La nature de la numinosité et sa reconstruction muséologique

The author questions the notion of “numinous” objects, i.e. supposed to hold a certain power in a certain cultural context, and for precise communities. Once they are put in the museum, these objects are supposed to lose all their qualities, only to the benefit of scholarly values alien to their ori...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Culture & musées
Main Author: Ames, Michael M.
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:French
Published: Avignon Université 2022
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journals.openedition.org/culturemusees/9204
Description
Summary:The author questions the notion of “numinous” objects, i.e. supposed to hold a certain power in a certain cultural context, and for precise communities. Once they are put in the museum, these objects are supposed to lose all their qualities, only to the benefit of scholarly values alien to their original properties. The purpose of the article is on the contrary to suggest, according to anthropological perspective, that the situation of such artefacts, during their transport, cannot be reduced to such a binary opposition – of the situation of their curators or visitors does not boil down to a simple opposition between members of the community of origin and external members, the first enjoying a monopoly of understanding, the latter being deprived of it. Michael Ames argues for a collaboration of scholars and stakeholders, and argues that the re-presentation of an object within a museum is, in the end, not more artificial than the one of the same object within its culture of origin. This theme was particularly close to the author’s heart, who returned to it in his last article, published posthumously: “Counterfeit museology”, Museum Management and Curatorship, vol. 21, n° 3, 2006, p. 171-186. L’auteur interroge la notion d’objets « numineux », c’est-à-dire supposés détenir un certain pouvoir dans un certain contexte culturel, et pour des communautés précises. Une fois mis au musée, ces objets sont censés perdre toutes leurs qualités, au profit de seules valeurs savantes étrangères à leurs propriétés d’origine. Le propos de l’article est au contraire de soutenir, dans une perspective anthropologique, que la situation de pareils artefacts, au cours de leurs transports, ne se résume pas à pareille opposition binaire – et que la situation de leurs conservateurs ou de leurs visiteurs ne se résume pas non plus à une simple opposition entre membres de la communauté d’origine et membres extérieurs, les premiers jouissant d’un monopole de compréhension, les seconds en étant privés. Michael Ames plaide pour une ...