Returning cultural objects

Yesterday, Svenska Dagbladet (one of the big newspapers in Sweden) wrote about the returning of two aboriginal craniums to Australia. Today, they write more (see http://www.svd.se/kulturnoje/nyheter/artikel_891649.svd ). A discussion about those matters is of utter importance. Throughout collections in the world, there are many objects, human remains and other things, that were taken from other countries, or from indigenous peoples, in ways that are not acceptable. This can be craniums, mummies, but also works of art and things with religious background. Just have a look at the Egyptian collections in many famous museums. How did they get there? Legitimate questions to ask. In each and every case the backgound must be investigated and in dialogue it must be determined what to do with a certain object. Such a process must take some time, but not too much. There is a certain risk of commercialisation, writes SvD, and there is. Some of those objects can be very valuable. So caution is necessary.

Still, we must go on, as a part of a decolonization process. Humain remains ask for special caution and sensitivity. Also, religiously loaded objects and objects from graves must be paid special attention to. And the nearer in time, the more sensitive questions are. But there are even cultural objects, works of art, simply stolen from the people.

Of course, there is a great value in having collections from other places. To be able to study cultures from all over the world. Therefor, there should be an ongoing possibility to have exhibits on Indian culture in Stockholm, or on Swedish culture in Sioux Falls. To name just one example or two. A good dialogue can settle this. There are always possibilities of exchange, of compensation. When the Ethnographical Museum gave back a totem pole to the Haisla people in North America, they god a modern hand-made one in exchange.

It is a good thing that dialogue has started on those matters. We still can have educational exhibitions on different cultures. But we would like to be sure that they are ethically acceptable. And human remains and grave objects must be handled with utmost respect and caution. Especially in that case, the people in question are to decide themselves what is acceptable or not.

The Swedes and the Bible.

A new survey among 1000 Swedes has been conducted in January. The results are in many newspapers today. About 32% said that the Bible has importance for their views on ethical and moral issues. For the majority it has not. Only about 10% of the people reads the Bible once a month, a figure which has been about the same during the last few years.

One question in the survey was: Is there any sripture that has had big influence on your ethics and moral views? The Bible was mentioned here by 20%, second largest was the UN Declaration on Human Rights (4%). Other religious documents had very small percentages, eg the Quran 1%. There were also people mentioning as diverse documents as greek filosofers, Harry Potter, the Lord of the Rings, Anne Franks Diary, etc.

But most remarkably, 62% of the people said that no document at all had such an influence on them. This is a high figure and one can wonder what this on the long term is going to mean for ethical and moral views in the country. With no written document at all as a guidance ethical and moral views risk to become rather floating and and changing under unclear influences. One could speculate that a situation like this would make it easier for certain groups, propagating for values contradictory to what most people still view as good, to find a growing ground. Further one could speculate that, no external guidance in form of any document being of relevance, the own winning could become the measuring stick for what is good and evil. Of course all this is speculative, but still, this figure of 62% might be a warning bell.

For the Christian community in Sweden it must be a challenge to give the Bible a greater relevance in Swedish society. Indeed, interest for religion seems to be growing. God is discussed in the media more than some years ago.