Our cultural heritage is in the spotlight. Not only do scientists do a lot of research on it; everyone has an opinion about it. The discussion around Zwarte Piet is a good example of this. A real Dutch tradition that should not be offended, or is it? Zwarte Piet has changed its appearance before and without any problems:why are we having trouble with it now? Scientists within the NWO research program Cultural Dynamics tried to find an answer to these kinds of questions.
More than fifty scientists from various disciplines and universities participated in the Cultural Dynamics research program (2009-2014). Based on their own expertise, they investigated the perception of Dutch cultural heritage among individuals, groups and societies. Their findings should lead to insight into the dynamic processes that determine what people see as heritage and why they consider it important. Cultural heritage does not only include old buildings or paintings, but also our habits, rituals and cultural expressions such as stories, fashion and photography.
The results of the investigations were recently recorded by Warna Oosterbaan as a journalistic report in the book Ons erf. Identity, heritage and cultural dynamics . Oosterbaan uses the definition of cultural heritage by historian Willem Frijhoff:'Something that is assigned to us from the past with the assignment to do something with it and pass it on to the people who come after us.'
Passing on to our children art and architecture as well as stories and rituals. But over time, we estimate the value of our heritage differently. Vincent van Gogh could not wear out his work while we are now paying millions for it. A building that we now find ugly could be classified as a monument in fifty years' time. Traditions become a lot more important when they come into question. What is that?
Left-wing hobby
Our colorful heritage collection is not static. Social changes lead to a different view of heritage:in times of crisis, art is more readily seen as an expensive left-wing hobby. But it is not only political and economic changes that provide dynamics, according to the studies. The heritage of new groups in our society also merges with the existing heritage. Some see this as an enrichment, others as a violation of their own traditions. It differs per person how much value we attach to (parts of) our heritage.
In addition, external appearances or objects, which are important in rituals and traditions, also evoke reactions, emotions and memories. We cannot see these objects separately from the ritual acts or as 'ordinary things'. Behind heritage can be a lot of sadness. Westerbork transit camp is now frequently visited and visitors are captivated by the story this place tells, while no one looked back at this location until the 1970s. Sometimes people prefer to forget 'painful heritage' in the first instance. Both the physical legacy as well as past events and memory.
With the passage of time, our view of heritage changes. This does not only concern physical heritage, but also other ideas. Our culture is changing as a result, as well as by changing social relationships. Was it still normal for fifty years that the woman stood behind the kitchen sink and was not equal to her husband or that you as a servant did not contradict your boss, let alone aspire to his position, nowadays that is unthinkable.
As well as that discrimination based on gender, religion, race or sexual preference is no longer the most natural thing in the world. These social changes are reflected in the cultural expressions of then and now. Take, for example, the cents print Battle for the Pants. In this age-old story, the roles of men and women have been reversed. The woman is the boss and the man does all kinds of household chores. This upside-down world is not an early example of emancipation, but rather a warning of what not to do.
Cultural heritage, what should we do with it?
In order not to forget how people used to think, what they considered normal and how they acted accordingly, it is important to preserve and research these kinds of cultural expressions. And of course to try to look at it with an objective eye. The latter is difficult, precisely because of the changes in mentality. Museum subjects have been attributed a different origin over the years. Not only because scientific knowledge increased, but also because researchers could not imagine the 'truth' and filled in the gaps in knowledge from their Western culture.
Oosterbaan gives an example of two Surinamese brooms that played a role in winti rituals as obias. The brooms had come to the Netherlands in 1873 under the name 'slave brooms'. However, museum curators could not imagine that the christianized slaves released after 1863 still made such magical brooms. According to their theory, they must have been made by the pagan Maroons (slaves who had fled to the jungle). In fact, you couldn't just get hold of such brooms, so the Maroons who made them must have converted to Christianity. Here lay the proof of a successful mission!
Over the years, conservators and historians developed various theories about the obias. After in-depth archival research, the entire history of ritual brooms was reconstructed in 2010, including the ideas that had existed in the West over time. The obias are now in the Tropenmuseum in Amsterdam and, with a different background story, they have also been given a different function. They are today seen as proof that there was no separation between a typical plantation culture and a forestland culture, but that these cultures merged into each other.
Fascist racial theory or Dutch culture?
Another striking example of dynamics within our culture is physical anthropology, a branch of science that was developed in the 19 e century blossomed. While the cultural anthropologists examine the differences between cultures, the physical anthropologists look at the biological differences between groups. According to the theory from the 19 e century, it was possible to determine from the dimensions of a skeleton or skull to which race it belonged and what its additional characteristics were. Certain appearances could, for example, indicate a criminal streak or blood ties with Neanderthals.
In the depot of the Tropenmuseum are hundreds of bones, skulls and even entire skeletons. They ended up there for physical-anthropological research. Many of the bones come from the former Dutch East Indies and Papua New Guinea. Tribes there still lived close to nature, without having had contact with Westerners, and that should be measured by their bones, according to the researchers. Since the Dutch colonizer saw himself as superior, people did not take it too seriously with the sacred ancestor worship or the autonomy of the Papuans.
Unsolicited bones were dug up and traded and the population measured under false pretenses. Skulls and data tables were sent to the Netherlands for further research. In any case, the individual and his specific wishes played a much less important role than now, and that was not only true in the colonies. Urk fishermen were also seen as a different breed. They lived in a closed community that was closer to nature than other Dutch people. Their skulls were measured and even secretly dug up until the 1930s to prove this racial theory.
Today we look at physical anthropology very differently. The Race Theories of the 19 e century were declared 'not done' after the Second World War with its fascist racial doctrine. In addition, scientific breakthroughs in that century of measuring and comparing tables failed to materialize, although the hope for this persisted for a long time. New measuring techniques and equipment might still provide evidence.
The question that now arises is what to do with heritage that we believe we have gotten our hands on in an unfair way. The Urk skulls have since been returned to Urk and reburied there, but that does not apply to all bones from our former colonies. We believe that exhibiting is no longer possible, unless the skulls are part of ritual objects. The bones and skulls will remain in the museum depot for as long as necessary for further research. DNA testing is a new research method that can be applied to the bones. Until we may also find that degrading in the future.
The lesson from heritage
Our heritage is dynamic and that is not always easy to accept. The studies into cultural dynamics show that the value of cultural heritage is not very objective. It changes with time and heritage is not only admired but also used. Used to defend traditions and reinforce discussions, which will actually increase the value:don't take away from us what is typically Dutch!
You can only wonder how 'typically Dutch' something is, according to the researchers. What we used to think was not important, we now see very differently. And vice versa. But how do you deal with that? Should we leave any tradition unchanged just because we used to do it that way? And keep everything old because it's part of our history? That is impossible and also not realistic. Changes are part of life. But then what? The researchers do not have a ready-made answer to that question, if that is possible.
In museums, the answer may be that objects have remained the same, but their meaning has changed. Or that today the aesthetic value of objects is shown, even though the object is not made and intended as art. The building of the Tropenmuseum itself is also a good example of the dynamics of our culture and therefore our heritage. The building is an ode to the Dutch colonies, with sculptures that majestically depict tropical animals, among other things. Once the pride of our nation, colonialism with its oppression and exploitation is now mainly a page of history of which we are not so proud. This lavish architectural tribute to the Emerald Belt emphasizes the differences from the past, on how not to do it. Cultural heritage as a lesson from the past, just like with Camp Westerbork or the story about the battle for the pants.