Lara: Metanarrative

Over the past four years I have become familiar with the twist and turns of the halls of the Penn Museum, and maybe even too familiar with its internal logic as an institution to the point that examining its exhibits in the lens of an introductory visitor seems impossible.  I am realizing that this familiarity can be detrimental to my ability to access and fully grasp ways of meaning-making outside of my established knowledge of the institution. Touring the halls this afternoon, however, was an exercise that has helped reorient my pre-established thoughts and feelings concerning the story that the institution is telling especially concerning the role of objects in crafting narratives. 

According to the museum website, the self-described mission of the institution is to "encapsulate and illustrate the human story: who we are and where we come from." Thus, people are described as central to the mission and reasoning for the museum's existence, but is this expressed and comprehensively and critically developed in the content and physical execution of its galleries? I would argue that no, people and the significance of objects to lived experience continues to be an element lacking in the institutional structure of the museum. 

So, then, what story is the museum telling?  A prominent story that the institution crafts about humanity is that the dynamic nature of lived experience can be  reduced down to the display of static objects. The idea that objects act as proxies or surrogates for people and their lives is a function of the foundation of the institution's affiliation with the disciplines of archaeology and anthropology. The most recent exhibit instillation is rather overt about the autonomy of objects in constructing their own meaning, exemplified by its title 'Objects Speak . . . Media Through Time.' This title perpetuates the idea that objects have innate meanings separate from their socially constructed environment, and, thus, can stand in for the voices of individuals. 

Of course, the objectification of individuals can also be seen throughout the museum especially in the form of the display and discussion of human remains. The Physical Anthropology display of individual skulls on the first floor and the Mummy galleries on the third floor are clear examples of the way deceased human beings are treated as 'things' rather than once sentient individuals. Funerary objects themselves (which I feel can be seen as an extension of the deceased) including various coffins, sarcophagi, and funerary paraphernalia that make up a large portion of the Etruscan, Greek, and Egyptian Galleries further demonstrates the way something as deserving of reverence as death has become and object of viewership instead of serious contemplation.  

As a result, the story of humanity is reduced to mere assemblages of objects for display, retroactively made significant and meaningful in an equation where object equals person and vice versa. That being said, I would argue that the gallery 'Native American Voices' presents an example of an exhibit that attempts to move beyond the static and fetishized display of artifacts to demonstrate that material objects are innately crafted by people for purposes other than mere display. While the exhibit itself is not without its faults, it represents an approach that hopefully is followed throughout future instillations.