CHAPTER 6. COLLECTIONS CAPTURED IN TIME
6.8 Collections in Transformation
based on all heritage expressions in South Africa. That would be the most earnest and democratic way of documentation, but also the most complicated system to develop.
The Natal and the Msunduzi Museum (VM) were characterised by non-systematic collecting, but parts of the collections represent a systematic collection. The Msunduzi Museum (VM) borders on a systematic collection, since it contains Voortrekker items from 1912-2003. This is in keeping with informal museum policy although the material was donated. Mkhize and Mapalala (2002) suggest that during Transformation the Msunduzi Museum (VM) collection changed with the demands to diversify it. The collection policy stated that the museum was no longer concerned with material from White Afrikaner communities, but from other communities (draft collection policy 2003, Voortrekker Museum). The Msunduzi Museum (VM) now collected from previously disadvantaged communities and for display purposes.
The objectives of collecting for display purposes have resulted in a fruitful relationship with, e.g., the local Indian Hindu community, and the museum´s interest in the group has resulted in donations to the museum. The museum researchers recorded the construction and consecration of a new temple and the temple builders were kind enough to mould a little temple for the museum. The museum´s changed policy has therefore resulted in an increased interest from communities that were not previously represented in the museum, which was also what Transformation intended.
New collections were intended to follow national ideals, but there was no clear coherent objective apart from not collecting White Afrikaner representation and collecting for display purposes. The objects collected rather revealed a disconnected representation of reality but could with time grow to a coherent collection. Nevertheless, Dunn (2004: 62-71) points out that a well defined collection policy was not a guarantee that objects would fit into the collection forever, and that the museum´s research and collection direction could change and alter the history of the objects.
Since the 1990s the Natal Museum has had a combined collection policy for their cultural and natural material. It states: ‘Only material that is appropriate to the achievement of the goals and mission of the Natal Museum should be accessioned into the collections’ (Natal Museum Collections Policy: undated). The Natal Museum acknowledged with this policy that collections were not static, but related to changing museum activities in research and collection objectives. The mission statement of the museum was in line with socio-political structures that were proposed during early Transformation. According to the policy (Natal Museum collections policy: undated), the museum should ensure the goals of the mission
statement so that the collection was in harmony with research. Knell (2004: 13) argued that most policies lacked intellectual rationale for collecting, were isolated from other policies, and were interested in the material acquisition of object fetishism. This does not apply to the Natal Museum, for its somewhat haphazard collections came through its collection policy to function in line with the socio-political ideals of the government. This suggests a reciprocal relationship between collections and socio-political structures. Museums in South Africa were forced during Transformation to reconsider and revaluate their activities and become up-to- date with a global museological discourse. The collections consisting of old donated material had to be reconsidered and the museums became aware of the problems and strengths of these collections.
The museums aimed to build a national multicultural collection to fill gaps and demonstrate the significant developments of South African history. The Msunduzi Museum (VM) collection policy was firmly located in a socio-political museological Transformation discourse. The Natal Museum collection policy renegotiated socio-political structures, making use of them within the framework of the museum. The Msunduzi Museum (VM) policy was a result of the demand to restructure the institution while the Natal Museum policy was a result of an institution that was largely changed before Transformation. Both policies revealed how the museums negotiated Transformation. Natal Museum was on an objective journey to uncover the empirical facts of the world and the Msunduzi Museum (VM) was on a journey to make the representation of the museum more diverse. The policies also revealed something about the hierarchical social organisation in the museums, about how material culture was handled, and about its effects on classification and representation at large.
The Msunduzi Museum (VM) was affected by the RDP, which suggested a people-driven approach, since choices of what to accept into the collection were made by an acquisition committee. They also followed other governmental policies, e.g., the transformation budget guidelines suggesting that collections would lead to a more comprehensive representation of the national estate, incorporating aspects of tangible and intangible heritage (The transformation budget guidelines and framework, undated). In the Natal Museum the head of department was responsible and made the decisions. Collections should primarily reflect the research in the institution. The policy, together with the classification systems, revealed the museum´s self-perception and its relation to the government. It also revealed the museum´s attitude towards past activities and the implementation of Transformation. It revealed the
museological discourse over time and acknowledged a reclassification of objects and was dependent on agents, time and space. Policies and classification systems fused academic and museological discourses and the result became visible in research and displays.