Identified Indian Objects: An Examination of Category

Abstract

In writing this article, I am responding to issues made apparent by my own research on the representation of Native American culture in public spaces, specifically, on the exhibition of objects in museums and culture centers. What began as an interest in gaining a better understanding of how American Indian objects are identified in the written materials that often inform museum didactic labeling and text panels, resulted in my realization that such terminology was applied inaccurately and inconsistently. This misapplication contributes to a prevailing ignorance of the complexities of Native cultures and lifeways. The myriad meanings associated with terms attached to current descriptors have confounded the task of writing about American Indian material culture and/or representing it in public space. My research—based on data gathered from scholarly and professional texts in the areas of fine arts, culture studies, art history, museum studies, public history, folklore, artists’ biographies, anthropology, archaeology, and American Indian studies—and my work as a trained artist, museum consultant, and scholar indicates a need to clarify the terminology and, perhaps, to standardize it. Writing and teaching about the representation of culture leads to some perplexing questions. Once in a museum-studies course a student asked me, “What is a traditional Native object?” The question was prompted by the use of the word on an exhibit label. This seemingly simple question led me to an exploration of the profound philosophies and pragmatic ramifications underlying the use of certain terminology. The answer became more of a philosophical quagmire than an actual response. As I conducted my own inquiry, the same questions continually arose about words such as authentic, genuine, and Indian-made. What did all of this terminology really mean? Was it