The Benefits and Shortfalls of “Digital Repatriation”

Katherine Carlton

Native American Material Heritage and the Digital

Age

To explore the ways in which Native American artifacts can be replicated digitally to inhabit a virtual, shared space that is then utilized by museum professionals and Native community members. How does the use and interpretation of these objects differ when the viewing medium is virtual rather than physical, and what are the implications for control?

Research Objective

What are the benefits of artifact digitization?How is knowledge being shared and

communicated virtually, and how is this exchange different than what is done in the physical sphere?

In what situations is it more useful or necessary to have access to the physical object instead of the digital replica?

Who has access to these artifacts, both physically and virtually?Once the object is digitized, does it remain in the

possession of the museum?

Questions to Consider

The Virtual Museum and DatabaseArizona State

Museum Virtual Pottery Project

Pitt Rivers MuseumThe Louvre

Improve researchMake collection accessibleDocument collection before it is “lost”Appeal to wider audienceWork with communities

Why Digitize?

Collaborative ProjectsLac Vieux Desert

Band of Lake Superior OjibweMichael Laukinen

University of PennsylvaniaTimothy PowellWhite Earth Tribal

and Community College

Anishinaabe Tribes

“To bring to life, to sanction, to give permission”

Gibagadinamaagoom

http://gibagadinamaagoom.info/

Great Lakes Research Alliance for the Study of Aboriginal Arts and Culture

“Would it be possible to use information technology to digitally reunite Great Lakes heritage that is currently scattered across museums and archives in North America and Europe with Aboriginal community knowledge, memory and perspectives?” GRASAC Website

GRASAC

What are the benefits and drawbacks of these virtual spaces?Opportunities for education?Knowledge sharing

How can Native American community members interact with these digitized objects?How does it differ from physical encounters?

Implications for intellectual property?Who is in control?

Questions Raised

MethodologyResearch Ojibwe

history of basketryWhy is it culturally

significant?Who is involved?Intellectual

property?

Digitizing the Museum of Anthropology’s Great Lakes Basket Collection

Methodology (Continued)

Methodology (Continued)Observing the

interactions of Native community members with virtual heritage sites and artifact databases

GRASAC

http://gibagadinamaagoom.info/elders.html

Observations at the Ziibiwing Center of Anishinabe Culture and Lifeways

Methodology (Continued)

“The permanent, educational, sacred, and ceremonial collections of the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe (SCIT), managed by the Ziibiwing Center (ZC) are a bridge through time where the past meets the present”

-Ziibiwing Center Website

Compare the ways in which baskets are used and interpreted by Anishinaabe community members on virtual databases versus in the physical space of the Ziibiwing Center; What are the benefits and drawbacks of each medium, how could they compliment each other, and what are the implications for ownership and control?

Research ObjectiveDigital versus Physical

Baskets are central to Anishinaabe cultureIs the physicality important when dealing with

these objects?How can digitization be used to highlight

cultural importance?How do community members interact with

these objects in a virtual space?Who is allowed access?What aspects of the baskets are best shared

through interaction with the physical object, rather than the digital?

Relevant Questions

Significance of ResearchAddresses the

effectiveness of the digital spacePhysical versus

virtualPotential for further

collaborationRefining of Projects

Questions issues of control and ownership