I had traveled to Ottawa in later February to give some lecture segments at a local SCA (medieval) event. I took the opportunity to add any extra day to the trip for a visit to one of the many museums in Canada's capital. I had considered both the Diefenbunker, the War Museum, or the Aviation & Space, none of which I had seen before. Truth was I really was hoping to see something that would lead so some artistic inspiration (but not the kind of thing likely at the National Gallery).
So I chose to go back to the Canadian Museum of History, located just over the bridge in Hull.
Now I have not been to what was once the Canadian Museum of Civilization for over a decade. I was well aware, through my contacts in the archaeology community, of the re-engineering of the museum's research, programing and presentation under Steven Harper's government from 2012 -2017.
As someone fairly familiar with the general sweep of Canadian History, I was extremely displeased with the what had been done.
It is clear that simple politics has shaped what has been included and how it has been presented.
The old presentation included simulated room settings to display objects. These started from the impressive West Coast First Nations hall, with timber building fronts and totem poles. As you moved into the modern era, there were recreated street scenes and individual buildings. All used to situate objects in context. A highlight for me was the use of living history staff, mainly working as 'animators', ie presenting set piece historic based and scripted presentations, followed with more free form public interactions. Overall the lighting was bright and the spaces airy.
As an important aside here, regular readers are aware that I have significant bias here. I have worked as a living history interpreter at a number of Settlement Era sites. I have made many replicas and reproductions for both static and interpretive presentations, plus worked as a consultant on a number of traveling exhibits. Most significant is my creation of the 'Norse Encampment' program for L'Anse aux Meadows NHSC, and my long association with Parks Canada for that site.
The new presentation is dimly lit, overall the feeling is being in a dark shrine to the past.
A very carefully selected and limited view of the past as well.
The front public spaces now only contain First Nations related objects, primarily major modern sculptural works. Yes, I agree that these are impressive and important pieces. There had originally been a 'European' based diorama as well. This being a representation of the first landing at Vinland by the Norse, with two figures and a detailed replica of a small boat and associated goods.
This is gone now, who knows where all those pieces ended up? Sorry Mr. Harper, my feeling is that First Nations are being shoved forward, as a tossed bone showing 'see, we know you were here first' Especially since it is the monumental scale *contemporary* work of First Nations ethnic artists being featured to exclusion. (The fact that "Indigenous peoples, including First Nations, Inuit and Métis" are given free admissions, while all others pay any day but Thursday or Canada Day, kind of re-enforces this.)
" The galleries on Level 1 of the Museum present exhibitions relating
principally to Canada’s First Peoples: their histories, cultural
identities, artistic expressions and traditional and contemporary ways
of life.
On Level 2 there are three galleries devoted to changing exhibitions.
Some of these exhibitions are designed by the Canadian Museum of
History; others are produced by Canadian as well as international
institutions.
The Canadian History Hall is located on levels 3 and 4. This exhibition traces Canada’s history from the dawn of human habitation to the present day. " (quoted from the CMH web site)
A couple of key notes to that description:
Take a look at the allocation of space, via the Museum's printed guide.
Level 2 also contains the IMAX theatre, the gift shop and significantly the Canadian Children's Museum. Which you should note is not even listed as containing 50% of level two in the description above.
Level 3 and especially Level 4 are reduced in raw size over the lower levels. The combined exhibit space is about equal to that on Level 1. (I freely admit that I was getting burned out by the time I got to Level 4, which is 'Contemporary - post 1914', and did not view that. That gallery was brightly lit.)
The Canadian History Hall starts with the Norse in Vinland. (French first, then English, so reduce what you see in half for duplication.) One Panel. Kind of...
Objects? 1) a pile of wood chips, 2) a pile of iron smelting slag. There is absolutely no description or explanation of why either of those fragments mean anything. There are no replicas of the two most significant artifacts, the soapstone spindle whorl or the (diagnostic) bronze ring pin. (There are lots of other replicas other places.)
The next case is 'Arctic People's First Interactions with Europeans'
 |
Object #8 - number tag is 1cm
|
Sorry about the image quality, shooting in the dark (see below)
The objects presented include about half that are actually of Greenland Norse origin. It is significant that the objects are actually described as being found in Arctic People's sites, so this origin is hazy at best. Especially the difference between object 10, actually of Arctic People's creation, (and highly significant) and the other two iron artifacts, reworked from broken European objects. (That knife badly photographed as #8 was clearly to my eyes a broken spear tip.) This major technological difference is completely glossed over.
As you proceed through Post Contact Canada, roughly equal space is given to objects from French and English European origins, and those used by First Nations. 9 about 1/3 ?) Primarily these are 'memories of the Rich and Famous' (you know : 'pocket watch of the first Governor of Quebec' ).
Again, Mr. Harper? I understand that you want to ensure that everyone remembers that Six Nations on the Grand River also fought in the War of 1812. But the CMH has already given over roughly 50% + of the total exhibit floor space to exclusively First Nations culture and history via Level 1.
Looking at the First People's gallery...
Although I do understand there is a simple collections / preservation problem with First Nations materials. The bulk of the objects on display in the First People's Hall, if actually 'historic artifacts', are late 1800's dated. The bulk of these are, as expected, wood or plant material. Many objects are in fact of completely modern creation, and made by First Nations artisans. These are most often not listed as 'replicas' or 'reproductions' however (1) They are simply credited to the artisan with the actual production date.
 |
Double images on object descriptions from shooting through glass
|
Note the complete lack of any detail here. This does say 'model' (one of the few so described). Is this life sized? What is it made of? What is the history behind this? Fish trap used how? What is 'Haisle' (a Nation, a Location?) Without proper context, there can not be understanding.
Another bias point. When I was researching 'What Dreams They Had' I ran into a huge problem deciphering the difference between 'traditional' / historical / ancient. Too often 'traditional' came down to 'what my grand mother told me' - with no appreciation that what was done 200 years ago could possibly be different, Much less 600 years ago = pre-European.
I found too often the background for objects in this gallery, when presented, completely missed this quite important difference between what is well understood to be a shattered 'tradition', an a possible difference in historic practice. To be fair, the overall gallery presentation is attempting to illustrate material culture within separate regional Nations.
I do understand that museums hand over much of the control to the presentation of their collections to graphic designers, who often have little to no understanding of the objects they are presenting. Drama is more important than clarity all too often. The average viewer does not read beyond a couple of words. Context is only provided by loose groupings of objects, often shoved together for effect more than historic realities. Overall I found much of the First Peoples Gallery suffered from this stripped down information. Especially with simple things like functional objects. Why is that basket in any way different than the last basket presented?
 |
What are the materials used here? What source? Not given on the label!
|
Shooting in the Dark?
Look, I understand that at least SOME of the objects include paint or dye. Somewhat reduced lighting should be expected. But the First People's and History Hall Level A materials were in the dark. Most especially the 'West Coast Nations' materials. From an artistic standpoint, these were the only materials on display that caught my design eye. Below I will show the images as shot - and after considerable modifications via photoshop. (1) Note that this selection is from objects that particularly struck me as possible inspiration points for my own future work in one way or another.
 |
Painted, this one of the better lit objects!
|
 |
This was so dark, I could not get a usable image of the description.
|
 |
'Headdress', worn like a helmet
|
It is hard not for me to assume the whole purpose of the near darkness used in the West Coast Nations section specifically was to create an intentional 'shrine' like atmosphere. I noticed anyone attempting conversation was speaking in hushed or whispired tones. Why?
Now of course I had my drawing book - and did make my own scratch drawings of some of these pieces.
If I am feeling generous, I may undertake a second blog posting illustrating some of the other objects that caught my eye...
1) The only thing I studied at all four years of art school was photography. The camera used here is a 2008 Olympus E-300 (8 mpx) with a 3.5 aperture lens. Most of the exposures were hand held (braced against the case where possible) from 1/8 - 1/4 second exposures. I freely admit my hands are not as steady as they once were. But that does not account for the lack of light to enable even vaguely correct exposures.
