Arts of Africa, Asia, Oceania, and the Americas. (recent exhibitions).

ARTS OF AFRICA, ASIA, OCEANIA, AND THE AMERICAS

Musee du Louvre, Pavillon des Sessions Paris, France Opened April 2000

Almost twenty years after the inauguration of the Rockefeller Wing at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Europe's most important art museum finally cleared a space for the arts of Africa, Asia, Oceania, and the Americas. The opening of the Pavilion des Sessions by the President of the French Republic, Jacques Chirac, is the result of a long ideological and intellectual debate over the introduction of "arts premiers" ("first arts"), as they have been referred to in France, into the sanctum sanctorum of Western art. In his foreword to the exhibition catalogue, the President expresses the hope that the masterpieces shown in this new wing of the Musee du Louvre "will attest that no hierarchy exists among the arts." The admission of non-European arts to the country's most prestigious museum institution thus constitutes both a symbolically laden event and an important political act. (1)

In this text I will not discuss the museum for non-European arts scheduled to open in 2004, which will be built by Jean Nouvel on the Quai Branly along the Seine, opposite the Eiffel Tower, although in conception it is closely related to the present exhibition at the Louvre. Those concerned, however, have pointed out that the Pavilion des Sessions, named after the parliamentary sessions for which the building was originally constructed, cannot be seen as a prefiguration or synthesis of the Musee du Quai Branly (Viatte 2000:41; Pomian 2000:80). Rather, the selection on view, which is the work of the art expert, collector, and former art dealer Jacques Kerchache, the French president's main counselor, should be considered as a complement to the future Branly museum. The Pavillon des Sessions will be permanently reserved for the arts of Africa, Asia, Oceania, and the Americas, even after the opening of the Branly museum in 2004, but the many loans will necessitate a rotation system.

In many respects a division remains between the newly established non-European arts wing and the other collections at the Louvre. The Pavilion des Sessions occupies only a small corner of the museum and is quite remote from the main entrance under Pei's glass pyramid. Moreover, the exhibition of these non-European arts has not been accompanied by the establishment of a curatorial department within the Louvre's walls: the administrative offices and scientific staff responsible for the new wing will actually be housed in the Musee du Quai Branly.

Although the other sections of the Pavillon des Sessions also contain stunning artworks, I will here limit myself to its African section. Of the 117 pieces on exhibit, 46 are from Africa. As was the case at the celebrated exhibition "Africa: The Art of a Continent" at the Royal Academy of Arts, London, in 1995 (Phillips 1995), visitors are welcomed by a predynastic Amratian statuette in schist, which according to the exhibition curators should link the new wing to the other departments of the Louvre. Along with some recently acquired archaeological finds from Nigeria, this Egyptian statuette testifies to the antiquity of Africa's civilizations. (2)

Since Kerchache's selection is meant first and foremost for the layperson barely familiar with non-European arts, his choice holds few surprises for the average African-art amateur. Given the limited number of objects included, Kerchache did not attempt to present an encyclopedic survey. He emphasized that his selection was driven by subjective and even "autobiographical" motives (Geoffroy-Schneiter 2000b:6). As can be inferred from the title of the associated catalogue, Sculptures: Afrique, Asie, Oceanie, Ameriques, only sculptural works are shown. In order to avoid the anecdotal and to negate stereotypical ideas about African art, Kerchache deliberately limited the number of materials other than wood, and included surprisingly few masks and just one "power figure" (Varenne 2000:27). As a result of these limitations, the layperson is likely to leave the Louvre with a simplified and distorted view of the arts of the African continent.

The objects on view have mainly been lent by national museums and a few other French and overseas institutions. Taking the colonial history of the national collections into account, it should not come as a surprise that the former French African regions are well represented. The strong presence of Nigeria is mainly the result of the French state's acquisition in 1997 of 276 Nigerian art objects from the Musee Barbier-Mueller, Geneva (Willett & Eyo 1997). The installation also includes some new acquisitions for the future Musee du Quai Branly, the result of donations as well as purchases.

The gifts raise important ethical questions, since some of the donors have also sold objects to the Musee du Quai Branly. The Musee Barbier-Mueller is a case in point: France paid about FF 40 million to acquire the 276 Nigerian pieces mentioned above. As suggested by the code of ethics of the International Council of Museums (ICOM), the risk of a conflict of interest arising from the simultaneous donation and sale of artworks is real. The gifts Anne and Jacques Kerchache made to the Quai Branly have also aroused suspicion, because it is thought that they will increase the value of what remains in their private possession (Noce 2000a:3). In order to prevent any misunderstanding on these sensitive points, it is imperative that the government issue a clearly articulated and well-considered policy.

Then there is the allegation that by buying Nok terracottas from one or more Belgian dealers, the French state disregarded the UNESCO treaties for the protection of Nigeria's archaeological heritage. According to one journalist, the agreement signed with the Nigerian government in which France promises funds for and assistance with protecting Nigeria's artistic heritage actually looks like an attempt to buy its impunity (Noce 2000b:5; see also Mark 2000:93). However, the problem seems to reside in the fact that Belgium ratified neither the 1970 UNESCO Convention nor the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention. Therefore, instead of accusing a number of individual art dealers, what is urgently needed is the ratification and implementation of these treaties and resolutions by all European countries involved. It is obvious that prestigious institutions like the Louvre should set the standard by adopting a rigorous acquisition and exhibition policy, especially since the Musee du Quai Branly is under UNESCO's patronage.

By devoting our attention almost exclusively to the ethics of the acquisition of archaeological objects from west Africa, we sometimes forget that the export of nonarchaeological objects from Africa did not always occur peacefully or smoothly either. Despite Jean-Louis Paudrat's fascinating historical introduction to the African part of the Louvre catalogue (pp. 44-57), and many interesting historical facts in some of the catalogue entries, one finds very little information about the colonial context of most of the works on exhibit and even less about the "collection history" of the most recent acquisitions. Laudably, however, the Louvre has clearly distanced itself from the postmodernist self-critique which has threatened to paralyze a number of ethnographic museums in Europe. (3) In some cases the post-colonial identity crisis entailed by this moral introspection has led to a total neglect of the artistic value of the objects contained in their ethnography collections.

The Louvre, however, has deliberately chosen what the French press terms an "aesthetic approach," stressing the "excellence of form" (Roux 2000:28). This approach, befitting an art museum, is greatly served by the sober and "cool" presentation of designer Jean-Michel Wilmotte, in which the objects themselves are the focus of attention. Most of them are individually shown in large glass cases on elegant bronze mounts or freely exhibited on flat bronze bases. The size of the cases gives the impression that the sculptures are floating. The two large African rooms are suffused with a soft natural light filtered through a sophisticated system of metal shades, but almost every object is also lit by four spotlights fixed against the seven-meter-high ceilings. The pale, sandy-colored stone of the walls and floors adds to the serene atmosphere which greatly enhances the appreciation of the artworks. Moreover, the fact that the 117 objects are dispersed over an area of 1,400 square meters makes it possible to view all the exhibits from all four sides.

The actual object labels in the exhibition, in French, English, and Spanish, are very concise and offer only minimal information. As noted earlier by Frank Willett (1991:189-90), using vernacular terms like nimba or eyima bieri without explanation does not teach the visitor anything. Many of the labels mention very early dates, but the scientific criteria on which they are based are not always clear. The attributions of some works could also cause confusion among the lay public in that they give the impression that names such as Nok, Sapi, Baga Bulunits, or Bidjogo all have the same bearing. Furthermore, contrary to the clear-cut identifications offered at the Louvre, it is generally known among Africanist art historians that many styles cannot be neatly equated with ethnic groups.

In spite of this so-called aesthetic or decontextualized presentation, visitors can gain insight into the cultural background of the objects in different ways. Handouts in French and English contain quite elaborate summaries of the catalogue entries. This catalogue, edited by Jacques Kerchache, is an impressive collective work which draws not only on the collaboration of forty-eight specialists, among them such eminent experts as Ezio Bassani, Leon Siroto, and Robert Farris Thompson, but also a number of upcoming scholars like Marline Biton, Vincent Boulore (who also assisted Kerchache with the general editing of the volume), Marie-Yvonne Curtis, and Helene Joubert. Those who want to delve even deeper into the objects' cultural context can consult the well-made CD-ROM in the specifically designed "espace d'interpretation." In this separate corner, where dark colors dominate, about twelve computers are available to visitors who want to learn more about the exhibited pieces through both image and sound.

The Louvre installation also offers more than a mere aesthetic approach, as the objects are exhibited according to geographical and, to a lesser extent, historical criteria. Although it could easily go unnoticed by the less informed visitor, Kerchache opted for this kind of arrangement with the aim of shedding light on the multiple formal relationships between the different cultures represented (Geoffroy-Schneiter 2000b:5--6). Unfortunately, practical constraints of space have affected the internal logic of this scheme in a number of instances. Perhaps the most effective juxtaposition is the grave marker of the Sakalava people of Madagascar, which is placed in the small gateway leading to the Asian art section, near two anthropomorphic poles of the Nage people of the Indonesian island of Flores.

There is little doubt that amateurs of African art will recognize the high artistic quality of Kerchache's subjective selection. One may assume that it reflects the consensus that seems to exist in the West among experts, curators, art dealers, and collectors about such vague notions as "aesthetic perfection" and "artistic value." However, it should be stressed that we are mostly dealing here with the opinions of outsiders, not of the makers and users of the artworks. Research into local aesthetics shows not only that the spokespersons for these cultures have their own aesthetic preferences and distinguish good from bad art, but that our preferences do not necessarily coincide with theirs. An art museum which claims to celebrate respect for arts from all places and all times has the moral obligation to acknowledge these insights. The same is true for a museum whose ultimate goal is to transcend the artificial opposition between so-called aesthetic and ethnological approaches.

(1.) Except for two catalogues and a CD-ROM published in conjunction with the opening of the Louvre wing, articles about the event have appeared in both the specialized and the general art press. The French magazines Arts d'Afrique Noire, Beaux Arts, Connaissance des Arts, and Telerama each devoted a special issue to it. Two general books bearing the unhappy term "arts premiers" in their title, were published on the occasion of the opening as well (Degli & Mauze 2000; Geoffroy-Schneiter 2000a). The debate surrounding the Louvre wing and the future Musee du Quai Branly also led to the publication of thematic issues of the Africanist journals Cahiers d'Etudes Africaines (Dupuis 1999) and Le Journal des Africanistes (Coquet 1999).

(2.) In fact, this particular statuette was already included in the reference book L'art africain by Kerchache, Paudrat, and Stephan (1988).

(3.) See the interview with Germain Viatte in Meyer (2000:38); but see also Corbey (2000:6).

References cited

Coquet, Michele (ed.). 1999. Des objets et leurs musees. Special issue of Le Journal des Africanistes 69, 1.

Corbey, Raymond. 2000. "Arts Premiers in the Louvre," Anthropology Today 16, 4:3-6.

Degli, Marine, and Marie Mauze. 2000. Les arts premiers, le temps de la reconnaissance. Paris: Reunion des Musees Nationaux, Gallimard (Collection "Decouvertes Gallimard").

Dupuis, Annie (ed.). 1999. Prelever, exhiber: La mise en musees. Special issue of Cahiers d'Etudes Africaines 34, 3/4:155-56.

Geoffroy-Schneiter, Berenice. 2000a. Arts premiers. Paris: Assouline.

Geoffroy-Schneiter, Berenice. 2000b. "Interview with Jacques Kerchache," in Tribal Arts: Africa, Asia, Oceania, Americas, pp. 4-7. Special issue of Beaux Arts magazine.

Kerchache, Jacques, Jean-Louis Paudrat, and Lucien Stephan. 1988. L'art africain. Paris: Mazenod, Citadelles.

Leurquin, Anne. 2000. "Une entree remarquee au musee du Louvre a Paris," The World of Tribal Arts 23:64-66.

Mark, Peter. 2000. "The Future of African Art in Parisian Public Museums" (First Word), African Arts 33, 3:1, 4, 6, 8, 93.

Meyer, Laure. 2000. "Les arts premiers envahissent le Louvre," L'oeil 515:33-39.

Noce, Vincent. 2000a. "Kerchache, un flibustier au musee," Liberation, April 13, p. 3.

Noce, Vincent. 2000b. "Comment deux statues volees sont exposees," Liberation, April 13, p. 5.

Phillips, Tom (ed.). 1995. Africa: The Art of a Continent. London: Royal Academy of Arts, Prestel.

Pomian, Krzysztof. 2000. "Un musee pour les arts exotiques: Entretien avec Germain Viatte," Debat 108:75-84.

Roux, Emmanuel de. 2000. "Les sculptures des quatre continents font leur entree au Louvre," Le Monde, April 14, p. 28.

Varenne, Francoise. 2000. "Les mysteres de la grace," Le Figaro, April 13, p. 27.

Viatte, Germain. 2000. "L'esprit d'un lieu," in Les arts premiers au Louvre, pp. 41-44. Special issue of Connaissance des Arts 149.

Willett, Frank. 1991. "Art Galleries: The Last Bastion of Colonialism," in Arte in Africa 2: Raccogliere, documentare, conservare, restaurare ed esporre le opere d'arte tradizionale africana, eds. Ezio Bassani and Gaetano Speranza, pp. 184-90. Florence: Centro di Studi di Storia delle Arti Africane, Associazione "Poro."

Willett, Frank, and Ekpo Eyo (eds.). 1997. Arts du Nigeria: Collection du musee des Arts d'Afrique et d'Oceanie. Paris: Reunion des Musees Nationaux.

CONSTANTINE PETRIDIS is a Postdoctoral Fellow of the Fund for Scientific Research-Flanders (F.W.O.-Vlaanderen) in the research unit of Ethnic Art at Ghent University, Belgium. He is a consulting editor and Exhibition Review Editor (Europe) for African Arts.