uoHNpo.

QU]
 mind’s eye, what
What makes a museum? Ifyou imagine one, in your
metal? Steps,
doesit look like? Whobuilt it, and how? Stone, glass, brick,
how isit
columns? And whatare you looking at inside? Ifit’s art,
lhistory, a
arranged? Oris ita museum ofthings, archaeology or natura
se-built treasure
science museum, ina converted private home ora purpo
g and warm,or
box? What does the museumfeel like? Is it welcomin
ity guards?
hostile and cold? Are the staffaroundyou educators,or secur
Dothe other peoplein this spacelook like you?
house
Museumsare morethanjust physical places designed to
donot
collections. Their purposeis to shapeidentity and memory. They
tives they
and cannot represent completestories, but the distilled narra
ed facets
proposeoften contain the most treasured and the mostcontest
ofidentity, national or otherwise.
Amuseumisa place we cangoto find andtell stories about ourselves
and others.Itis not the only home for knowledge,butit is one that often
and
holds a national curriculum ofidentity, preferring the dominant
 THE WHOLE PICTURE

mainstream narratives. Noneof thesestoriesis in the museum by

accident. Someonehaschosenevery objecton display, categorizedit, and
placedit on a plinth or behind glass. Someone wrote the labels. Maybe
you were involvedin one or moreofthese processes, maybe you weren't.
Perhapsyou feel you already spend enoughtimethinkingcritically
about every other thing in the world, and for youa museum should bea
place you cango tojust wander around andlook at beautiful things. But
youstill have to remember that, howeverinvisible they maybe, there is
someonedirecting you aroundthatspace, shaping yourinterpretation,
and choosing whatyou maylook at and how.
Iam writing this book because sinceJune 2017, afew timesa week,I
havetakenagroupofpeoplearounda gallery, on unofficial, unauthorized
Uncomfortable Art Tours, and we have discussed the things thatlive
there - how theygot there, and how they have been usedtotell stories
overtime. I started my tours froma place offrustration. I hadjust spent
three years on an arthistory degree that overwhelmingly ignored the
colonial and imperial history that created the museums and galleries
we
were studying, and where the only module that considered the art ofthe
British Empire wasoptional. I volunteered as a tour guide with school
groups and saw the holesin the British history curriculum. Kids would
have studied the Tudors andVictorians — eras that bracket Britain’s
trade in enslaved people - but never touched the time in between,
with
its intense andviolent periods ofinvasion and war, and the creation
and
rise of Britain’s empire. I wastired ofseeing people - overwhelmingly
people like me, my privileged White colleagues studying art and
working in museums - who had neverlearned these histories, and could
not recognize how they hadinherited and unconsciously perpetuated
the inequalities created by colonialism. Iam hyperaware of my own
position as a product ofempire: a White person whose family took part
in the invasion and colonization ofAustralia, displacing the Indigenous

10
 INTRODUCTION

tt e museum by nations who were already there.I do notbelieve guilt is inherited, but
fegorizedit, and responsibility is, and there is nobodyalive today whose existence has
labels. Maybe not been shapedbycolonialist, racist forces. Thatis a legacy wealllive
i you weren't. with, and we should all deal with the consequences. If you have
g critically benefitted, then soaking yourself in remorse andguilt does not help
mshould bea anyone. Whatyou can do, though,is ask constantly how youhavefelt
aithings. But those benefits. At whose expense werethey gained? I grew tired ofthese
ybe, there is histories being treated like somethingthat only happened elsewhere, as
pretation, ifthe British Empire andits atrocities had nothing to do with modern-
dayBritain. British museumsarefilled with objects from those former
saweek,I colonies, with paintingspaid for with that wealth, with representations
authorized ofimperial power.It is everywhere, whenyoulookforit.
sthatlive WhenI started the tours, I knew how hardit wasto get privileged
ell stories people to think abouttheir dark inheritances, even whentheywereface to
J ist Spent face with the legacies ofimperial violence.Itis hardto hearthat the things
ored the you have been taughtand havetaken for granted aboutyournational
sries we history are not necessarily true. But I have received a huge response:there
ttofthe isareal, urgent appetite for these stories - and an interest in learning how
school to deconstruct amuseum’s narrative - that I did not expect.
would Iam notthefirst person to have the ideaofdoing alternative history
fain’s tours, and I did not invent anti-colonial museuminterventions; I owea
With huge debtto activists and educators whohave beenleading‘alternative’
tours for decades, concentrating onhistories ofrace, gender, sexuality,
disability, or any ofthe lives that exist outside ofthe narrowly defined
‘normal’. Butit feels asifwe arein a moment, now,that mightbea turning
point. There is a more public conversation around repatriation and
restitution that has been buildingup for a while, andit seemsasifit is
part of a bigger, international anxiety around nationalidentity and
nationalism. The questionsarefinally being asked: whohastheright to
hold objects, andtotell their stories?

11
 THE WHOLE PICTURE

I do not have a definitive answerfor that, but Iam trying to work

through the questions. The Uncomfortable Art Tours are about making
colonial history visible, showing how museums worknow,and
demonstrating the waysin which thebeliefs of their founders and
collectors continue to have a resonancetoday. These are spacesthat are
still shaped by the politics and aestheticsofthe past, for better or worse.
It’s not just about the objects or images that have ended up in the
museum’scollection, but the way they are displayed, too: how curators
describe things, how they create narratives by comparingor contrasting
pieces. This bookis an introductionto being a critical museumvisitor:
someone whofeels confident going into a gallery and seeing behind the
curtain to the underlying narrative ofthe museum.
The way welookat things is never objective:it is shaped by who we
are, the experiences webring with us, the ways we have been taughtto
see the world. No two people lookat art in exactly the same way.This is
not to discredit museum workers,or to dismiss their expertise, butit is
areminderthat there is more than one kind ofexpert. Amuseum worker
is qualified by their training, anartist is qualified by their practice, and
someone from the samecultural background asthe person that created
an object has another kind ofunderstanding. Scholarship hasvalue, but
itis not the only way to know things.
The idea ofa rational, objective wayofseeing art is an invention ofthe
15th century. In 1435, Leon Battista Alberti told a charmingstory about
the architect Filippo Brunelleschi, who created an imageofthe Florence
Baptistry so perfect that it was mistakenfor the real thing. Brunelleschi
gathered a crowdoutside the Baptistry, and presented a bystander with
a boardto be held in one hand and a mirrorin the other. Standing ona
precise spot, looking through a small hole in the board towardsthe
mirror that he was holdingin front of him precise distance away, the
man was convincedhe could see the Baptistry. In fact, he was looking at

12
 INTRODUCTION

painted on the
; m trying to work a reflection of Brunelleschi’s picture of the Baptistry,
to depict objects
about making board’s reverse side. Brunelleschihad ‘discovered’ how
appeared to
ork now, and and buildingsin proportion to eachother, so that they
real world. This
x founders and shrink and recedeinto the distance, just as they doin the
E.. paces that are was the invention offixed-point perspective.
so this origin
ter or worse. Brunelleschi’s revelatory painting no longer exists,
Alberti wasn’t there,
aded up in the story relies on Alberti’s version (never mindthat
key turning point
; how curators since he was exiled from Florenceatthe time). Itwasa
n and knowledge
or contrasting in European arthistory: the single moment whenvisio
ofa system of
Seum visitor: wereperfected, madeflawless and ordered; the discovery
s. Brunelleschi’s
gbehind the rules that ushered in the Renaissance andall its glorie
was a momentof genius that changedthe world.
ool art teacher
yy who we At least, that’s how I remember my high-sch
iar to anyone who
en taught to describingit. This system ofperspective will be famil
. But this way
ty. This is has eversat ina schoolart room dutifully drawing grids
ally accepted
ise, butitis oftelling the story misses an important point thatis gener
way of seeing or
worker in modernart history: there is no one‘better’
ally ‘perfe ct’
stice, and representing. The compulsion to representa mathematic
tcreated not always the
world, with ‘correct’ perspective and proportion,is
the very specific
alue, but purpose of making. Brunelleschi’s methodreflected
e person
goalof creating a visualtrick, which workedonly if one singl
ody can
mofthe stood at one single point, and looked with one single eye. Anyb
rabout ective;
make picture, and chooseto use or not use fixed-point persp
rence n used
they can opt instead for any ofthe technologies ofrepresentatio
“Schi to denote
by picture-makersin different times or places: using scale
With ting a
power,flattening landscapesto focus on the foreground, depic
a be
single object from multiple angles. But representationstend to
s
culturally specific. For Brunelleschi andhis contemporaries,illusion
of perspective and depth were a key consideration,just as at other
ority.
momentsrepresenting textures,light or movement becamethepri

13
 E PICTURE
THE WHOL

unicate. It is
be sc ient if ic al ly perfect to comm
veto ed lines. Soit
Things do not ha il di ng, ina few sketch
ize a face, or a bu
possible to recogn ival study in
nd th at th e do mi nance of perspect
dersta complex
isimportantto un pu la ri ty of images with
aly, and th e po
15th-century It istic choice
of f th e pa in ter’ s skills, was a styl
showed iversally
backgrounds that le pr og re ss ion towards a un
kind of inev it ab
rather than some or good
no es se nt ial qu ality of good art,
art. There is to like what we
prilliant form of rders. We tend
al bo
anscends cultur
making, that tr o like.
at we are taughtt st is tied back to
recognize, and wh or y ofthe cultural We
t an d ar t hi st
So much of the ar nce. Thisis the
on of th e ar t of th e Italian Renaissa
ecti its concern for
the supposed perf e re alism to art, with
re st or ed th
to have cy. This is
erathat is meant si on -imitating accura
e and ov er al l vi
perspective, scal overy, 4
sh if t th at pr ec eded an age of disc
e cultur al t anyone
supposed to be th th , gr ow ing technology. Bu
ation, ri si ng we al
goldenera of explor one else -
ex pl or er is an invader to some
selves an ressing.
whocalls them ld in g an drelentless prog
paying fo r th e gi
someoneis always ence,
mo me nt is gi ve n this much promin
ic cultural other
And whena specif on , it is al wa ys atthe expense of
adleof civili za ti
andturnedintoa cr
s, communities. rspective, the
regions, historie Th e ‘discovery’ of pe
um s co me in .
This is where muse al, coincided
xe d po in t of si gh theldby an individu
le fi controlling
dominance ofa sing se d on rationalizing and
ural mo me nt fo cu
withagreater cult seek to
pe rs pe ct iv e, an d the ways people
story of dualism,
the world. The hi l sh if tt ha t celebrated indivi
thebigger po li ti ca
controlit,is part of rational
d th at de fe nd ed its own apparent
to the worl I can
and an approach at ‘i f I ca n see something,
assumpti on th
objectivity - this el assumptionthat
he re fo re co nt ro li t’, with the parall
dt its outward
understandit, an thin g based only on
tely know some ,
you can comple e viewer’s vision
s to compose and constrict th
rk
appearance. It wo
 THE WHOLE PICTURE
Things do not haveto be scientifically perfect to communicate.It is
possible to recognizea face,or a building, in a few sketchedlines.Soit
is importantto understandthat the dominanceofperspectival study in
15th-century Italy, and the popularity of images with complex
backgroundsthat showedoffthe painter’s skills, wasa stylistic choice
rather than some kindofinevitable progression towards a universally
brilliant form of art. There is no essential quality of goodart, or good
making, that transcends cultural borders. We tendto like what we
recognize, and what we are taughtto like.
So muchofthe art and art history ofthe cultural Westis tied back to
the supposedperfection ofthe art ofthe Italian Renaissance. Thisis the
era that is meantto have restored the realism to art, with its concern for
perspective, scale and overall vision-imitating accuracy. This is
supposedto be the cultural shift that preceded an age of discovery, a
goldenera ofexploration,rising wealth, growingtechnology. But anyone
who calls themselves an explorer is an invader to someoneelse -
someoneis always payingfor the gilding and relentless progressing.
And whena specific cultural momentis given this much prominence,
and turned intoa cradleofcivilization, itis alwaysat the expense ofother
regions, histories, communities.
This is where museumscomein.The‘discovery’ ofperspective, the
dominanceofa single fixedpointofsight held by an individual, coincided
with a greater cultural momentfocusedonrationalizing and controlling
the world. The history of perspective, and the ways people seek to
controlit, is part ofthe biggerpolitical shift that celebrated individualism,
and an approach to the world that defendedits own apparent rational
objectivity - this assumptionthat ‘if I can see something,I can
understandit, and therefore controlit’, with the parallel assumption that
you can completely know something based only on its outward
uppearance.It works to compose andconstrict the viewer’s vision,
14
TRODUCTION
imposingrulesthat only work in extremely specific circumstances. We
leave thingsout, or twist them for the sake ofthe narrative,for the sake
of a ‘correct’ image. I am not trying to blame the Renaissance for
neoliberalism - but I wantyouto be consciousofthe way you have been
taught to look at images. Evenif you never formally learned visual
analysis, it is something you have absorbed from the world atlarge,
through lookingat art and film, TV shows,adverts, Instagram,
whatever. Your personaltaste is valuable, but it is also culturally
produced:it will always be informedbythe things you see aroundyou,
what’s familiar, what yourpeerslike.It is affected by histories ofart,
design,society, and it is sculpted by the institutions - museums- that
narrate thathistory.
Humansare hoarders. We accumulate objects through ourlives, and
we arrange them aroundus. Illuminated manuscripts, stamps, tea
towels, postcards, ‘Old Master’ paintings, cool rocks, 14th-century
swords, matchboxes. Weuseourthingsto interact with the world, and
they have meanings beyondtheir material limits and functions. We
project our desires and beliefs onto these pieces, and make themfit or
support our views. Humanslike order, though oneperson’s orderis
another person’s chaos. Perhapsyoudisplay yourcollections, or maybe
you hide them in a cupboard. Howeverthey are arranged, two or more
objects create a story, shaping a narrative through juxtaposition and
comparison. The person doing the arranging is writing a narrative,
whether that is happening ina bedroom ora museum. A museum isjust
that desire backed by power, taken to the extremeofego - it takes truly
unshakeable confidenceto believe that yourstuffis significant enough
to give ‘to the nation’, and to persuade the powersthatbethat youroffer
should be accepted.
Fundamentally, the processofcurationis one oforganizing what is
already there, choosing how to understand andpresent the assortment
15
 THE WHOLE PICTURE

of stuff in a space. Curators mayalso haveresponsibilities involving

caringfor and preservingthecollection, butin most museums nowadays
thatisarole carried out by conservators.(Ifyou meeta curator, ask them
about whatthey do, then wait for them to explain that their jobtitle
comesfrom curare, a Latin verb meaning‘to arrange’or‘to carefor’, and
how actually their roleis about nurturingor healingcollections, notjust
displaying them - it happensnearly every time.) These areall roles that
are increasingly exclusive. While there have been shifts to offer more
trainee opportunities, students who wantto work in museums,for
example, arestill expected to show commitment with volunteering, and
to be able to undertake absurdly expensive (and usually theoretical
rather than practical) postgraduate degreesfor entry-level jobs,ifthey
are paid atall. It is still a financially exclusive industry, and seniorroles
often reflect that, skewing White andprivileged.’
Allartis political. Everything in a museumis political, because itis
shaped bythepolitics ofthe world that madeit. Ifyou can’t see the views
and agendas comingthrough,that doesn’t meanthey aren’t there: it
might just meanthat they are close enough to your own for you to take
them for granted. Right now, however,it feels as if museumsare
increasingly at risk oflosing their relevance to contemporary society and
politics in their pursuitof ‘neutrality’ (where neutrality reallyjustmeans
the status quo). We areliving throughtimesof intense turbulence and
transformation, butit is hard to see many museums really reflecting
this. Art has always beenthetoolofthe powerful, and also the weapon
ofthe dispossessed:official imagery controls narratives ofidentity and
defines whatis ‘right’, but these representationscan be creatively
subverted and destroyed. You haveto know the rulesof the space to
sabotageit. Ifyou don’t - cuts in fundingfor arts education,for example,
stifle these possibilities - then generations no longer havea place to start
from, narratives go unquestioned, andnostalgia triumphs.

16

THE WHOLE PICTURE
of stuff in a space. Curators may also haveresponsibilities involving
caringfor and preserving the collection, butin most museums nowadays
thatis arole carried outby conservators. (Ifyou meeta curator, ask them
about whatthey do, then wait for them to explain that their jobtitle
comes from curare, a Latin verb meaning‘to arrange’or‘to care for’, and
how actually their roleis about nurturingor healingcollections, notjust
displaying them - it happensnearly every time.) These areall roles that
are increasingly exclusive. While there have beenshifts to offer more
trainee opportunities, students who wantto work in museums,for
example,are still expected to show commitment with volunteering, and
to be able to undertake absurdly expensive (and usually theoretical
rather than practical) postgraduate degreesfor entry-leveljobs, ifthey
are paid at all. Itis still a financially exclusive industry, and senior roles
often reflect that, skewing White andprivileged.’
Allartis political. Everything in a museum is political, becauseit is
shapedbythepolitics ofthe world that madeit. Ifyou can’t see the views
and agendas coming through, that doesn’t meanthey aren’t there:it
might just meanthat they are close enoughto your own for you to take
them for granted. Right now, however, it feels as if museums are
increasingly at risk oflosing their relevance to contemporary society and
politicsin their pursuitof‘neutrality’ (where neutrality reallyjust means
the status quo). We are living through timesof intense turbulence and
transformation,butit is hard to see many museumsreally reflecting
this. Art has always beenthetoolof the powerful, and also the weapon
ofthe dispossessed:official imagery controls narratives ofidentity and
defines whatis ‘right’, but these representations can be creatively
subverted and destroyed. You haveto knowthe rulesof the space to
sabotageit. Ifyou don’t - cuts in fundingfor arts education, for example,
stifle these possibilities - then generations no longer havea place tostart
from,narratives go unquestioned,and nostalgia triumphs.
16
INTRODUCTION
describing
This bookis divided into four sections, with eachsection
mightfind in
a different type ofcollectionor gallery and the objects you
igger
it. Lhave chosen to discussspecific, real pieces to ground someb
and asking
discussions abouthistory and identity; these ways oflooking
d far
questions, andthe ideas and ideologies behind them,can be applie
it has
more broadly. Each object may be unique,butit is of a type, and
hing
been chosenforits typicality as well asits uniqueness: this is somet
r that
museumsdo,too,celebrating objects individually but makingclea
s
they are also valued for what they represent more broadly. My focusi
msare
on museumsandcollectionsin the cultural West, since museu
84),
European, Enlightenment inventions (moreon thatlater; see page
and you will see an overrepresentation of the British Empire andits
the
formercolonies, which reflects a personalbias, since these are
histories and collections with which I am mostfamiliar.
d,
An opendistinction between‘artist’ and‘artisan’ will be avoide
since these terms suggest implicit hierarchies and differing levels of
brilliance, whereby an artist makes highly valued objects of aesthetic
pleasure, but a craftsman makes functional things with a purpose(or,
crucially, things that don’t look like art to European eyes). We are
frequently faced with other forms of distinction, too. Whois the artist
that immediately comesto mindif lask you to name one? Askyourself:
how often do you hear someone described asa ‘maleartist’, or specifically
labelled as straight, cisgender, White? And how much more likely are
youto hear someonecalled a queerartist, ora woman artist, or an artist
of colour? Linda Nochlin’s famous essay ‘Why Have There Been No
Great WomenArtists?’ unpicks the waythathistorically, in the cultural
West, accessto the classrooms,studios andgalleries that allowed an
artist to be counted as‘genius’ wasrestricted toa handfulofindividuals:
overwhelmingly White, male and backed by bourgeois families?. That
essay waswritten in 1971, and some things have changed,butit’s stilla
17
 THE WHOLE PICTURE

good testamentto how difficultit is to summonanentire new canon of

artists when everythinguntil that point has beenset up to prevent their
success. The hoop-jumping requiredforanartist to beinstitutionally
celebrated so effectively excludes swathesof people that the lack of
diversity begins to appearnaturally occurring.
As an engaged museumvisitor, your task is to remember that a
museum isa box ofthings, put there bya collector oragroupofcollectors,
andpresented as complete - so ask yourself, what’s missing? Whose
eyes are we viewingthe story through? How hasthis history been
massaged andclipped into a narrative? Is it the same old Great White
Males,at it again? Don’t fall into the complacencyofbelieving that,ifit’s
worthy,it is in the museum - and conversely,ifit’s not in the museum,
it’s irrelevant.
Museums coerce our emotional andintellectual responses to the
things they display - that’s not necessarily sinister, butit’s something to
be conscious of, as these selective narratives can veryeasily start to look
like definitive histories, or binaries of right and wrong. Welearn to
follow the logic ofthe space, move from cabinet to cabinet, believe the
labels, behave ourselves, becivil, but not to recognize any ugliness and
cruelty in the getting ofthese collections. We view images with single-
point perspective, and wetrust them, because we are familiar with the
trick they are pulling. We know the conceit, and we choose notto see
it.
Ultimately,it’s some lines on paper, but we have been taught to recognize
them as dimensional, correct and ofvalue. What happens ifwe
learn to
view museums in the same way? We can understand them as spaces
built with ideologies, and begin to read thetext oftheir inclusion and
exclusion. There is always more than one wayoflooking.

18