Colonial descriptions

In this second blog about the colonial legacy in cultural heritage institutions, we dive deeper into how metadata and descriptions are seen and (re)interpreted. To learn more about this work and the DE-BIAS project, please read the first blog in this series, 'Colonial Depictions'.

We've gathered a few testimonies and pieces of feedback written by members of Intellectuele Congolese Kring, an organisation striving to represent the interest of the Congolese community in Belgium. They were invited to critique colonial descriptions of Congolese peoples and history, in collaboration with KU Leuven and KADOC. Below are some of their contributions.

Marie-Antoinette

Marie-Antoinette is a mother of three who works as a social worker.

Most of the words used in museum collection descriptions are not neutral, they rather have a negative connotation recalling the superiority of the white man compared to the black man. It shows not only the physical but also the moral and spiritual humiliation of the Congolese people. Almost all the words and images of the colonial period evoke the denigration of black people by white people while emphasising their authority and superiority in the management of society.

The phrase 'third world countries', for example, categorises those countries as weak and subordinate in relation to the 'first world countries'. I would have preferred the term 'developing countries' because it evokes hope and an evolutionary trend.

I don't like the term Évolués, I prefer to talk about acculturation. The so-called 'évolués' black people were supposed to live like white people, assimilating their cultures: eating with spoons, knives and forks, dressing like white people, speaking their language, etc. Even though they acculturated to white culture, they would unfortunately always remain subordinate to Bwana, the 'civiliser'.

I experience a similar feeling when it comes to the ‘inburgering’ (integration/integration and citizenship) courses, with the only difference being that with the latter they omit to mention their 'civilising mission'.

Darcy

Darcy is a university student who is the liaison officer for students concerned about diversity and inclusion.

This photo is titled 'Picnic in Africa at the turn of the century'. The use of the word 'Africa' seems inappropriate here. It reminds us of the term 'African' which is often used as a generalist description for any black person.

Maybe the term 'Africa' was used here due to a lack of information: the curator didn't know where precisely the photo was taken. The rest of the description is also too vague, making the value and meaning of this photo unclear. Why should one be interested in this picture? Why is it important? None of this info is present in the description.

The photo above with the description 'Refugees' has similar issues to the previous photo. The use of the word 'refugees' immediately frames this image, disallowing viewers to see other interpretations of the photograph.

If the description denoted the purpose of the photographer for taking this picture, this would be useful to viewers to understand the photographer's thinking. For instance, 'the photographer wanted to demonstrate the circumstances in which the refugees from Manono were located'. At the same time, this would give viewers space to re-interpret the photograph differently from the photographer's original intentions.

Yves

Yves has co-founded an organisation aiming at providing children from Eastern Congo with educational opportunities.

I think this is a very beautiful photograph. It would fit perfectly in a fashion magazine. I do feel that the name of the person pictured should be mentioned in the metadata. That's the least one could do to honour the subject of the photograph. Who knows, maybe someone could recognise their forefathers through a photograph like this one, providing them with a piece of their family history?

I also wonder if this person has consented to having their picture taken. Was this a posed photo or was it taken without the subject's knowledge or permission?

Deafening silence

The presence of basic, incomplete or poor metadata is problematic: the lack of depth, precision or substance makes it almost impossible to assess whether descriptions or labels of cultural objects were intended or could be interpreted as harmful.

This lays bare a phenomenon often spotted when working with contested heritage: we often don't have all the information about the journey and provenance of an artefact. Either the trail of information is incomplete, or it was never documented in the first place. In many cases the bias rests in the silence of the descriptions: the elements (un)consciously ignored, passed over by ignorance or intention.

The DE-BIAS project aims to highlight underrepresented voices as a starting point to recontextualise contentious cultural heritage collections. Through co-creation events, crowdsourcing initiatives, the creation of a vocabulary and knowledge graph of contentious terms, and the creation of an online tool to detect biased terms in cultural heritage metadata, DE-BIAS aims to help the cultural heritage sector into the postcolonial era.