have relatively high social and economic capital and a higher level of education. Their ‘human capital’ increases their chances for economic and social integration (Zorlu and Hartog 22).38 The Dutch Central Social Planning Agency (SCP) estimates there are 200.000-250.000 refugees in the Netherlands. Same as for the other categories, this estimate is based on the total number of immigrants from certain countries, including the second generation. The refugee category includes countries that many refugees come from, and effectively accounts for all other non-Western countries that are not included in the post-colonial and guest-work categories (VluchtelingenWerk Nederland, “Vluchtelingen” 3).

Meanwhile a new group of unskilled labourers immigrates to the Netherlands from Rumania and Poland, legally yet undocumented as they pass through the open borders of Europe. This last group fits the category of guest workers, but their history is too short for comparison and their status as immigrants cannot be confirmed. Consequently they will be left out of consideration.

Current composition of the immigrant population in the Netherlands

Table 2.1 and 2.2 are summaries of statistics by the CBS, showing the number of immigrants according to their country of birth or that of their parent(s). The number of refugees is given for the ten biggest groups. The most recent statistics date from 2014 and are the point of reference for further discussion of the ‘current composition’ in Chapter 3 and 4.

Table 2.1 shows that in 2014 there were 3.594.744 million immigrants, making up more than 20% of the Dutch population. Including Indonesians and Japanese 11,75% of the total population is from non- Western countries. Indonesians, Antilleans (including Aruba), Surinamese, Moroccans and Turkish are the largest immigrant groups in the Netherlands (Table 2.2), which has been the situation for the past ten years (Zorlu and Hartog 6). Indonesians remain the largest group, but immigrants from both Turkey and Morocco have now outnumbered immigrants from Surinam (Table 2.2). The post-colonial

38 A search for reliable statistics on the socio-economic integration of refugee populations in the Netherlands, especially from the African countries, was unsuccessful. In contrast an abundance of research investigates the first two categories, indicating that the attention of researchers and political discussion.

28 Representing Cultural Diversity immigrant population is still a third larger than that of guest workers (Table 2.1). Taken together, refugees have become a substantive incoming immigrant category (Zorlu and Hartog 6-7), but in the present, hesitant climate towards refugees it seems unlikely that they will outgrow the other categories. The size of the refugee populations per country averages around 10% of the size of the other non- Western immigrant populations (Table 2.2).

This way of representing the composition of the immigrant population has a few drawbacks. The statistical categories of the CBS work according to countries of birth, even though these cannot be equated with ethnic groups or cultures. For one, Chinese immigrants from Indonesia and Moluccan populations are considered Indonesian. By using statistics on immigration the numbers are no longer representative of the earliest group of post-colonial immigrants, from Indonesia and Surinam, as their third and fourth generations in the Netherlands are not classified as immigrants, though some estimates have been included. To obscure matters further the complicated nature of asylum, illegality and the difference between refugee numbers and those granted asylum makes it difficult to monitor exact numbers of refugees. With increased mobility within Europe, European immigrants no longer need to register and have become invisible to statistics as well. Furthermore, Indonesians are counted among Western immigrants, which sets them apart from other post-colonial immigrants. The inseparability of the category ‘Western immigrants’ left two options. The first, to generalize this category that also includes Indonesia, Japan, the United States and Canada.39 Second, to disregard this category completely and use estimates on the size of segments in the post-colonial immigrant population, which appears the best option. Since most of the Western countries contained in this category are absent from the ethnographic collections, ‘Western Immigrants’ will be left out of consideration, while Indonesian and Japanese immigration statistics were added.

39 The CBS website states that the Japanese and Indonesians are included because they are of similar ‘social- cultural standing’ (CBS, “Begrippen”).

29 Representing Cultural Diversity

Table 2.1: Total Total Percentage immigrant population in the Netherlands, 2014*

Total population 16.829.289 100%

Total immigrant population 3.594.744 21,36%

Total non-western 1.597.160 9,49%

Total non-western 1.976.727 11,75% including Indonesia and Japan Total western 1.997.584 11,87%

Table 2.2: Composition of the non-Western immigrant population in the Netherlands, 2014*

Immigrant Countries of birth Total 1st + 2nd 1st generation 2nd generation category generation

Post-colonial, Indonesia** 372 233 109 788 262 445 including Indonesia Surinam 348.291 180.863 167.428 Netherlands 146.855 82.148 64.707 Antilles (including Aruba)

Guest workers Morocco 374.996 168.320 206.676

Turkey 396.414 194.759 201.655

Refugees, ten Afghanistan 43.183 33.085 10.098 largest groups China 64.097 44.915 19.182 Colombia 14.759 8.724 6.035 Egypt 22.205 12.481 9.724 Ethiopia 12.596 8.013 4.583 Irak 54.159 40.408 13.751 Iran 35.561 28.513 8.048 Somalia 37.432 26.502 10.930 Syria 13.744 9465 4279 Vietnam 20.603 12.415 8.188

*CBS Statline “Herkomstgroeperingen” 2014 **CBS counts Indonesian immigrants among Western immigrants

30 Representing Cultural Diversity Integration into Dutch society

Attitudes towards immigrants in politics and society, migration flows and migration policies have continuously influenced each other. At the end of the Second World War the country was crowded with refugees but without economic disposition. There was an emphasis on facilitating emigration rather than integration. For a while the Government sustained that it could re-establish authority in the East-Indies and reverse immigration from that region. Nevertheless post-colonial immigration continued based on citizen rights and a sense of duty to receive people of the (former) colonies (Oostindie 29-30). At the time of the first post-colonial immigration and repatriation wave only basic integration policies had been in place. The imagined objective was assimilation (Oostindie 40).

Dutch society was ‘pillarized’ (verzuild): different religious segments in society organized their own education, media and other aspects of life. The immigrant population was expected to fall into the ‘pillars of society’ and were allowed opportunity to form their own pillar around the Muslim religion (Oostindie 40-43). The policy was facilitation of a parallel, if isolated, lifestyles. The prevailing idea was that ties with the homeland would not be severed, easing the intended return of some immigrant populations (Zorlu and Hartog 10, 20). The integration of guest workers was initially not pursued either because of the assumption of their temporality.

In the 1970s the Dutch Government lost sight of its goals of assimilation into pillarized society, and conceptualized the ‘multi-cultural society’ in which many fragmented cultures would ‘live and let live’ (Oostindie 40-3). However, mere ‘tolerance’ of other cultures and benefits from the welfare state did not integrate the immigrant population sufficiently: they were falling behind in education and the labour market (Oostindie 30, Zorlu and Hartog). In 1983 the discourse about integration acknowledged the existence of ‘ethnic minorities’, different from the native Dutch (autochtone) population (Zorlu and Hartog 21, Oostindie 42).

In the nineties the realization had dawned that immigrants were permanent and socio-economic integration policies were deemed a failure (Zorlu and Hartog 10). Right wing politicians were starting to cast the immigration population as a threat, which was confirmed by incidents such as train hijackings by Moluccans and the murder of an outspoken filmmaker, Theo van Gogh.40 In 2000 the essay ‘Het Multiculturele Drama’ (‘The Multicultural Disaster’) of Paul Scheffer was the catalyst of a widespread discussion. Soon after the multi-cultural concept was officially abandoned by politicians

40 On two occasions, in 1975 and 1977, a group of Moluccans hijacked a train as a culmination of their frustrations about the Dutch Government’s disinterest in the independent state RMS, which was apparent from integration policies, and demanded recognition (Oostindie 174).

31 Representing Cultural Diversity (Oostindie 41-3).41 Society is now conceived as ‘pluralist’ in a negative sense: culturally diverse, but not necessarily compatible.

By the turn of the century political attention for immigrants had shifted to guest workers and by now it seems to pass by post-colonial immigrants entirely. Oostindie argues this might indicate that policy makers assume post-colonial immigrants have successfully integrated (Oostindie 42-3), even though socio-econmic statistics say otherwise (Zorlu and Hartog). At present right-wing politician and second generation Indonesian immigrant Geert Wilders is directing discontent with the pluralist society at guest workers, explicitly demanding ‘less Moroccans’. Discourse about the immigrant population has evolved from tolerance to disinterest and currently has extremities in aversion.

For successful integration society will need more than a return to ‘tolerance’, which in effect is synonymous with ‘ignorance’, leading to prejudice (Sniderman and Hagendoorn). Immigration continues and cannot be reversed, therefore cultural diversity needs to be seen as a positive factor that can contribute to society. Ethnographic museums already provide insight into the richness of other cultures, but do they have the capacity to overcome disinterest and familiarize a country with the cultural backgrounds it contains?

41 Published in NRC Handelsblad 29 Jan. 2000.

32 Representing Cultural Diversity

Chapter 3:

Diversity Policy in Ethnographic Museums

This chapter asks if and how ethnographic museums represent the immigrant population through their ethnographic collection. The first part reviews the descriptions given in the first two chapters to see whether the collections can represent the immigrant populations in the Netherlands in the light of historical relations. The second part is an investigation into political and museum discourse on the subject and into the museum’s awareness of their history and present situation in a pluralist society. The third part gives an overview of how the museums have presented collections pertaining to immigrant populations in their programming.

Categories of comparison

The introduction asked whether parallels exist between ethnographic collections in Dutch ethnographic museums and the current composition of the country’s immigrant population. It is important to question how the two can be compared and how their representation can be measured. The research relied on secondary sources and, as a consequence, was limited by the categories they use to describe things. The political and statistical discourse on the immigrant population limits itself to the nations in which immigrants or their parents were born. As it turns out, the museums predominantly use a similar, geographical approach to their ethnographic collections.

All of the museums use the same, or closely related categories of the SVCN – the digital database of the Stichting Volkenkundige Collectie Nederland (Foundation Ethnographic Collection Netherlands).42 The SVCN works with four overlapping indexes pertaining to region, culture, object-type and function. The region and culture indexes split into a root structure. The former distinguishes continents, the latter splits into religious or cultural region, then into cultures and with the extension of

42 The SVCN aims to disclose ethnographic collections in the Netherlands to the public through a digital database. The Tropenmuseum, Museum Volkenkunde, Universiteitsmuseum Groningen, Museon, Afrika Museum and former museum Nusantara have made their digital catalogue available through the SVCN website (SVCN, web.). Wereldmuseum is not part of SVCN, but does use the same system of categorisation (Wereldmuseum, web.).

33 Representing Cultural Diversity historical periods (SVCN, web.). The departmental structure of the museums adheres to the geographical categories and splits into sub collections according to nations and then cultures. In the past decade most of the museums have also started to identify cross collections based on object function, religion, historical period or other themes. The Afrika Museum is different in that it divides its main sub collections according to cultural regions and cultures. The Museon uses themes. Except these two museums, collection profiles and the departmental structure of the museums address the composition of their ethnographic collection in terms of geographical categories and, as such, could be equated with the immigrant population. The comparison will be based on the premises of nations and cultures. ‘Representation’ stands for the presence of one or more objects from the available population categories, but its variations will be discussed in terms of quantity and significance.43

A historical relation

If one cross-references the nations of the immigrant populations in Table 2.2 with the public databases of the ethnographic collections44 it is possible to find a match for each nation on the basis of intersecting cultural regions (for example: Eurasia) and for many of its cultures (for example: Javanese, Persian). However, this thesis only intends to cover the most important parallels in their presence and absence.

Overall colonialism has been the most important forebode of the ethnographic collections and immigrant populations in the Netherlands. The largest segment in the immigrant population coincides with the largest and most significant collections in the ethnographic museums: from the former Dutch colony Indonesia. Both the Tropenmuseum and Museum Volkenkunde in Leiden have large Indonesian collections of global significance. The joint Indonesian collections in the Netherlands overshadow any collection in Indonesia itself. Immigrants from Surinam are the second largest

43 ‘Significance’ has recently become very popular under the label ‘quality’ (Stuurgroep Code Culturele Diversiteit 8). The generally excepted definition of ‘significance’ was formulated by the Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed (Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science. National service for Cultural Heritage.) of the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. Following an international trend they issued ‘Op de Museale Weegschaal’ (On the Museum Scales) to help museums and policy makers prioritise certain collections, sub collections and objects based on their waarde (meaning ‘value’, but synonymous to ‘significance’) (6). The document helps museum professionals establish the significance of heritage based on an assessment of the physical condition, the ensemble (with other objects or parts of collection), the provenance, and its rarity and exemplariness (11-31). 44 The databases are incomplete and would probably yield more object matches upon completion because most attention was given to the digitalisation of the 19th century collections. SVCN, web., Collectie Gelderland, web., Wereldmuseum, web..

34 Representing Cultural Diversity segment of post-colonial immigrants and were also preceded by large ethnographic collections accumulated in colonial times. The most significant collection from Surinam in the Netherlands and on an international scale as well, is in the Volkenkundig Museum in Leiden.

Chapter 1 showed how the early collections like those originating in Haarlem and Artis were engrossed with the colonies, trade posts and missions. Taking inventory of the ethnographic collections now, it becomes clear that the post-war re-orientation of museums as ‘world museums’ rather than ‘colonial’ or ‘trade museums’ has had a relatively small effect on this bias in terms of quantity and quality. Despite emphasis on the quality of other collections, the colonial collections still exceed other collections in terms of significance. In their new departments the colonial collections have simply come to represent entire continents. The majority of objects in the ‘Southeast Asia’ collection in the Tropenmuseum are still from Indonesia, stemming from the time in Haarlem. It is only partially composed from other regions as the result of incidental field trips, like the Thailand sub collection (Van Brakel and Legêne 14). The other museums with collections founded in the 19th century have a similar complexion.45 The ‘Oceania’ departments of the Tropenmuseum, Universiteitsmuseum Groningen and the Wereldmuseum consist predominantly of objects from New Guinea (Van Brakel and Legêne 15, Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge 1, Wereldmuseum, web.). The ‘Latin America and the Caribean’ sub collections are characterized by Surinam (Van Brakel and Legêne 17), or in the case of Museum Volkenkunde, by an important collection from Brazil, which was a Dutch colony between 1630 and 1654 (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 51). The colonies are also the dominant theme in the large photographic collections. In proportion, another segment of post-colonial immigrants is relatively underrepresented: little is kept of The Netherlands Antilles and Aruba (Van Brakel and Legêne 17, SVCN, web.).

The two other immigrant categories have a much shorter shared history. Immigration from Turkey and Morocco started up when the bilateral agreements about guest workers were made in the 1960s. Refugees became a substantial category in the 1980s. Collecting from their countries of origin was less extensive. It seems that the Netherlands showed less interest in the cultures because they were not invested in the countries; the migration was one-sided. By then collecting had also toned down in scale thanks to the protection of heritage, the increase in prices in response to the market and less private and government funds (Bedeaux). On the contrary, the link with Turkey dates further back. Since the 16th century the Netherlands had bilateral agreements with the Ottoman Empire that resulted in a trade relation and active and passive support in a number of conflicts. One of the older collections stems from The Royal Cabinet of Curiosities and is now in Museum Volkenkunde, where Turkey is the

45 The Africa Museum stands apart because of its history as a missionary museum and has held on to its original categories based on cultures rather than geographical regions. The Museon that was founded in the 20th century was only affected by history indirectly through bequests of older collections.

35 Representing Cultural Diversity largest component of the Southwest and Central Asia sub collection (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 26-8). In addition both the Tropenmuseum and Wereldmuseum collected twentieth century objects from Turkey and Morocco (Bremer 25,29, Van Brakel and Legêne 17-8). Previous expeditions to Morocco had been incidental and individual, as there had been neither former trade posts, nor missions there.

Nevertheless, happenstance and historical relations did not accommodate for all the cultures in society, especially as it becomes increasingly plural. Relatively little can be found from East-Africa and the inland, the region of Somalian refugees who form the largest African segment in the immigrant population. The collections of the Afrika Museum are focussed on three areas around missions near former trade posts in Nigeria and Benin but relatively few people have immigrated from there to the Netherlands (Grootaers and Eisenburger 12, 203) (see Figure 1.1 and Table 2.2). The largest and most significant African collection in the Netherlands is not in the Afrika Museum but in the Museum Volkenkunde where it is only of secondary importance (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 24). After passing its African collection to the Museum Volkenkunde, the Tropenmuseum acquired a fragmented, unsystematic collection from ‘Sub-Saharan Africa’ that contains objects from Mali, Nigeria, Ghana, Cameroon Congo and Ethiopia (Van Brakel and Legêne 18-9).

The museum staff expeditions of the 1960s and 70s did broaden the collections. In the following decades the composition of society did as well. The refugee population had a more varied cultural background than what the Netherlands had ever seen (see Table 2.2). Some of the regions of recent immigrants have been reached through thematic interests that led to broadly orientated and consequently inclusive sub collections. Collecting interests according to object-type and function led to the inclusion of contemporary instruments from Turkey, Iran, and North Africa in the Ethnomusicological cross-collection of the Tropenmuseum (Van Brakel and Legêne 20-1). More prominently, the theme of religion has caused an interest in otherwise underrepresented regions that coincide with the guest work and refugee immigrant population. The Tropenmuseum has an important collection pertaining to Islamic cultures from the ‘Middle East and North Africa’ (Van Brakel and Legêne 17) of similar standing as that in the Museum Volkenkunde, followed by the Wereldmuseum (Bremer) and a small collection on the topic in the Museon. The Wereldmuseum and Museum Volkenkunde also have marked specializations in Hindu and Buddhist cultures from the vicinity of trading posts along the Asian coastline (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 24). The ‘Southwest and Central Asia’ collections of these two museums that were mostly collected by diplomats are centred on Islam. In the Museum Volkenkunde this sub collection includes the Arabic peninsula, Turkey, Iran, Syria, and Afghanistan (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 26-9), corresponding with the nationalities of current refugees. This partially overlaps with ‘Middle East and North Africa’ collections of the Tropenmuseum that also extend to Morocco and Yemen, Iran (Van Brakel and Legêne 17).

36 Representing Cultural Diversity It would seem that each segment of the immigrant population is met with at least a small collection pertaining to their nation or religion. However, the use of categories in the heuristic field of ethnography is always problematic, and mostly misleading. In fact the ethnographic collections do not perfectly overlap with the cultures present in Dutch society. So far, this comparison of the immigrant population and ethnographic collections does not account for individual cultures and isolated religious communities. I will discuss marginal cultures in Indonesia and Turkey as examples. History and politics turned out to be important factors.

Turkish collections are scattered over a number of museums and under a number of different sub collections. Since 2012 there is a Turkish museum with an ethnographic collection in Den Haag. Speaking in terms of nations the Turkish immigrant population would appear to have a parallel collection, but in effect they comprise of cultures. A large part of the Turkish guest workers in the Netherlands are Kurds.46 The Kurdish population is spread out over a number of countries in the Middle East and are the biggest ethnic minority in Turkey. Another, smaller segment are Armenian Christian refugees that used to inhabit the East of Turkey.47 Their cultures have been marginalized, denied as cultures and even eradicated by the Turkish Government. Both sub populations are completely invisible in the new Turkish museum, which is funded by the Turkish Government (Hoekman).

On the other hand there are cultural subtleties that are reflected by the collections. The Chinese immigrant population in the Netherlands is historically and culturally diverse. They arrived in a succession of waves, each bringing Chinese with different cultural and historic backgrounds. In the early twentieth century seafarers docking in the Netherlands stayed and became a familiar sight in society, selling peanut-cookies. They married locally and in 1933 started opening Chinese restaurants. After the independence of Indonesia a second wave occurred as some three to four thousand perenakan Chinese moved to the Netherlands. In the past few decades two more groups have arrived: refugees, and students and professionals from China (Vluchtelingenwerk Nederland, “Vluchtelingen” 4). Objects from the cultures of the first wave of Chinese immigrants are in the Wereldmuseum and in other early collections that came on the same boats as the seafarers. The hybrid culture of the perenakan Chinese can be found in many Chinese collections since the Dutch middle class in Indonesia became acquainted with them. The largest Chinese collection is in the Museum Volkenkunde and covers pre-Mao Zedong cultures, corresponding with the historical period of the first immigrants (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 73). In addition the Wereldmuseum and

46 In 2006 approximately 70.000 Kurds lived in the Netherlands, the majority of whom was counted among the Turkish immigrant population (Raad van Europa: Report Committee on Culture, Science and Education). 47 In 2014 Vluchtelingenwerk Nederland counted 854 registered Armenians living in the Netherlands (VluchtelingenWerk Nederland “Armenie”).

37 Representing Cultural Diversity Tropenmuseum have interesting and important China collections (as does ceramic museum Princessenhof in Leeuwarden). The Wereldmuseum has proclaimed a focus on contemporary culture and art familiar to the Chinese student and professional population. In order to attune their collection the Wereldmuseum is collaborating with National Chinese museums and institutions and exhibits artists and cultures that have been approved by the Chinese Government, while on the other hand it has a significant collection of Tibetan Buddhist culture that is oppressed by the same Government.

So, do these ethnographic collections have enough width and depth to represent the country’s immigrant population? The answer is complex; some parallels in the collections are evident and resulted from a historical relation, but others have developed independently. Yet other regions and cultures are relatively underrepresented. In general, however, it can be concluded that the largest and most significant collections in the ethnographic museums were formed in the 19th century out of objects and private collections from the colonies, trade posts and missions. Because of the historical relation the post-colonial immigrant populations and their cultures are relatively overrepresented, both in quantity and in quality.

Historical relations with the guest workers and refugee populations have been incidental and so have ethnographic collections pertaining to their regions. The fragmented nature of these collections means they do not include the whole range of cultures present in Dutch society. On the other hand, thematic cross-collections such as ‘Islamic culture’ have the advantage of representing a large, relatively homogenous cultural community. In contrast, geographical categories contain many heterogeneous and even hostile cultures, so that their representation in museums sometimes leads to exclusion rather than inclusion.

Even though the scope of the museums has widened, some substantial immigrant populations have no parallel in significant collections. The present acquisition policies prioritize the complementation of the most significant collections, which are predominantly from the colonies. The Africa museum is the exception thanks to an active acquisition policy of contemporary art by African artists living in the Netherlands or the West (Grootaers and Eisenburger 20-21). It can be concluded that the representation of the immigrant population in ethnographic collections is not democratic but explicitly historical, and at times, a political matter.

Government and museum policy

The collections in ethnographic museums were never founded with the intention to represent all the cultures present in the Netherlands, let alone to cover the total and immense variety of cultures present on earth.48 However, the undeniable overrepresentation in collections of some cultures that living

48 This ambition was pursued by encyclopaedic collectors, but abandoned in the 18th century (Kistemaker 13-14).

38 Representing Cultural Diversity Dutch society calls attention to the absence of others. Upon asking whether the museums are aware of this situation and its historical causes, it proved difficult to get answers beyond a simple ‘yes’. Eventually it was necessary to rely on documents and statements and distil the instances that attest, explicitly and implicitly, to the museums’ awareness of, and attitudes towards the immigrant population.

Ethnographic museums first became concerned with the immigrant population in the 1970s, in accordance with the discourse in society and politics. Some of the museums incorporated the political attention for ‘ethnic minorities’ in the 1980s, and since the 1990s there has been a concern for ‘cultural diversity’. In this context ‘diversity’ (verscheidenheid, diversiteit) indicates the variety of individual demographic difference (sex, age, ethnicity) and personal difference (sexuality, lifestyle, character, culture) that inform people’s behaviour (Stuurgroep Code Culturele Diversiteit 11). Cultural diversity refers to people’s personal ethnic-cultural background.

Diversity Policy, 1980-2011

In the 1980s, problematic integration led the national government to intervene and direct policies at specific ‘ethnic minorities’. The explicit and colloquial discourse of the 1970s was adjusted – in politics ‘Indos’ became ‘Indisch-Nederlands’ (‘Indonesian-Dutch’) (Oostindie 34). However, they had to refrain from using positive discrimination. For example, they would have liked to stimulate minority employment but could not force employers or employees to disclose their ethnicity (Zorlu and Hartog 10). In the same vein, they could only formulate their intentions of integration in cultural institutions in the form of euphemistic advice on policy, which was not always brought into practice. Another important tendency in the discourse of the 1980s was the endorsement of developmental policies through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Development Cooperation. Their campaign for ‘third world countries’ was picked up by all of the ethnographic museums, perhaps because it could easily be superimposed over their geographical departments.

In the 1990s the independence of cultural institutions increased, but the Government remained a vital and influential stakeholder (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 6, Van Brakel, int.). The government’s Deltaplan provided funding for the improvement of collection conservation.49 In 1995 Secretary of Culture Aad Nuis created funding opportunities so that vulnerable communities could develop a cultural backbone and for the stimulation of understanding of other cultures.50 The objective was to achieve ‘union in diversity’ (‘eenheid in verscheidenheid’) in a multi-cultural society. Nuis’ successor Rick van der Ploeg continued along these lines, but criticized the policy’s bias towards well-

49 Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science, “Museale Weegschaal”. 50 Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science “Pantser of ruggengraat: cultuurnota 1997-2000”.

39 Representing Cultural Diversity established groups. He made institutions responsible for the inclusion of newcomers, stimulated with awarded funds so that the diverse cultures in the Netherlands could be visible without one overshadowing the other.51 Despite his efforts Van der Ploeg’s policy’s ended with the end of his office. After 2000 the Dutch government issued ‘Erfgoed Extra-gelden’ (‘Heritage Extra-Funds) to improve ethnographic collection management, digital access and mobility (Van Brakel and Legêne 2008:5, Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 6), but it was a parting gift. The Government had started withdrawing support from the Cultural Sector – as if they felt something coming.

When the financial crisis hit, budget cuts landed on the cultural sector first and hard. The country felt it needed to support itself and the political discourse began to show signs of nationalism. Former Prime Minister Peter Jan Balkenende started speaking of the Dutch (Christian) ‘normen en waarden’ (‘norms and values’). It seems to have foreshadowed a new discourse on pluralism that deems Islamic norms and values incompatible with the Dutch ones. The promotion of diversity or a ‘pluralist society’ was beginning to be seen as something undesirable, a threat to Dutch national identity and cohesion. The visibility of cultural values different from the Dutch and Western values revealed incompatibilities. The seeming impossibility of tolerating intolerant cultures was undermining the hopes of a pluralist society, and the realism of ‘union in diversity’ fell through.

In this climate Halbe Zijlstra, the new Secretary of Education, Culture and Science (2010-2012), reversed any remaining funding for the encouragement of diversity and cut two hundred million Euros from the cultural budget. In line with his party leader, Prime Minister Mark Rutte, he proclaimed that museum’s should ‘do it yourself’, by becoming independent through commercialisation. A minimum of recognizable state supported institutions would have to be shining examples of the Dutch nation.52

In their imposed independence museums and other cultural institutions organized themselves in favour of continued diversity policy. Research had shown that the inclusion of multiple cultural backgrounds is vital to organizations operating in a multi-cultural setting, and has the propensity to improve content production, management, and marketing (Ely and Thomas). Politics had taken cultural diversity off the agenda, but the culturally plural society was still the situation cultural institutions had to operate in, and that they felt they had to deal with (Pals). In 2008 Netwerk CS, consisting of professionals in the cultural field, commissioned LA group (Leisure & Arts Consulting), to write a report on a decade of diversity policies. It addressed diversity of four factors in cultural institutions: Programming (content production), Personnel, Partners (persons and organizations that collaborate or are commissioned) and Public under the title ‘De Olifant in de Kamer: Staalkaart culturele diversiteit in de

51 Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science “Cultuur als confrontatie: cultuurnota 2001-2004” and “Ruim baan voor de Culturele Diversiteit.” 52 Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science. “Meer dan Kwaliteit: Een nieuwe visie op cultuurbeleid.” 4-5.

40 Representing Cultural Diversity basisinfrastructuur’ (‘The Elephant in the Room: assessment of cultural diversity in the basic infrastructure’, author trans.).

Based on an inquiry in cultural institutions the report concluded that 85% of mainstream cultural institutions were ‘monocultural’: run by middle class, white professionals. 90% of cultural institutions in the Netherlands professed that cultural diversity was important and 80% that cultural diversity should be a fundamental mentality, but only 60% thought cultural diversity was relevant to them. Opinions were divided over whether rapid encouragement of cultural diversity would be necessary, or if it would develop naturally. Diversity policy – stimulating cultural diversity – appeared to be applied in terms of programming and the intended public, rather than through involvement of people from different cultural backgrounds in the organization (LAGroup/Netwerk CS).

The report was handed over to the then Minister of Culture Ronald Plasterk who replied with the request to formulate a code in support of cultural diversity. Three large organizations in the cultural sector collaborated on the ‘Code Culturele Diversiteit’ (Stuurgroep Code for Cultural Diversity), published in 201153. The Code is a set of guiding rules open to interpretation, meant to aid institutions with the question: ‘What to do with the demographic composition as a cultural institute?’ (Stuurgroep Code Culturele Diversiteit 7-11). To a similar question in the inquiry for this thesis (Appendix 1) the Wereldmuseum plainly answered: ‘Nothing’ (Kevenaar).54

That same Wereldmuseum was most prepared to take Zijlstra’s advice to heart. Under its director, Stanley Bremer, the museum proliferated itself as a specialized museum of international ‘quality’. The traditional collection profile had been replaced with a business plan and – aided by government funding – was in the process of becoming self-sufficient through its commercial branch (Wereldmuseum, “Jaarplan 2012” & “Jaarplan 2013”). It was a drastic change of course considering the Wereldmuseum had taken an active role in the ‘integration of minorities’ in the 1970s. They had employed a specialised employee for the inclusion of ‘ethnic minorities’ who organized travelling exhibitions about ‘homelands’ and collecting expeditions to Turkey and Morocco (Bremer 31). But, after a thirty-year period of diversity policy the quotidian and local focus was changed to a focus on ‘art and artefacts’ from Asia and Oceania (Kevenaar, Wereldmuseum, “Jaarplan 2012”). 55 When the museum re-opened in 2009 after a restoration and refurbishment, local headlines read: ‘Niet allochtoon maar autonoom’ (‘Independent in stead of allochtoon’) (Bremer 106).

53 Stuurgroep Code Culturele Diversiteit, includes organisations NAPK, NMV and VSCD and institutes Erfgoed Nederland, Kunstfactor, TIN en MCN 54 Original question: Does the museum respond to cultural diversity in society in any other way? See also Appendix 1. 55 Addressing the ‘immigrant population’ (from 1970s), and ‘ethnic minorities’ (from 1980s up to 2005) in their Public, Programming and Collection Policy, in the terms of the political discourse at the time (Bremer 31).

41 Representing Cultural Diversity The other ethnographic museums implemented Zijlstra’s policies to varied extents, and some rallied behind the Code for Cultural Diversity.56 Nevertheless, they were affected financially. While the Wereldmuseum pulled in investors for its managerial overhaul, other ethnographic museums faced bankruptcy. In 2013 the Tropenmuseum could no longer support itself, but was saved with temporary funding for the Tropenmuseum from the Ministry of Development Cooperation. As a prerequisite the Tropenmuseum, Afrika Museum and Museum Volkenkunde had to merge their management and research department into a Nationaal Museum voor Wereldculturen (National Museum of Worldcultures). Their new constellation has strengthened their reach, research and internal and external collaborations (Nationaal Museum voor Wereldculturen “Persbericht”), but the budget remains an issue (Van Brakel, int.). The latest government policy, discussed at the end of this chapter, has provided some relief.

Diversity policy in Ethnographic Museums, 2011-2015

The mission of the Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen is ‘to contribute to an open view of the world.’57 It is implemented mainly through its programming (Nationaal Museum voor Wereldculturen, “Persbericht”). Cultural diversity is being addressed by a newly installed ‘Diversity Team’ lead by Wayne Modest, Head of the Curatorial Department. The team specializes in the implementation of diversity policy. At the moment they are still in an exploratory phase and were unwilling to discuss results, but their efforts and attitudes can be surmised.

Marielle Pals, Head of Public Programming at the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen and in the Diversity Team, explained why diversity policy is important. She said that ‘every tax payer is entitled to representation. Because ethnographic museums are about cultural diversity it is no more than logical that they connect to the cultural diversity of the diverse/ allochtone surroundings and people who are connected to the collection’ (Pals). Her colleague Koos Van Brakel, Head of Collections, believes that thanks to the merger the combined collection has the capacity to represent the current Dutch population. He added that ‘The history of the Surinam and Indonesian collection is important in connection with the immigrant population, because it is ‘shared heritage’, ‘a shared history, which one could argue has nothing to do with the Netherlands, but it’s not that simple. It’s important because in the Netherlands are a lot of people from Surinam to whom it is important’ (Van Brakel, int.). Both think that it is also important to look beyond internal expertise and involve the expertise present in the culturally diverse society. Therefore, the museums are experimenting with ‘co-creation’ workshops

56 The Code was issued to the ethnographic museums by the Museum Vereniging (MV, Museum Organization), of which all seven museums are a member. 57 ‘Bijdragen tot een open blik op de wereld.’ (Nationaal Museum voor Wereldculturen, “Persbericht”).

42 Representing Cultural Diversity that involve people from cultural communities in the Netherlands, but the emphasis remains on Programming, rather than Partners.

Each of the museums also maintains its own philosophy. The Africa Museum always strived to incorporate ‘other perspectives’ in and on their collections. First curator of the museum Father Jan van Croonenburg wrote: ‘the main thing is not the pleasure of collecting objects, but the fact that Africans are given an opportunity to express themselves and thus to provide a more accurate picture of their often outstanding qualities.’ (qtd. in Grootaers and Eisenburger 11). This principle has become even more relevant in the current context. As present director Ineke Eisenburger put it: ‘In the multicultural dialogue which has to take place, we must give Africa a voice and give the various African cultures the place in global relations that they deserve and indeed seek’ (Grootaers and Eisenburger 21). Nevertheless, the former missionary museum still emphasizes what they used to call the ‘less advanced’ and now the ‘less advantaged’ situation of the cultures they present, as part of their the development focus (Grootaers and Eisenburger 12).

The museums of the Nationaal Museum of Wereldculturen are currently the only museums with a diversity team. The Museon and the Universiteitsmuseum have no pronounced diversity policy, though they have not denounced it either (Van Harskamp, De Jonge). The Museon’s effective policy addresses the immigrant population in their exhibition and education program, though that might change in the future. The museum is still responding to Zijlstra’s new cultural policy by reorganizing their collection around four themes and proliferating themselves as a museum for ‘sustainability’. Ethnographic objects in the collection will probably be recontextualised around the theme ‘identity’ (Van Harskamp).58 The former museum Gerardus van der Leeuw has on occasion adapted their programming to segments of the immigrant population, but in its present location the collection has not been used to this purpose (Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jong 3, Universiteitsmuseum Groningen, “Jaarverslag 2012”). The Universiteitsmuseum has a historic-scientific focus and the ethnographic collection has no priority besides immediate conservation, cataloguing and a plan for de- acquisition (Universiteitsmuseum Groningen, “Jaarverslag 2012”, De Jonge).

Four of the ethnographic museums have promoted cultural diversity as an important factor in their policies since 2011. The promotion of cultural diversity in the areas of Public, Personnel, and Partners has proven difficult. A person’s cultural background is generally regarded as a private matter. Targeting and monitoring visitors of a specific cultural background depends on the willingness of visitors to disclose their identification with a country, ethnicity or culture. One way to reach culturally diverse audiences has been through the educational programs and the invitation of schools from areas of a certain demographic. However, despite indications of deliberate target-groups, these practices are not put down on paper. Positive discrimination in advertisements for personnel are not standard

58 The other themes are ‘Energy’, ‘Water’ and ‘Food’.

43 Representing Cultural Diversity practice either, and efforts have been received with contempt.59 Therefore, co-ordination of partnerships with cultural communities still takes place through prominent members of the more visible national, ethnic and cultural communities that correspond with significant collections. The public target-group has to be invited through similar channels. The sensitivity of the discourse is making cultural diversity a difficult subject to deal with. Nonetheless, the absence of public policies and reports cannot be taken as an indication of its implementation.60

Over the past five years the ethnographic museums have each dealt differently with the changes in society and the political climate. All of them have had to adapt financially, but some museums were more inclined towards the political discourse, while others continued to adjust their policy to the pluralist society. The majority of the museums demonstrated an attuned awareness of the country’s changed demographic and included the promotion of cultural diversity in their policies. However, the application of diversity policy in the areas of Public, Personnel and Partners is a grey area, limited by the inhibitions of the discourse. Programming appears to be the only area in which diversity policy clearly manifests itself. Examples shall now be discussed.

Immigrant population-related programming of ethnographic collections, 2011-2015

Permanent displays

The permanent displays of the museums are divided by geographical areas, with the wings or floors of their buildings representing large geographical areas, and sections for different regions or themes, reflecting the organization of their collection profiles. The permanent displays show a very broad overview of different regions, cultures, practices and types of objects. Nevertheless, the prominence of certain cultures mostly adheres to their significance in the collection and shows the same historical bias. Overall East Asia has the largest presence in terms of space and prominence. Indonesia is usually given as much space, and a separate section, as some of the continents.61 In Museum Volkenkunde, for example, the continents Africa, Asia, the Americas and Oceania occupy little over half of the exhibition space. The remaining three rooms are occupied by East-Asian countries China, Japan and Korea and Indonesia, in accordance with the size of their respective collections – the founding

59 See for example a discussion about the Tropenmuseum’s advertisement for a Moroccan employee (135 reactions) on the popular forum GeenStijl (Stifft “RACISME! Museum zoekt Marokkaanse medewerkers”) 60 I have seen internal reports on the results of the aforementioned practices, but am not at liberty to disclose them. They were used to establish priorities in my own interviews and questionnaires. 61 Except in the Museon and Afrika Museum.

44 Representing Cultural Diversity collection from Japan, the relatively large Korean and Chinese collections and its largest and most significant about Indonesia. The rooms give general overviews of the collections, showing off the highlights and giving a cross-section of the multiple cultures living in the areas.

Just as in the organization of the collection, themes intersect the geographical areas and religion is the most prevalent theme. The two largest religions in Asia are also the two main themes in the ethnographic museums: Buddhism and Islam. The Wereldmuseum has arranged its entire permanent display around Buddhism, showing examples from Tibet, Japan, China, Indonesia and Oceania. In addition the museums have semi-permanent exhibitions on specific themes in sectioned off areas.

The use of cross-collections and themes has also facilitated exposure for segments of the guest work and refugee categories of the immigrant populations. In the Museon a room about the Arab speaking world (North Africa and Middle East) covers the homelands of many recent refugees and guest workers. The objects are displayed with little textual information, but with four films narrated by locals, addressing some of the general themes associated with the Arab world, such as the shuk (market) and the dessert. Examples of headdresses, dishes, and water pipes from different regions are presented together alongside old-fashioned Western books stereotyping the region.

The permanent collection of the Africa Museum is largely outdoors. A complete context is recreated for the immersive experience of the visitor. Not everything in the outdoor section of the Afrika museum is authentic and the installations provide a generalized image of a regional culture. On the contrary, the permanent ethnographic sections in the Museon in Den Haag decontextualise the collections by placing a very wide range of objects in a fictitious narrative or under a universal theme without any reference to their cultures of origin. The most extensive ethnographic display is a section on art that organizes the objects according their formal qualities, subtitled with Western art movements. The manner of display makes it difficult to associate the collection with specific cultures. However, the Museon is different from the other museums,62 and has more affinity with the Universiteitsmuseum Groningen where the ethnographic objects play only a small role, as they do not so much represent cultures, as mankind as a whole (Universiteitsmuseum Groningen, “Jaarverslag 2013”).

In one case immigrant cultures and their history are explicitly featured in the permanent collection. The room ‘Komen en gaan’ (‘Coming and going’) in the Museon is explicitly about migration to and from the Netherlands. In the exhibition the history of migration in the Netherlands is explained and each of the largest immigrant populations is addressed in a cabinet according to country of origin. The

62 The permanent exhibition of the Museon Jouw Wereld, Mijn Wereld (Your World, My World) covers the history of the planet (geology, geography), the origin of life and mankind (biology), technological developments, and human development. The ethnographic collection serves to illustrate themes such as warfare, justice, art, and society.

45 Representing Cultural Diversity cabinets state the reason of their immigration and display personal affects from the time of their move, accompanied by spoken personal accounts. The ethnographic objects are relevant to the personal histories. These sections run up and until immigrants from Surinam. The final wall shows the personal stories of contemporary immigrants, including many refugees. Thirty people in total are shown in a portrait with their country of origin and the time they have been in the Netherlands, to represent the current immigrant flow. The bottom of the display also details the reason for immigration, the general situation in their homelands, and a display of personal affects, including photographs and ethnographic objects.

Temporary exhibitions

In the Afrika Museum collections pertaining to immigrant cultures have been included more prominently in the indoor section on African ‘art’. The space is used for temporary art exhibitions, initiated to ‘show the vitality of the continent.’ The display comments on the western aesthetic and also seems self-aware that it is conceiving ‘art’ out of ‘artefacts’ by placing them next to contemporary art with no dual function. The indoor exhibitions are explicitly connected with the past, not overlooking missionary work or slavery, while the programming also aims to be socially relevant through the inclusion of African artists living in the Netherlands and other Western countries (Eisenburger en Grootaers 20-21). A similar tactic is used in the programming of the Tropenmuseum. Their collection of modern and contemporary art from the Dutch East Indies serves to create a link between their historical collection and the present (Van Brakel and Legêne 22).

In the past five years the programming of temporary exhibitions in the Tropenmuseum and Museum Volkenkunde and Wereldmuseum have occasionally varied from the main subjects in their collection and permanent exhibition. The most noteworthy effort in relation to the immigrant population was the Museum Volkenkunde production Verlangen naar Mekka (Longing for Mekka). The exhibition about the Hadj: the Muslim pilgrimage to Mekka was on show between September 2013 and March 2014. In collaboration with the British Museum and local Muslim communities, the museum brought together 250 objects of high quality that represented Muslim cultures since the 10th century from all over the world, but with special attention to communities connected with the Netherlands. Thus the exhibition addressed almost the entire Muslim segment of the immigrant population and told their personal stories in the displays and related events. Promotion was targeted at Muslim communities in particular (Pals, Museum Volkenkunde, “vooraankondiging”).63 Afterwards, a small version of the exhibition was installed in the side gallery of the Asian room in Museum Volkenkunde.

63 In 2014 the museum won the Museumprijs Zuid-Holland (Museumprize) for successfully reaching this target group.

46 Representing Cultural Diversity A similar section in Museum Volkenkunde is temporarily devoted to the sub-culture of Chinese perenakan. The textual information details the arrival of the perenakan community in India as guest workers in the second half of the 19th century, their family reunion, their climb in the social ranks, the adoption of traditions particular to the Dutch colonisers and their arrival in the Netherlands after the fall of Sukarno in 1966. The exhibition is woven around a narrative about marriage with objects from the collection that highlight cross-pollination between objects and traditions from Indonesia, China and the Netherlands.

In the past the Tropenmuseum has organized a number of exhibitions that correspond with immigrant populations in the Netherlands. Urban Islam in 2003 was a great vehicle for diversity policy by continuously working with local expertise, using the museum collection, reaching culturally diverse audiences and representing numerous communities from the immigrant population. More recently, the exhibition Zwart&Wit (Black&White) in 2013-2014 questioned the connotations of black and white and was accompanied by discussions about cultural diversity in the pluralist society (Tropenmuseum, web.). However, the exhibition made limited use of the ethnographic collection. Other temporary exhibitions in the Tropenmuseum that were built on the collection sporadically coincided with the cultural background of post-colonial immigrants and often took colonialism as a subject (Tropenmuseum, web.).

The Wereldmuseum has repeatedly involved external collections in order to set up temporary exhibitions of the ‘highest quality’. This has resulted in a programming focussed on ‘high culture’ and collaborations with private collectors instead of Partners in local communities (Bremer 86).

Projects

The Tropenmuseum has always involved consultants from local communities in their development of exhibitions and projects that relate to their culture. Since 2013 Tropenmuseum junior, the museums department aimed at youth with its own exhibition space in the museum, organizes ZieZoMarokko. ZieZoMarokko is a continuing educational project that engages children to think about the concept of homelands, and learn about Moroccan culture. The project was developed in ‘co-creation workshops’ with Moroccan immigrants and Moroccan Dutch in order ‘to attune the project to current demographic and political-cultural developments’ (Pals). The project is in continuous development and an exhibition is scheduled for September 2015 until March 2018. Since the foundation of the Diversity workgroup the ‘co-creation workshops’ are being implemented throughout the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen. Similar tactics were used for the Verlangen naar Mekka exhibition in Museum Volkenkunde. In these instances the communities are consulted by the museum, but the Tropenmuseum has also opened a channel that allows people to contribute on their own account. Foto zoekt familie (Photograph looking for family) is an ongoing project that invites people to browse

47 Representing Cultural Diversity through the photographic collection and add any information they have about photographs or albums. Head of Collections Koos van Brakel professed he would like to see more of these ‘crowd-sourcing’ initiatives that open the catalogues to expertise in society and allow the shared knowledge of the collections to grow organically (Van Brakel, int.).

The Wereldmuseum and Universiteitsmuseum no longer have projects of this kind. The Museon does have a broad range of educational programs that work with their permanent exhibitions related to the immigrant population, but did not disclose whether these had been developed in collaboration with people from corresponding communities, nor did they admit to targeting schools in culturally diverse neighbourhoods.

Conclusions

It can be concluded that, speaking in terms of nations, the combined collections of the ethnographic museums appear to represent the immigrant population. Such a comparison is relevant because geographical categories are used in the discourse on cultural diversity in politics as well as in museums. Museum policies and programming principally address cultural diversity in terms of nations and increasingly through religions, creating the effect of representation. The use of broad themes and regions in the programming is inclusive, but in terms of cultures it does not correspond with the immigrant population.

The ethnographic museums can be classified as ‘ethnological world museums’ whose collection, policies and programming are aimed at presenting a broad overview of non-Western cultures. The broad orientation has given museums and policy makers the opportunity to ‘include’ large segments of the immigrant population. In the museums of the Nationaal Museum voor Wereldculturen this is the deliberate result of diversity policy. In the other ethnographic museums collections pertaining to the immigrant population have not been prioritized; cultural diversity in the programming has occurred coincidentally.

In the past five years the implementation of diversity policy has occurred in spite of, rather than because of the political discourse and policy on cultural diversity. For museums with diversity policy the guest work category of the immigrant population is an important target group, though programs on their cultures cannot always be accommodated by the collection. Most attention still goes out to cultures of the post-colonial segment of the immigrant population, especially in the museums with their origin in colonialism and trade. On the whole, the presence of the immigrant population appears to have increased the significance of related collections, though less so for cultures of refugees. Diversity policy generally overlooks the refugee immigrant population. Their regions or cultures are only incidentally linked with the collection and programming, for example under broad umbrellas like

48 Representing Cultural Diversity Islamic culture. The museums continue to take initiative based on their most significant collections and the largest segments in the immigrant population.64

This thesis looks at representation of the culturally diverse immigrant population with ethnographic collections, but it is important to mention the involvement of people who represent the immigrant population. The implementation of diversity policy in the areas of Partners, Public and Personnel is a difficult topic for museums. Whereas the museums do classify their collections according to ethnicities and cultures and often provide this information, they are hesitant to address people in the same terms. To explicitly appeal to or promote the ethnicity and culture of the immigrant population is deemed politically incorrect. In consequence government and museum policies are struggling to implement cultural diversity in the areas of Partners, Public and Personnel. The museums who promote cultural diversity were willing to disregard political policy, but did comply with the political discourse.

At the time of writing, the field has shifted again. On 8 June 2015 the Minster of Education, Culture and Science Jet Bussemaker presented her new policy ‘Ruimte voor Cultuur’ (‘Room for Culture’).65 One of her main points was reinstating part of the funding for the Tropenmuseum for the period 2017- 2020. Furthermore, she urges cultural institutions to ‘connect’ with the changing demographic of society (16). To this purpose she endorses the Code for Cultural Diversity, although the responsibility of its implementation is left within the cultural sector (17). In effect only ten percent of Zijlstra’s budget cuts have been reversed.66 Thus it is up to the ethnographic museums to implement diversity policy and make the connection. The final chapter contends that this is a positive development for the plural society, and discusses why and how the ethnographic museums should improve their representation of immigrant cultures.

64 There are a few exceptions to these statements. The Tropenmuseum and Afrika are actively extending and programming their contemporary art collections to bridge a gap between 19th century collections and the present, even though the collections are still weak (Van Brakel, int.). The Tropenmuseum has also hired its first curator with a thematic, instead of regional specialisation. Anke Bangma is curator of contemporary art and the photo collection that is also an important link to living cultures. 65 Bussemaker, “Toespraak” 66 18,6 million have been ‘added’ (Van Lent and Kammer), after previous cuts of 200 million.

49 Representing Cultural Diversity

Chapter 4

Discussion

This thesis began with an idealistic idea for which I expected little consideration. I wondered if ethnographic museums in the Netherlands had the capacity to contribute to the cultural backbone of the immigrant population. I found that it was not an unfamiliar idea at all, not to the museums or to politics. Notwithstanding the Wereldmuseum it seems that the ethnographic museums have made their collections relevant to the pluralistic society, either deliberately or inadvertently. Broadly, their ethnographic collections represent the immigrant population. Diversity policy aimed at improving representation is already a reality in approximately half the museums and has been put back on the political agenda. In this chapter I discuss how the related academic fields: heritage studies, museum studies and anthropology conceptualise the relevance of cultural diversity. In addition I propose how the museums could improve their policy and practice in relation to representation of the immigrant population, and why this is relevant to ethnographic museums and society.

In Indigenous Archaeologies: A Reader on Decolonization editors Bruchac, Hart and Wobst have compiled fifty-one essays that delineate the intertwined relationship between archaeology and colonization, exposing the power relation between the researcher and the people, past an present, who are their subject. In the final part, edited by Bruchac, it is concluded that the indigenous communities still hardly ever benefit from this practice. Most of the arguments presented in this volume apply to ethnography as well: anthropologists of different specializations are all in the habit of taking from their subjects – information, specimens, experience – rather than giving back. Bruchac does not deny that anthropology has moved past a purely one-sided practice, but development in the field, knowledge exchange and trade still need to grow as part of the course. An increasingly reciprocal practice seems only fitting to the post-colonial era, but in addition I argue that it is important that the old ethnographic collections are also incorporated in this practice.67

67 In the Netherlands the developmental approach was implemented in the ethnographic museums in the 1970s paired with rapid accumulation of new collections, for a large part from previously underrepresented areas in continuation of the world-wide expansion started in the 1960s. (Chapter 3)

50 Representing Cultural Diversity Giving back to subject communities by means of old collections is already being addressed in heritage and museum studies from different angles. The literature builds on two broadly interpreted concepts: ‘community’ and ‘cultural heritage’ (Newman and McLean). ‘Community’ is the generic term used to refer to a social organisational form that sometimes includes some or all members of cultural or national segments of the immigrant population. ‘Cultural heritage’ can refer to both material and immaterial culture that has meaning to, is the product of, or belongs to one or more cultures and includes ethnographic objects. A large body of the literature discusses whether to return cultural heritage to its original community (Layton, Shapiro, Simpson), though the cases of actual ‘repatriation’ of cultural heritage are very few. It is also widely investigated how communities can interact with cultural heritage within the confines of a museum (Golding and Modest, Peers and Brown, Layton, Simpson, Karp, Pearce), resulting in interesting dissertations on the dichotomy between the conservation of ethnographic objects in Western museums and their original uses (Pasztory, Kreps). Furthermore, museum professionals and scholars have shown an interest in the development of the general community living in the vicinity of the museum (Iervolino).

It is clear that museums are getting increasingly involved with communities (Crooke). The involvement of immigrant communities has also been on the agenda since the 1990s (Iervolino 115). Yet relatively little has been written about cases that involve immigrant communities as a culturally diverse audience, partner or source of personnel in direct relation with the museum’s collection. The cases discussed in the literature predominantly concern collaborations with native populations (Simpson, Karp), communities related to the collection but not local to the museum (Bahra, Peers and Brown), or the inclusion of a diverse, local community (Sandell). With a few exceptions (Iervolino, Golding and Modest), it appears that scholars have not linked the composition of new, local communities with the composition of museum collections.

Community engagement has been prescribed to cultural institutions by policy makers in England, Australia (Iervolino 115), the United States (Simpson), and the Netherlands. In a paper entitled ‘Heritage Builds Communities: the application of heritage resources to the problems of social exclusion’ Newman and McLean trace how politics defined a lack of cultural heritage as one of the causes and symptoms of ‘social exclusion’. ‘Social exclusion’ is linked with low, marginalized socio- economic status, and cultural heritage was heralded as a different means to participate in society (Newman and McLean 144-5). In England the use of cultural heritage in local community development was advocated as a remedy for ‘social exclusion’, which led to an increase of ‘community partnership’ initiatives in cultural institutions (143, 146-8, Sandell), including the Community Partnerships Team of the British Museum. Their activities address a diverse, otherwise socially excluded audience. Subsequently some of these also deal with cultural diversity among the socio-economically disadvantaged immigrant population and their representation in cultural heritage (Bahra). As seen in Chapter 3, the Netherlands showed a different approach: the policies behind

51 Representing Cultural Diversity partnerships with culturally diverse communities are more aimed at overcoming cultural diversity than at tackling social exclusion.

Despite an overlap with the target groups of community development programs the cultural diversity of the immigrant population in particular is only beginning to be explored.

The subject has recently been breached in a comprehensive volume edited by Golding and Modest (2013).68 In one of the essays in the volume Serena Iervolino explicitly links the culturally diverse immigrant population with museum collections. Iervolino signals that while immigrant inclusion used to happen as part of community outreach and education programs, members of the immigrant population are increasingly being involved with temporary exhibitions and with revisions of permanent displays (113). The museums with an actively implemented a cultural diversity policy discussed in this thesis showed similar activity (see Chapter 3 on the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen and the Wereldmuseum before 2009).

Iervolino describes a case from Italy, where policy advocating community development through the use of cultural heritage is a recent development (116). The National History Museum at the University of Parma organized an exhibition that reinterpreted the museum’s African collection to go beyond the traditional European perspective. She concludes that the exhibition, called Creatures of Earth and Sky, was an opportunity for ‘intercultural dialogue where its audience – Italians and African migrants – was invited to cross boundaries of belonging and to participate in a dialogic process of renegotiation and reconstruction, not only of the meaning of the collection but, more broadly, of national and cultural identities.’ (114-5) The exhibition involved African immigrants as interpreters of the exhibited objects. They later had them act as guides to visitors, explaining the original use of the objects. Iervolino observed some challenges in the process. Some of these were practical disagreements (eg. time management), but the objects’ interpretation by the European curators and African participants was also problematic. The colonial context in which many of the objects had been collected weighed in on their original interpretation by the African participants and biased the European curators. Iervolino suggests that the objects’ history pervaded a colonial hierarchy between those involved, and that this history is even more problematic with ethnographic collections (121). The hierarchy in this heritage practice – implied in the word ‘participant’ – is only temporarily suspended by the agency of the European curators. Nevertheless Iervolino concludes that the entire project fostered mutual understanding of different cultural backgrounds, and put the immigrant participants in the position of expert (122).

68 Wayne Modest is the Head of the Diversity Team of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen. He was not available for comments.

52 Representing Cultural Diversity The more critical view of heritage practice is currently overshadowing the optimism of some heritage professionals. Heritage discourse is accused of being to vague (Newman and McLean), yet too constricted for heritage practice to evolve. In Uses of Heritage Laurajane Smith, the most prominent critic of the heritage discourse, conceptualises what she has called the Authorised Heritage Discourse (AHD). The AHD is the discourse that delineates what can be defined as heritage and legitimate heritage practices. It is a self-authorizing discourse subscribed by the heritage experts whom it empowers. According to Smith the AHD defines heritage as material, aesthetic and monumental. Furthermore the AHD permeates the idea that heritage makes a positive contribution to identity formation. In order to expose these attributes of the heritage discourse Smith promotes critical discourse analysis (Waterton et al).

Critical discourse analysis proved useful to this thesis in exposing the limitations of geographical and thematic categories in politics and museum practice. By addressing cultural diversity in terms of nations politicians and museum professionals create deceptively inclusive categories at their convenience, generalizing culture in the process. Waterton, Smith and Campbell would argue that members of immigrant cultures are incapable of innovating the AHD since they are only allowed to be ‘participants’. The ‘dialogicality’ with this population (‘intercultural dialogue’ in the case presented by Iervolino) is diminished due to the one-directional nature of heritage expertise (Waterton et al).

Waterton, Smith and Campbell applied critical discourse analysis to the Burra Charter, a document that has become a prominent point of reference for heritage professionals dealing with the definition and conservation of heritage (340-1). As such it is an integral part of the AHD. The latest version states that ‘The revised charter also encourages the co-existence of cultural values, particularly when they are in conflict…’ in the use and interpretation of heritage (qtd. in Waterton et al. 341). Different values are an inherent obstacle in the integration of cultural diversity, also in Dutch society. Although the Charter demonstrates an awareness of cultural diversity it does not provide solutions for its practical implications. This can be explained if AHD is seen to be at odds with the concept of cultural diversity. According to Waterton and Smith AHD ‘works to marginalise and/ or fails to recognise the legitimacy of subaltern communities or other competing concepts of heritage’ (12).

I am convinced however that critical discourse analysis is prone to create theoretical obstacles that are not necessarily a reality. In the Netherlands professionals from the cultural sector itself, rather than the related academic fields, have formulated their own strategies for the integration of cultural diversity. The ‘Code Culturele Diversiteit’ provides clear yet open guidelines that involve culturally diverse audiences, partners, personnel and programs that may challenge the cultural institution (Stuurgroep Code for Cultural Diversity).

How can the ethnographic museums justify undermining their own dominant discourse? Scholars and professionals seem to agree that cultural heritage, like an ethnographic collection, is relevant to the

53 Representing Cultural Diversity identity of a community. The connection, however, is merely implied (Newman and McLean 146). Empirical evidence could found or dismantle this entire body of literature, but is surprisingly absent or vague. Waterton and Smith already warn about this fault in the argumentation for community involvement (5, 12). I confer, and believe that social scientific research is much needed. Despite a lack of evidence on the nature of the relation between cultural heritage and identity I will reason in its favour, in the Dutch context.

With the implementation of the ‘Deltaplan’ in the early 1990s ‘significance’ has become and important factor for cultural museums that depend on government funding.69 The cultural institutions have to emphasize their significance to justify their subsistence. The current guidelines for assessing significance, detailed in ‘Op de museale Weegschaal’ (‘On the Museum Scales’), distinguish between cultural-historical significance (cultuur-historische waarde) and social-societal significance (sociaal- maatschappelijke waarde). Cultural-historical significance refers to the historical, artistic and informative value of a collection; social-societal significance to the current, social, religious, political, societal, or spiritual meaning that a collection has for a group or community (58-9). The policy and practice that have been discussed in this thesis affected the social-societal significance of the ethnographic collections.70 The implementation of diversity policy in particular has the potential to lend current, social, religious, political, societal, and spiritual meaning to the collections.

At the moment the ethnographic museums have a very restricted budget that scarcely allows for high quality acquisitions. They also have fewer means for research that could place the collections in an academic framework to increase the historical, artistic or informative value of their collections. Therefore, the more abstract concepts of social-societal value are important options. If the right groups and communities are addressed, ‘meaning’ can be linked to their existing collections with the existing resources. This might explain why religion has become a prevalent theme in the description and programming of ethnographic collections. However, I did not involve the classifications of the Museale Weegschaal to invoke that the museums are merely looking out for their subsistence. I would like to emphasize the altruistic reasons for pursuing social-societal significance. More precisely, social-societal significance that has meaning to cultural groups in the immigrant population. After all, museums are ‘non-profit, permanent institution[s] in the service of society and its development’ (ICOM).

The idea that ethnographic collections could support the cultural backbone of the immigrant population sprung from two different theory’s that can be recognized in the present discourse on

69 Dutch government support for cultural institutions depends on the significance of their collection, as did the funds made available through the Deltaplan (Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science, “Museale Weegschaal”). 70 With exception of the Universiteitsmuseum.

54 Representing Cultural Diversity cultural diversity. The first was written by social anthropologist Frederik Barth, the second by his peer Anthony Cohen. In Barth’s introduction to the work ‘Ethnic Groups and Boundaries’, he proposed to define ethnic groups based on their boundaries. The boundaries were situated where ‘continuing dichotomization between members and outsiders takes place.’ In this line of thinking cultural communities distinguish themselves along the boundaries where cultural differences are negotiated and become apparent (14). This is useful to research, but if such a discourse were to become prevalent in society cultural diversity would be defined in terms of opposition.71 As Rick van de Ploeg warned in his cultural policy ‘Pantser of Ruggegraat’ (‘Shield or Spine’), groups would start to wear their culture as a shield, which would not be beneficial to the understanding of ‘other cultures’. According to the anthropologist Halleh Ghorasi, this is already the case.

In the essay version of ‘Paradoxes of cultural recognition: diversity management in the Netherlands’ Ghorasi outlines how the Dutch discourse on immigrants has been characterized by dichotomies and categorical thinking, stemming from the ‘pillarization’ (verzuiling). In her conclusion she urges the culturally diverse Netherlands to develop ‘new sources of commonality [between groups] as well as creating the conditions for encounters and discussions in which cultural diversity is a factor’ (51, author trans.). She aims to resolve the problem of opposition between cultural groups by fostering dialogue, but offers no alternative to categories based on boundaries (44).

I believe the discourse should move away from boundaries to avoid an emphasis on incompatibilities. In the book ‘The Symbolic Construction of Communities’ Anthony Cohen pointed out that ‘the boundary as the community’s public face is symbolically simple; but, as the object of internal discourse it is symbolically complex.’ (Cohen 74). He proposed that communities are bound by shared symbols that carry more meaning to them than to any outsider (101,114). The ethnographic collections in the Netherlands are a wealth of symbols that can have a constructive instead of contested meaning to communities in the Netherlands. This meaning is the equivalent of social-societal significance. It could give communities the cultural ‘spine’ they need to position themselves in society, while removing tension from the boundaries. Therefore representation of cultural diversity is an important task for the ethnographic museums.

The museums with a diversity policy seem to have implemented it within their ability. The overrepresentation of some populations and the underrepresentation of others can be explained. Because of the size and quality of the colonial collections the post-colonial segment is most catered

71 The usefulness of a focus on boundaries is apparent from this quote ‘The cultural features that signal the boundary may change, and the cultural characteristics of the members may likewise be transformed, indeed, even the organizational form of the group may change – yet the fact of continuing dichotomization between members and outsiders allows us to specify the nature of continuity, and investigate the changing cultural form and content.’ (Barth 14), but I believe that Barth should only be used to inform theory and not practice.

55 Representing Cultural Diversity for. For most of the museums, representing the guest work and refugee immigrant populations requires more extensive collections and external expertise that would strain the budget even further.72 The refugee category is represented least consistent. Then again, the refugee populations are five to ten times smaller than those in the other categories (See Table 2.2) and their priority in the collection and programming appears to be proportional.

One way to overcome gaps in the collections has already presented itself. The Museum Volkenkunde has crowd-sourced exhibitions in the immigrant population (Pals). It is an interesting tactic for the other museums to explore. Of course this depends on the communities and in the case of refugees, this will be difficult. Although, every immigrant caries cultural capital with them.

In order to give the collections meaning to groups and communities in the immigrant population it would seem only logical to involve them. In the monocultural Netherlands – if that was ever a reality – anthropologists had to interpret ethnographic collections, but in the pluralist society cultural informants are locally available. Not all of the museums tap into this wealth of personnel and partners, and the ones that do experience difficulty recruiting them due to the sensitivity of the discourse. This will probably remain an obstacle. Political correctness and non-discrimination are important in public institutions, but positive discrimination is a viable solution. In the British Museum applicants are required to fill out their ethnicity in a section that is marked for purposes of monitoring cultural diversity only, and this could be an option for Dutch ethnographic museums as well. Using ‘cultural background’ instead of ethnicity would also leave space for subjectivity.

Another inhibiting factor in the discourse is the use of geographical and thematic categories to address the collections. Broad categories have the advantage of a wide reach, but they also give a false impression of representation. In such a discourse a few or even a single culture with a more significant collection comes to represent entire continents, nations or world religions. This way New Guinea has come to stand for Oceania in Dutch ethnographic collections. While aiming for inclusiveness this discourse systematically ignores some cultures in the immigrant population. What is more, it leads to generalization and unrealistic representations of cultural regions, which in turn leads to stereotyping and prejudice (Sniderman and Hagendoorn).

The Nederlands Openluchtmuseum (Dutch Open Air Museum) in Arnhem has conceptualised a different style of inclusiveness that overcomes some of these problems. The volkenkundige (ethnographic) museums could learn many things from this volkskundig (European ethnography)

72 The Tropenmuseum is planning a large exhibition on Morocco which was made possible with generous funding from the Moroccan government. Sadly, a conflict in international politics obstructs the way. The Dutch government broke a bilateral agreement with Morocco because it wanted to decrease welfare benefits to Dutch Moroccans living in Morocco. In retaliation the Moroccan government retracted their funding and the exhibition was put on hold.

56 Representing Cultural Diversity museum. The Openluchtmuseum was founded to save “the national culture” from the advancing industrial revolution. It was primarily focussed on collecting from the countryside as the opposite of industrialised, metropolitan cities (De Jong, “Dirigenten” 13). At the same time the museum was a way to forge national identity, by selecting the cultural aspects that were supposedly specific to the Netherlands (De Jong, int.). Nationalism was emerging in Europe, and the Open Air Museum served as a point of reference in the formation of a national culture and identity (De Jong, “Dirigenten”, De Jong, int.).

In the 1990s former director of the museum Jan Vaessen and his colleague Ad de Jong formulated what they called ‘inclusive museology.’ The Openluchtmuseum was aware that it could ‘conduct the Dutch memory’ of its national culture, as it had in the early 20th century, and plotted how to do the same for a pluralist society: ‘the present-day discussion on identity and globalization, on the question of alien and own, asks for our participation, however, not just to affirm identity, but also to question identity, to create eye-openers and a sense of nuances.’ (De Jong “Inclusive Museology” 339, De Jong, “Dirigenten”). They created a policy and practice aimed at ‘involving popular culture, social struggle, ‘other peoples’’ history, contemporary history and the scope of private collectors.’ This way they wanted to connect with modern-day society and develop beyond a traditional (cultural-historic) museum (De Jong “Inclusive Museology” 332, Prooije).

Furthermore, the Openluchtmuseum’s method of collecting and presenting is very site specific: selected, significant buildings in danger of being demolished are removed to the museum grounds. The particular history of the building is researched and reconstructed with ethnographic collections collected on site, or using comparable authentic material. The displays are also time-specific or demonstrate cultural progress. Personal histories are collected and presented in text, by interpreters or audio-visually (De Jong, “Inclusive Museology”).

This method and the philosophy of ‘inclusive museology’ are interesting for many reasons. For one, the tactics of the Openluchtmuseum do not have a generalizing effect. The systematic way of collecting creates smaller, complete ethnographies instead of the fragmented ethnologies that were found in the ethnographic (volkenkundige) museums. The Openluchtmuseum gives the visitor a displaced experience of a local culture at a specific point in time. This form of (re)presentation offers a basis for identification, empathy and experience that can work in two directions: to acquaint native Dutch with cultural background of the immigrant population and to connect immigrants with their own cultural heritage.

For the ethnographic (volkenkundige) museums the possibilities of reconstructing a complete site are limited. Normally, they do not collect in this fashion and their modes of display have moved from complete contexts at the World Exhibitions, to “neutral” settings inspired by art museums (Effert 9). However, the contextualisation of the collections can be improved by adopting the use of strict

57 Representing Cultural Diversity timeframes, locations, cultures and personal histories. It would counteract generalization within categories and facilitate the attachment of meaning.

In line with its inclusive museology, the Openluchtmuseum also collects immigrant cultures, from the moment they enter the Netherlands (De Jong, “Inclusive” 341). Since 2000 the museum has included a Moluccan barack, a Turkish hostel, an Indonesian courtyard, and a Chinese take-away restaurant in their collection and permanent display (Prooije).73 The ethnographic (volkenkundige) collections on the other hand are from regions outside of Europe and would seem to have little to do with the national culture. However, in the pluralist society they have become a repository of cultural backgrounds that cannot be found in national collections like that in the Openluchtmuseum. They provide counterweight for the vast amount of collections pertaining to the dominant Dutch culture.

To implement these ideas, I believe the ethnographic museums will have to integrate diversity policy in their fundamental philosophy. Collection plans have been demonstrated to change according to fashions, but the pluralist society is a fact of life in the Netherlands. In the Openluchtmuseum the inclusive museology informs all practices, while in the ethnographic museums, diversity policy is an appendix susceptible to the whims of politics.74 It will be interesting to observe the consequences of the present government policy and the effect of the diversity team in the Nationaal Museum voor Wereldculturen. Hopefully its activities will support understanding of the cultures of the immigrant population and stand as an example to other ethnographic museums.

73 The Moluccan barrack is an example of the temporary housing solution that was installed for the Moluccan immigrants of 1951. The Turkish hostel is an example of the housing situation of the first guest workers who lived in the Netherlands before family reunification. Moroccan guest workers also felt that it presented their history (De Jong int.). 74 The the Openluchtmuseum the inclusive museology is the principal philosophy and incorporates new developments such as the Code for Cultural Diversity (Prooije).

58 Representing Cultural Diversity

Conclusion

The Netherlands is a pluralist society. To turn its cultural diversity into a positive factor the cultural discourse should focus on culture as the backbone of the immigrant population. Representation of the cultural heritage of the immigrant population could theoretically contribute to a self-definition that does not only rely on antagonism between different cultural groups. Ethnographic (volkenkundige) museums could have an important function in this process by providing the immigrant population with parallel ethnographic collections.

It can be concluded that the ethnographic museums have the capacity to represent the immigrant population, although a number of obstacles are also present. Representation of the immigrant population is promoted as part of diversity policy, but inconsistently and independently implemented by both the government and ethnographic museums. At the moment diversity policy is endorsed by the government, but to ensure its implementation the museums should integrate its principles into their theory and practice, following the example of the Openluchtmuseum.

The possibilities of representation are obstructed by the complex historical and political context that shapes the collection and policy of ethnographic museums. To improve the situation, the museums will have to coordinate with each other and the immigrant population, building on the existing collections in society. To connect with the immigrant population scholars and professionals will need to make a change in their discourse by addressing the immigrant population in terms of cultures and being mindful of generalization.

It will be difficult to balance the incorporation of new cultures with the museum’s historical, ethnological orientation, but the immigrant population is an important target group. Ethnographic museums in the Netherlands have been struggling to maintain their composure in the current political climate and have to prove their relevance to society. A meaningful connection with the immigrant population will give the ethnographic museums their social-societal significance and an important function in the pluralist society.

59 Representing Cultural Diversity Word count: 20.737

Bibliography Afrika Museum. Afrika Museum. Afrika Museum, 2015. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. < http://www.afrikamuseum.nl/> Barth, F. “Introduction”, in F. Barth ed. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries, Boston: Little, Brown 1969. Print. Bedeaux, R. M. A. Rendez-nous notre belier: Het behoud van cultureel erfgoed in Mali. Leiden: CNWS, 1998. Print. Belk, Russel W. "Collectors and collecting." Ed. Susan M Pearce. Interpreting Objects and Collections. London: Routledge, 1994. 317-26. Print. Bremer, Stanley. In Oude Luister Herstelt. Rotterdam: Wereldmuseum/ Fonds Mercator, 2011. Print. Bruchac, Margaret, Siobhan Hart, and H. Martin Wobst. Indigenous archaeologies: a reader on decolonization. Vol. 2. California: Left Coast Press, 2010. Print. Buchli, Victor. The Material Culture Reader Introduction. Oxford: Berg, 2007. Print. Bussemaker, Jet. "Toespraak van minister Bussemaker bij de presentatie van de Uitgangspuntenbrief voor het Cultuurbeleid 2017-2020. " Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science. 8 June 2015. Speech. Web. 10 June 2015. CBS. "Begrippen" Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, 2015. Web. 15 Apr. 2015. CBS. Statline. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, 2014. Web. 15 Apr. 2015. < http://statline.cbs.nl/Statweb/> Cohen, Anthony P. The Symbolic Construction of Community, London: Routledge 1989. Print. Collectie Gelderland. Collectie Gelderland. Erfgoed Gelderland, n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2015. Crooke, Elizabeth. "Museums and community." A companion to museum studies (2006): 170-185. Print. Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science. National service for Cultural Heritage. Op de museale Weegschaal: collectiewaardering in zes stappen. Versloot, Anne, ed. Werkendam: Drukkerij Damen, 2013. Print. Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science. Cultuur als confrontatie: cultuurnota 2001-2004. Zoetermeer: Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschappen, 2000. Print. Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science. Meer dan Kwaliteit: Een nieuwe visie op cultuurbeleid. Rijksoverheid, 2010. Web. 1 Jun. 2015. Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science. Pantser of ruggengraat: cultuurnota 1997-2000. Nuis, Ad, ed. Zoetermeer : Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschappen, 1996. Print. Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science. Ruim baan voor de Culturele Diversiteit. Zoetermeer: Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschappen, 2001. Print.

60 Representing Cultural Diversity Dutch Ministry for Education, Culture and Science. Ruimte voor Cultuur. Rijksoverheid, 8 June 2015. Web. 10 Jun. 2015. < http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en- publicaties/notas/2015/06/08/ruimte-voor-cultuur.html> Duuren, David van. 125 jaar verzamelen. Tropenmuseum. Amsterdam: KIT, 1990. Print. Effert, Rudolf Antonius Hermanis Dominique. Volkenkundig verzamelen: het Koninklijk Kabinet van zeldzaamheden en het Rijks Ethnographisch museum, 1816-1885. Diss. Letteren--Universiteit Leiden, 2003. Leiden: Universiteit Leiden. Print. Ely, R.J. and Thomas, D.A. "Cultural Diversity at Work: The Effects of Diversity Perspectives on Work Group Processes and Outcomes." Administrative Science Quarterly 46.2 (2001): 229-273. Print. Ghorasi, Halleh. "Paradoxen van culturele erkenning: Management van diversiteit in Nieuw Nederland." Tijdschrift voor genderstudies 4 (2006): 42-53. Print. Golding, V., & Modest, W. Eds. Museums and Communities: Curators, collections and collaboration. London: A&C Black, 2013. Print. Grootaers, Jan-Lodewijk, and Eisenburger, Ineke eds. Forms of wonderment: the history and collections of the Afrika Museum, Berg en Dal. Vol. 1. Berg en Dal: Afrika Museum, 2002. Print. Hoekman, Jakob. "Turken in Nederland emanciperen met eigen museum." Reformatisch Dagblad, RD. 20 Oct. 2012. Online. 3 June 2015. ICOM. "ICOM Statutes, adopted during the 21st General Conference in Vienna, Austria, in 2007." ICOM, ICOM, 2007. Web. 19 Apr. 2015. Iervolino, Serena. "Museums, Migrant Communities, and Intercultural Dialogue in Italy." Museums and Communities: Curators, Collections and Collaboration (2013): 113-129. Print. De Jong, Adriaan. De dirigenten van de herinnering: musealisering en nationalisering van de volkscultuur in Nederland 1815-1940. Diss. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 2001. Nijmegen: SUN, 2001. Print. De Jong, A. New Initiatives in the Netherlands Open Air Museum: How an Early Open Air Museum Keeps Up With the Times in Acta Ethnographica Hungarica, 55 (2), Budapest: Akademiai Kiado (2010) pp 329-347, Print. Drieënhuizen. , Caroline. A. (2012). Koloniale collecties, Nederlands aanzien: de Europese elite van Nederlands-Indië belicht door haar verzamelingen, 1811-1957. Diss. Universiteit van Amsterdam, 2012. Print. Karp, Ivan. Museum frictions: public cultures/global transformations. Durham: Duke University Press, 2006. Print. Kistemaker, Renee, et al. De wereld binnen handbereik: Nederlandse kunst-en rariteitenverzamelingen, 1585-1735. Amsterdam: Amsterdams Historisch Museum, 1992. Print. Kottak, Conrad Philip Cultural Anthropology: Appreciating Cultural Diversity. New York: McGraw- Hill, 2011. Print. Kreps, C. (2006). Non-western models of museums and curation in cross-cultural perspective. A companion to museum studies, 457-72. Print. LAGroup/Netwerk CS. De olifant in de kamer: Staalkaart culturele diversiteit in de basisinfrastructuur. Amsterdam: LAGroup, 2009. Print. Layton, R. Ed. Conflict in the archaeology of living traditions. London: Routledge, 2005. Print. Lent, Daan van and Kammer, Claudia "Tropenmuseum en Metropole Orkest gered." NRC Handelsblad, 8 June 2015. Web. 8 June 2015.

61 Representing Cultural Diversity Museon. Museon. Museon, n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2015 Museum Vereniging. "Museum Definitie." Museum Vereniging. Museum Vereniging, n.d. Web. 5 Mar. 2015. Museum Volkenkunde. De Mens in Beeld: Verzamelde Collectieprofielen. Leiden: Museum Volkenkunde, 2008. Print. Museum Volkenkunde. Vooraankondiging: Verlangen naar MEKKA; De reis van de pelgrim. Leiden: Museum Volkenkunde. May 2013. Print. Nationaal Museum voor Wereldculturen. Persbericht: Tropenmuseum, Afrika Museum en Rijksmuseum Volkenkunde fuseren tot nieuw nationaal museum. Leiden: Nationaal Museum voor Wereldculturen. 3 April 2014. Print. Nederlands Openluchtmuseum. Nederlands Openluchtmuseum. NOM, 2015. Web. 2 Apr. 2015. Newman, Andrew, and Fiona McLean. "Heritage builds communities: the application of heritage resources to the problems of social exclusion." International Journal of Heritage Studies 4.3-4 (1998): 143-153. Print. Oostindie, Gert. Postcolonial Netherlands: sixty-five years of forgetting, commemorating, silencing. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2011. Print. Pasztory, Esther. Thinking with things: Toward a new vision of art. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2005. Print. Pearce, Susan Mary. Interpreting objects and collections. London: Routledge, 1994. Print. Peers, L. L., & Brown, A. K. Museums and source communities: A Routledge reader. London: Routledge, 2003. Print. Prak, Maarten. Gouden eeuw: Het raadsel van de Republiek. Nijmegen: Uitgeverij SUN, 2002. Print. Raad van Europa. Report Committee on Culture, Science and Education. The cultural situation of the Kurds. Straatsburg: Raad van Europa, 2006. Print. Roodenburg, H.W. "Marken als relict: het samengaan van schilderkunst, toerisme, volkskunde en fysische antropologie rond 1900". Volkskundig Bulletin 25.2/3 (1999), 197-214. Universiteitsmuseum Groningen. Jaarverslag 2012. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2014. Universiteitsmuseum Groningen. Jaarverslag 2013. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2014. Sandell, Richard, ed. Museums, society, inequality. London: Routledge, 2003. Print. Scheffer, Paul. "Het multiculturele drama." NRC Handelsblad, 29 Jan. 2000. Print. Schotanus, Mensje, Arnoldus-Schröder, Victorine, and De Jonge, N.C.. Hoe het ging en verging: 25 jaar “Gerardus van der Leeuw” Groningen: Volkenkundig Museum “Gerardus van der Leeuw”/ Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2003. Print. Shapiro, Daniel. "Repatriation: a modest proposal." NYUJ Int'l L. & Pol. 31 (1998): 95. Print. Simpson, M. G. Making representations: Museums in the post-colonial era. London: Routledge, 2012. Print. Smith, Laurajane. Uses of heritage. London: Routledge, 2006. Print. Sniderman, Paul M., and Hagendoorn, Aloysius. When ways of life collide: Multiculturalism and its discontents in the Netherlands. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007. Print.

62 Representing Cultural Diversity Stifft, Pritt. “RACISME! Museum zoekt Marokkaanse medewerkers.” GeenStijl. GeenStijl, 2 Mar. 2015. Web. 10 Mar. 2015. Stuurgroep Code Culturele Diversiteit. Code Culturele Diversiteit. CCD, 2011. Web. 25 Feb. 2015. SVCN. Volkenkunde Collectie Nederland. Stichting Volkenkundige Collectie Nederland, n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2015. Tropenmuseum. Bezoekersgids. Amsterdam: KIT Publishers, 2010. Print. Van Brakel, Koos, and Legêne Susan. Collecting at Cultural Crossroads: Collection Policies and Approaches (2008-2012) of the Tropenmuseum. Amsterdam: KIT Publishers, 2008. Print. VluchtelingenWerk Nederland. Armenië: politieke instabiliteit en onderdrukking.VluchtelingenWerk Nederland, 2014. Web. 1 Jun. 2014. < http://www.vluchtelingenwerk.nl/feiten-cijfers/landen-van- herkomst/armenië> VluchtelingenWerk Nederland. Vluchtelingen in getallen 2014. VluchtelingenWerk Nederland, Oct. 2014. Web. 1 Jun. 2014. < http://www.vluchtelingenwerk.nl/publicaties/overige- publicaties/vluchtelingen-getallen-2014> Waterton, Emma, Laurajane Smith, and Gary Campbell. "The utility of discourse analysis to heritage studies: The Burra Charter and social inclusion." International journal of heritage studies 12.4 (2006): 339-355. Print. Wentholt, Arnold. Nusantara: highlights from Museum Nusantara Delft. Delft: C.Zwartenkot Art Books/ Stichting Nusantara, 2014. Print Wereldmuseum. Meerjarenbeleidsplan 2013-2016. Rotterdam: Wereldmuseum, 2012. Print. Wereldmuseum. Wereldmuseum. Wereldmuseum Rotterdam, 2015. Web. 21 Mar. 2015. Wijs, Sonja. "Artis in de Tropen." Tropenmuseum. Tropenmuseum, n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2015. Zorlu, Aslan, and Joop Hartog. Migration and immigrants: the case of the Netherlands. Disc. Pap. Tinbergen Institute, 2001. No. 01-042/3. Print.

Illustration Figure 1: Map of the colonies, original illustration “Map of Dutch Colonies” retrieved from ImgSoup, n.d. Web. 7 June 2015. Changes by author.

63 Representing Cultural Diversity Interviews Bahra, Harvinder. Personal interview. London, 13 August 2013. Minutes. De Jong, Ad. Personal interview. Den Haag, 30 April 2015. Minutes. Van Brakel, Koos. Personal interview. Amsterdam, 24 April 2015. Recording.

Visitations Tropenmuseum. Amsterdam 3 March 2015. Tropenmuseum. Amsterdam 15 April 2015. Museon. Den Haag, 30 April 2015. Museon. Den Haag. 13 May 2015. Museum Volkenkunde. Leiden, 26 May 2015. Wereldmuseum. Rotterdam, 3 June 2015.

Correspondence Kevenaar, Eline. (Wereldmuseum) “Scriptie volkenkundige collecties.” Message to the author. 28 May 2015. E-mail. De Jonge, Nico. (Universiteitsmuseum Groningen) “Scriptie volkenkundige collecties.” Message to the author. 14 April 2015. E-mail. Pals, Marielle. (Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen) “Scriptie volkenkundige collecties.” Message to the author. 28 May 2015. E-mail. Van Harskamp, Michiel. (Museon) “Scriptie volkenkundige collecties.” Message to the author. 28 May 2015. E-mail. Van Prooije, Leendert. (Openluchtmuseum) “Diversiteitsbeleid.” Message to the author. 2 June 2015. E-mail.

64 Representing Cultural Diversity Appendix 1: Inquiry format

Subject: Vragenlijst

“In mijn scriptie beschouw ik de relatie tussen collecties in etnografische musea in Nederland en de culturele achtergrond van de allochtone populatie en of/hoe musea deze relatie ontwikkelen.

1. Schiet u bij dit onderwerp gelijk een project of deel van de collectie te binnen?

2. Is er een specifiek orgaan in het museum dat zich bezig houdt met culturele diversiteit* of met het bereiken van allochtone doelgroepen?

Zo ja, 3. Wanneer is dit in het leven geroepen en wat was de aanleiding?

4. Is het museum op de hoogte van het door de Museum Vereniging onderschreven document ‘Code Culturele Diversiteit’? of het eraan voorafgaande ‘De Olifant in de Kamer’?

5. Is deze of aanverwante code van belang voor uw beleidsvorming?

Zo ja, 6a. Hoe interpreteert/ implementeert het museum deze code met betrekking op de programmering?

Zo nee, 6b. Speelt het museum op een andere manier in op diversiteit in de samenleving?

7. Wordt daarbij gebruik gemaakt van deelcollecties uit het land van herkomst van allochtone** doelgroepen?

8. Waarom denkt u dat culturele diversiteit belangrijk is voor etnografische musea?

9. Is er nog iets wat u zou willen toevoegen?

* Demografische (geslacht, leeftijd, etniciteit) en persoonlijke (cultuur, religie, sexualiteit) verscheidenheid in de samenleving. Culturele diversiteit is verscheidenheid in etnisch-culturele achtergrond.

** De Nederlandse overheid en het CBS onderscheiden allochtonen op basis van land van herkomst of dat van een of beide ouders.

65 Representing Cultural Diversity English translation

Subject: Inquiry

“In my thesis I am investigating the relation between collections in ethnographic museums in the Netherlands and the cultural background of the immigrant population and if/how museums develop this relationship.

1. Probed by this subject, is there a specific project or part of the collection that comes to mind?

2. Is there a specific department in the museum that is concerned with cultural diversity* or with reaching immigrant target groups?

If yes, 3. When was this department founded and what was the reason?

4. Is the museum aware of the document ‘Code for Cultural Diversity’, subscribed by the Museum Vereniging, or the preceding document ‘The Elephant in the Room’?

5. Is this code or related documents of influence on the museum’s policymaking?

If yes, 6a. How does the museum interpret/ implement the code with regards to programming?

If no, 6b. Does the museum respond to cultural diversity in society in any other way?

7. Does the museum use collections from the immigrant** population’s countries of origin to respond to cultural diversity?

8. Why do you, personally, think that cultural diversity is important for ethnographic museums?

9. Is there anything you would like to add?

*Demographic (gender, age, ethnicity) and personal (culture, religion, sexuality) difference in society. Cultural diversity refers to varied ethnic-cultural backgrounds.

** The Dutch government and the CBS distinguish immigrants based on their country of origin or that of (one of) their parents.

66 Representing Cultural Diversity