 Bienvenidos a la segunda sesión de las terceras jornadas, la tercera edición de las jornadas reparándolo del pasado. La tercera edición de recolonització i també comunitats que eren marginades per la construcció de la seva històrica memòria i la memòria col·lectiva. Aquestes museums serien compartits i serien explicats a través dels llocs dels directors de l'Africa Museum en Belgi. Després d'aquestes dues papers, serem unes setmanes de preguntes i respostes i es faran que s'hi hagi escoltar. Aquestes setmanes serien explicats a través dels llocs dels directors de l'Africa Museum. Després d'aquestes dues papers, serem una setmana de preguntes i respostes i es faran que s'hi hagi escoltar i que es faran que s'hi hagi escoltar. El primer resum és que he vingut ara i vaig ser l'ambassador d'almost 10 anys en l'Africana. He vingut a l'Africa, doncs he tingut una neta d'aquestes i, amb l'aigua d'aquestes, m'ajunto a entendre certes sensibilitats. Segurament, crec que un museu és mediat. S'estem mediats. S'estem mediats entre el pass i el present entre l'Africa i l'Europa, entre les cultures diferents. I crec que hi ha d'anar. S'ha de ser vist, perquè sóc aquí d'aquest 6 mesos. A poc de mesos, seré avançat, però no tan tard. He d'anar a quatre main points. Et presentaré aquests quatre points molt ràpid i després començaré. Fins i tot, som no només un museu. Som, en un moment, un museu sobre el museu. S'ho explicaré per què. Perquè hem de preguntar-nos-ho. Com que ja t'ho ha explicat, què és la legitimitat d'un museu africà a Belgi? ¿Has algo como, digamos, un museu europeo en África? No, no, no. Hem de saber per què i hem de reflexionar-nos-ho. El meu segon punt serà que no només hi ha un museu sobre el museu i sobre el colonialisme, etcètera. També hi ha un museu sobre l'Àfrica i em diré amb l'Àfrica. Això pot ser important. Havíem creat un museu sobre l'Àfrica, però volem treballar amb l'Àfrica. És un concepte complet diferent. També hi ha un museu amb un rol en la societat. I crec que avui més i més, fins i tot en el XIXè, quan els museus eren creats, hi havia un rol en la societat. D'acord, aquest rol ha evolucionat, i així he de fer un poble sobre això. El meu segon punt serà que és inescapable. Si parlem de reparellar l'estat, s'hauríem de parlar de la restitució. Aleshores, quatre punts. I crec que he de fer una quarta hora, no més de 20 minuts, i he de fer una quarta hora. El meu segon punt serà que és per què hi haurà un museu sobre l'Àfrica. Per això he de dir-ho a tu, la història. Vam ser creats després de l'exhibició del món a Belgium, a Brussel·les, en què hi havia una xarxa, en un lloc a bit fora de Brussel·les, els grans grans de la lluna de Brabant, que era el lloc del lloc del lloc del lloc de la lluna de Brabant. Vaig tenir una xarxa de congo, perquè era un projecte personal. Vostè sap que congo no era una col·lí de Belgia. El govern no era molt comitiu a la lloc del lloc, va prendre la lloc a les seves mans. I va ser lloc del lloc de la lloc de la lloc de la lloc de Brabant. Però, de clar, va tenir suport. Va tenir un investiment, va tenir suport polític, i va prendre per la lloc de la lloc del lloc del bon thròmer. Vaig precisar dos anys de l'exhibició. Va fallar el darrere. Vaig estar de dos dir S'havia d'anar allà, les ciutadans de Congolès no eren necessàriament fàcils. 7 d'entre ells anaven i eren burits aquí a la viatge d'aquell que tenim el museu. I ell no va decidir crear un museu, perquè va veure l'interès de la suporta i el suport que va fer allà de la població. El museu va ser creat i a sobre de hores de les nostres col·lectius venint de Congolès. 2,3 de les objectes culturals, que són aquí, han estat obtens durant aquest període de les 3 estats de Congolès. Aquest era un període de conquistament. I també era un període d'exploitació. Vostè ha de dir que la roba rosa era el principal d'incompaç. I la manera que va organitzar-la va ser extremament violent, moltes vegades, i doncs va ser a causa de l'escàndol, el qual va causar a tot el món a les Estats Units, que en l'endemà, Lleopold II va decidir que això no serà la meva proposta personal, o la meva domània personal, que va ser una proposta belgiana i que va ser més de la col·lectius mainstream. Aquesta és la dependència del Congolès que ha estat un museu col·lectiu. A l'estat espanyol, hi ha un número, per exemple, en París, l'Africa Museu, o el Museu Mundial, que hi ha d'haver-hi, que hi va haver de l'estat espanyol, que va ser al costat d'una altra construcció. No ho vam fer, vam ser a l'estat d'una altra construcció per altres reasons. La principal por és que creiem que tot passi excepte l'estat espanyol. Has de mirar l'estat espanyol a l'estat espanyol i no pots ser legítimament aviat si no t'has de reconèixer els missatges, a vegades els crimes, que eren cometits en l'estat espanyol, doncs has de prendre en compte. Això significa que estem, a certe lloc, a un museu molt veient en el seu partit. A part de aquest partit, per exemple, va crear una certa manera de mirar a l'Àfrica. I tenim, per exemple, un nombre de statues, un nombre d'objetos, que van ser creates durant la periodes coloniales, i que confirmen unes de les estereotipes, de les negatives vius a l'estat espanyol. El que és molt ben conegut és l'estat espanyol. Tu veus un març, l'estat espanyol, que és en el procés d'estat espanyol. Això no és històric, perquè hi hagués l'estat espanyol, però en aquests costums, quan eren analitzats, no hi hagués mai even un drop d'estat espanyol. Aleshores, no era cert que marçés l'estat espanyol que anés a l'estat espanyol. I era una cosa que va posar a l'estat espanyol a l'entrada de l'estat espanyol, i fins i tot quan renovàvem-ho, perquè ara hem fet la set-up, fa 5 anys que hem movit això, i era l'almost la primera cosa que vam veure. Vam dir que no és la manera que volem treballar, però ho hem stillat. Avui hem decidit que això és l'estereotip de l'estat espanyol, i no ho hauríem de fer sense acompanyament, sense introducció. Vam fer una feina de missatge per no seguir repetint els mateixos missatges. Vam dir que no només era un museu sobre la col·lí. Sí, volem tenir una critica de l'estat espanyol, però no era el nostre només missatge. I així vinc a el meu segon punt. El meu segon punt és que hem de ser un museu sobre l'Africa i un museu treballant amb l'Africana. Un dels meus col·legs, durant les meves primeres setmanes, un dels meus col·legs congolins, va dir a mi, Bart, que no hauria de reduir-nos a la passada col·lí. Teníem una passada que és molt lluny. En el museu, podem veure, trobem objectes que es veuen darrere d'una copia de teus, que es veuen darrere de 2 milions d'anys, i ens veiem objectes de 200.000 d'anys en Congo o en altres llocs africans. Ens veiem un mascle que es veuen d'Angola, que es veuen d'anys d'anys del següent següent. Aleshores, hi ha molt més de col·legs col·legs. I, de course, els col·legs col·legs, en principis, han deixat d'anys d'anys d'anys del següent següent. Hi ha hagut història aleshores. I un dels missatges que hem fet, fins al present moment, la representació permanent de la història col·legal, veus el que els officers col·legs han fet, els missatges que han fet. Però el que hem de fer, o a més o a més, que tenim dificultats per mostrar, és l'acció de les congolies. Les congolies eren no només víctimes, s'organitzen, s'han resistit, s'havien treballats, hi havia una segona societat. Ens forgetem d'això, perquè, de course, la base de la nostra col·legia és col·legal, però això no és una excusa per no donar una vista balançada de què l'Africa avui és sobre. Això és el primer punt. Crec que podem trobar solucions per això. Hi ha fotografia, hi ha moltes altres sources, hi ha oral història, no hi ha res per què no ens hauríem de mostrar el rol d'africans durant la col·legal era, abans i després. El segon punt és que hem de treballar amb els nostres col·legs africans. Avui tenim una cooperació científica, biologia, biologia de la biologia, per exemple, molt important, perquè és lín de climate change, tenim geologia, tenim, de course, l'històric i sociològic i antropològic activitats. Per a nosaltres, és important fer-ho amb africans. Hem de ser honestos, tendim a anar-hi amb la nostra connexió, amb, de course, el suport de les nostres col·legues, i anirem a dir-los d'on anir-hi, això és gradually changing, una paraula de partnership, una paraula de co-creació és una realitat. Si volem ser balance i tenir una bona vista, volem saber si organitzes una exhibició o si tens un projecte de recerca, volem tenir diferents vies en un altre, diversificant les vies balance. Hem, per exemple, recentment, i és molt al cap i a l'entrada de l'Enteriors del Museu, tenim un espai sobre racisme. Racisme no és només una cosa sobre el passat. Si parlo de l'Human Zoo en 1897, bé, a Franck, en 1958, dos anys abans de la independència de Congo, hi havia una majora exhibició de l'exhibició a Belgium, i al cap i a l'altre, hi havia l'Human Zoo. A l'anterior, perquè hi havia congolins visitant, i hi havia polítics, va ser un escandal dins de l'estat, i va ser lluny d'anys, però, fins i tot, vam organitzar aquesta sort de l'Human Guàrdia, i hi ha una tendència de dir, oh, sí, Lleopold II, va ser terrible, però, després d'això, vam ser totes les bones ciutadans del món. Hem de reconèixer que, avui, a la nostra societat, és a Europa, i certament aquí a Brussel·les, tenim racisme. Un poc d'anys, una de les nostres researchers de la Congo, va ser a la transporció pública, i va ser físicament atacat. Amb un clar racista d'entrada, el nom de l'endord va ser utilitzat, etcètera. Així, hem de jugar un rol en la societat d'avui, no només en el nostre past, però també en el nostre present. A veure com contribueixen en el past, com a museu, a alguns d'aquestes serotypes sobre africans, però també avui, a tenir un rol en termes d'educació, i en termes d'operacions. La cooperació d'aquestes 20 altres d'africans, és molt important perquè és la manera per nosaltres, no només dos, em dic, en el nostre col·lectiu, fer una recerca, però també és una qüestió de legitimitat com a institució científica, a jugar un rol, insertar alguns d'aquestes bàsiques problemes, en termes de biodiversitat, en termes de l'edició de la rola que africana en un canvi climàtic i en un canvi climàtic, l'equitorial forest en Congo i en la rola de Congo, en l'Africa central, és una de les últimes places on la CO2, la carbonada, és captivada en una manera durable. Em va donar a l'últim punt, el que és molt linked a l'idea de reparació, és la restitutió. Des de l'any passat, tenim una llei, una llei belgiana, que clarament diu que el que és estolent haurà de tornar. És clar que no és necessàriament tan clar, tan clar i simple, perquè, bueno, com defineix el que és estolent? Com aneu a sobre la restitutió? L'engany de l'endemà és el primer. La primera condició per fer-ho bé és per fer-ho en una manera bilateral, en una manera cooperativa. Estem precisament, en sort de fer-ho bé, per tenir una clau base, una argumenta bilateral, amb el que l'ailem a transmetre. d'aquest nostre projecte. S'hi tancarà unanya a la llengua d'antigueres, I no ho hem de fer. L'any 17 d'octubre, jo em vaig fer una recerca per a les quals s'ha de fer. Jo no he tret la recerca de les dues recercions. I, per dir-me, jo també he tret la recerca de les dues recercions. Jo també he tret la recerca de les dues recercions. I, per a les quals he tret la recerca, he tret la recerca de les dues recercions. i estic convençut que molt més esforç es necessitarà abans que puguin arribar a algunes conclusions. La comissió pot fer una recomendació i la decisió serà política de les dues llocs per decidir, sí, considerar-ho estolent i ha de ser la proposta de l'estat de la Congolès. Hi ha alguns truques, perquè aquests objectes van originalment venir d'una comunitat i per què la comunitat no es claima d'arribar a aquest objecte. El principal és... el creixement és que aquests objectes que hi ha de la feina en la Congolès han de ser decidits per les Congolès. No és per nosaltres decidir qui es resta. S'ha de ser la govern de la Congolès i fer-ho en el millor possible. Però, si no hi hagi una consistència en la Congolès, es farà la legitimitat d'una operació difícil. El segon problema és que molts africans diuen que els objectes, sí, sí, són importants, però no només sobre els objectes, sinó també sobre la nostra cultura. Si és la ciutadania coloniala, si és les missoneries, si és la ciutadania sense dretes de la monog puffia, poi és la ciutadania en la gallery, i si és la cultura que té una imatge de l' performer zona, perquè encara no ho pot schlimre un machinery que vol dir har tools. És la trชelorelle psychoanàlia sempre ho ve malaria, i això no és un complaining físic i mala для els objectes, és l' trainor ni solvisible en un moment que no t'agradi. No volem ajudar a les gent que fan això. Si ens volen fer una bona feina, en termes de restitucions, volem això ser una operació legítima, que per això hem de cuidar no per fer-ho d'una manera una, hem de prendre en compte les reales demanes, no només de la Governa de Congolès, de la societat, de les comunitats. Això significa que hem de tenir una vista broma i també tenir una cooperació en termes de cultura, en termes d'strengueixar les capacitats de museums. Per exemple, i crec que és un projecte interessant, tenim una xarxa d'Europa i africans museum directors. En la xarxa d'aquesta xarxa, volem cooperar i ens hem de treballar en un moment en què ens trobem solucions. Per exemple, organitzar exhibicions. Per què hi ha gairebé cap exhibició de l'Africa a Europa o de l'Africa a Europa i de l'africa a diversos capitals? Jo crec que això seria una manera de realitzar-ho i treballar en un espèrit tru de partnerships i de tenir comunes projectes. Hi ha una última qüestió, que s'ha preguntat moltes vegades. Molta gent diu que això hauria de ser molt difícil per al museum perquè s'haurien de perdre una part de la teva col·lecció. Jo diria que tota la discussió institucional és molt important i és una oportunitat per a nosaltres com a museus del món. Si continuem com ens fem quan estiguem a l'aivri-tau, la nostra legitimitat com a partners, la nostra legitimitat de fer la recerca a l'Africa o a altres països del món per cooperar serà cada cop més contraversió. Per a la nostra legitimitat, com a museus del món, és essencial que entrem en aquest exercici i cooperem. L'objecte com a una altra no pot ser un objectiu com una altra. Franchament, a la nostra col·lecció tenim 120.000 objectes culturals, tenim 8.000 instruments tradicionals, tenim 10.000.000 espècies d'insectes, tenim 1.000.000 espècies d'insets, you know, sharing this is really obvious. And if, for example, I can see that our Congolese partners, certainly the research who are here, they look at the objects as a priority which are lacking in their own collections. And they say, we want to be able to respond to every community in our country and to reconnect them with their culture. So that is our main objective. So while we in our own legislation tend to concentrate on the reparation team, the view from the African side, certainly from the Congolese side, is more holistic and is one of reconnecting with their own culture. Where reparation is certainly something which is in the back of their mind, but it is not the only requests to which we need to answer. I think I talk for too long already so I'm going to shut up. Thank you. Muchas gracias, Bart. Thank you very much. Bart, I don't know if anybody among our audience would like to ask a question about the subject presented by Bart. We keep the questions for the end and we will listen to the rest of the speakers first and we will have a Q&A at the end of the session so we can exchange our opinions now. We're going to give the floor to Andrés Gutiérrez. Let me tell you in advance he said, doctor, history by the University of America, America de Madrid specialized in anthropology. He belongs to the faculty of conservators of the museum. He's in charge of the Museum of America. He had also developed other presences that's for example the head of the department and responsible for projects at that museum. He's also a commissioner of different exhibitions, author of several articles related to the management of collections and museum collections, archaeology and heritage, and also several monographies on mythology and archaeology of the Norandes. He also belongs to the research team of one of research and development projects and if I'm not mistaken, he's in charge of reinventing museums, right? So now we're going to listen to Andrés Gutiérrez. For about 20 minutes we can only ask you not to go beyond that time in order to have time for the Q&A. And I guess that you will also tell us about the different projects you are developing related to this change which these ethnological museums are undergoing with a new sensibility towards working on social representation, collective imaginations, etc. in order to revisit a little bit the history they've gone through. Mr. Gutiérrez, you have the floor. Thank you very much. Thanks to the museum. Thank you, Oriol, for your kind introduction. Thank you, Celeste. Thank you, Ricard, for being here together with us. I'm going to start by giving you a quick perspective on the new discourses and perspectives from our museum. You are probably familiar with our museum. It's in a very symbolic place. It's this green building at the entry of the university village in Madrid, Moncloa, near Alco de la Victoria. It was created in 1941, right after the end of civil war. So there is an important load. Sí, bueno, porque vieron la foto. Este es el edificio. So this is the building, as I was saying, was created in 1941 as a museum, but the collections date from much before. I'm not going to dwell on these aspects and all the aspects related to the creation of the museum. The moment it was created and the ideological load of the building or the history of the collections because I want to highlight aspects related to new discourses, new perspectives, and new subjects and perspectives that we are attempting to apply. These perspectives are related to the turn of the century. Since the 70s, museums have undergone a very important transformation, the new museology that was created in the 70s. And in reality, we are seeing how the new society, and we can mention the Queen Society of Regents in 1991, thinking about how this new society, Western society was going to be, or Bauman society, liquid society, to different perspectives. With the beginning of the 21st century, there was a transformation of Western society, and this is the context in which we can frame disruptions which are happening within the discourse which can be applied to museums. These courses that are related to the patriarchal perspective, a new line and vision on gender and sexuality, the Eurocentric dominant perspective, which is breaking away from this perspective, generating a new interculturality, new application of diversity. He's asking if he's going too fast. He's going a bit fast, but it's okay. This colonial is discourses, the one that brings us here, the new vision of this dominant discourse which is predominant in museums because in these new lines and discourses about decolonization and the invisibility of marginalized groups, generating new discourses related to the other, and also the subject of identities. Very interesting, an imposition that has been made. Art in general has contributed to generating a specific identity and how we are trying to be far away from these discourses and narrations. And these new values are related to a transformation of museums, a general transformation of society. How can they be reflected in my museum, Museo de América? Like my colleague, I have not been in charge of the museum for long, just since the month of May, but we have been able to apply new working guidelines, and since we cannot transform the permanent museography of the museum, we thought about incorporating new spaces of reflection within the permanent collection. No, those temporary collections, although they will be temporary. And these are going to reflect reflections about what I've mentioned, the heritage of presence of African descendants on gender diversity, on the construction of the image of America, sustainability, subjects or issues, environment, climate change, a general coincidence, because this responds to the new challenges of the contemporary society, independence, which is other aspects that in the museums have not been reflected before. And then the cross-breeding, a cultural mix or mixed culture, hot points for debate, small modules that can be added to the existing museography in order to provoke reflection on the visitor. It's going to be part of the permanent exhibition, and they can change with time, because what we want is to take a look at the other voices. This is not the discourse that wants to be generated by the museum, but rather a window that we open on new works. We are working on Afro-descendants, and specialists about the descendant origin from Africa. Our subject is America, not Africa, but there is some bonds. There are some bonds and associations that are collective, et cetera. So we are working in order to generate those contents. Let me mention four aspects, which are very much related to our conference, our discourses, and everything that we want to do related to this seminar gathering us around here. Covering memory through making visible those collectives that were invisible, we've been working on Afro-descendant presence in the museum, something that has not been dealt with in the discourse, the current discourse of the permanent museography dates from 1994, although ten years ago we started to work on this ten years before, and the subject of the Afro-descendant presence had not been considered important or was not dealt with. So we have an audiovisual, a theme path, and we talk about different aspects. I'm sure that you are familiar with this work of art. I'm sure you are familiar with this, and this is a deposit of the National Museum of El Prado. It was painted in Quito, representing what has been named and called the Mulatos de Esmeraldas. Why is it called like this? When the name of those people represented here is painted on the picture, on top of the heads of those people we see Fantisco de Arrovedo, Pedro, and the Right Bingo, and the Hs of each one of them. So one of the questions that we have to deal with, besides placing value on the history of this picture, because this picture speaks about freedom processes, the fight of slavery, mamas, the agreements with the audience, and how they become governors of a certain region. What we want is to reflect on the names and titles of the works of art. It should be named portrait of Don Francisco de Arrovedo and his two sons, Caciques of Esmeraldas, which is a province in the coast of Ecuador. So we are inviting a specialist, Julia Cabrera, Fernando Barbosa, specialist, and we have organized an open round table in order to deal with the subject that we want to deal with, and I don't know if it's very fruitful or not. Man, we have specific round tables in order to provide ourselves with the content that are going to be part of this, part of reflection. First content, and this is going to be changing, depending on the different voices that we hear and the needs for these voices and how we should approach new discourses within our permanent collection. The second aspect I wanted to touch upon was what Minho was referring to, the policies of knowledge, or politics of knowledge. We've always used the same criteria, the criteria of the museum of a specific country, of a specific culture about the others, because we are always speaking about the others and this dominance of the territory and thinking has been materializing the way we look at objects. I am bringing this sentence, and this is an article by Jose Marin, and as my way of reflection, and this is the first idea that I can launch here is to debate whether we are going through a new phase, which is a continuity of a phase that started back in the 15th century. I'm talking about America, but it can also be applied to Africa. Colonizing America began in the 15th century evangelizing the non-believers so we create different categories depending on a religious category. But it will be like the civilization of wild people. This is not related to the religious perspective, but the cultural perspective, whether they are civilized or not, but always naming them as wild opagans. And in the 20th century, we are talking about underdeveloped countries, and here we change our prism from religion, point of view of civilization, in order to speak about the economy, which was prevalent in the 20th century. What happens in the 21st century? I wonder if all this process, decolonizing process, I don't know if we can be focused on this or not, but maybe it can mean turning those groups and those countries into another country that has to be decolonized from Europe, where putting them in different categories. And if we don't have this line, we'll have another one, because in Europe we're always working on the otherness, right? And I was speaking about this single way of thinking, and this is just an example. We've seen a chair of the Manteña culture. This is a culture from Ecuador before the Inca conquest. And this is an object that seems like a chair with arms. In America, this type of furniture does not exist, and it's related to other type of furniture, which are high tables. So local chips, a Manteña sitting on a chair, we're using them as stools, low stools, and here we are categorizing, and this is something that we apply from the Hispanic past, from the European perspective. No chair to seat, no kingdom. Those suspects and those suspects have been categorized as chairs looking for this symbolism related to high hierarchies, such as the use of stones. And this is a way this has been represented in Ecuador. We can see an excavation site where we are building what we call Council of Local Thieves, chiefs, and these chairs, not thieves, but chiefs, sorry, these chairs which are called, well, this is just a western revision of something that we think could have been applied. If you are interested, I don't know whether to unveil the mystery, there is a publication called Metaphors of Lineage where we approach a new perspective and thinking not from the western perspective, this is a chair, but what type of object is this and what will be its function. And the third one, my apologies, I don't have a lot of time, links with what is contemporary. When we approach the past, we have to do it from a contemporary perspective. What can it mean for nowadays? And this is something I've mentioned before. When we're working with communities, we organize a transgender exhibition with LGBT associations, transgender people and children in order to see what did we have to approach in this study, in this temporary exhibition, including a cover of a catalogue. Working with the communities, but also bringing this to the present, there is nowadays discrimination about the LGBTI people, yes, because we've suffered this in the museum when we organize the exhibition, I can tell you about it, but we always kept in mind positive aspects because this narration has been incorporated into the narration of the museum. So far nobody spoke about transgender people in America when it's a permanent reality that you can see and any chronicle from the 16th to the 18th century. And here we were able to buy contemporary works of art, fotografies portrays by Álvaro Laíd in Venezuela, someone called Tidawina, trans women, and in Oaxaca, pictures of Núria López with these trans women. We also work with migrant communities, this is one of the essential aspects, we cannot speak about America without America, as our colleague was saying before, and we organized a projecte which concluded already, unfortunately, but it was very interesting because it was an open project, virtual project, where stories, videos and pictures could be uploaded in order to explain the narration of migration from the perspective of the migrant. We stimulate the production of some stories from the museum, but in Mexico they took this project, they adopted this projecte in order to narrate migration stories towards the U.S., wet bags, et cetera, and I think these were students, cases of family members who had gone under circumstances of migration processes towards the U.S. Gender is another important aspect, I have five minutes left. Gender is something we want to deal with and there is something important, but we don't want to omit our mistakes, this is another current perspective, we have to be able to recognize our mistakes. When I was studying the pre-Hispanic art, when I took a look at the pre-Hispanic work of art from the gender perspective and the different categories, we appreciated many mistakes and mistaken identifications that had happened for the last 30 years in the museum, for example, in the representation of chief, when in the writing you could see the female genitals, so we published a video in Instagram and then guided visits saying that the perspective that we applied from our optic has to be revisited, this gender perspective has been applied to this viranal art, this is a fantastic picture representing the daughter of a virre in the new Spain, in Mexico, but by Israel, and representing someone forgotten by history, it's difficult they appear together, it's an indigenous woman full of tattoos and she has a contraplasia and we organized an exhibition about this, so we are revisiting the collections from different perspectives in order to offer new narrations, new discourses, which are related to what I meant. I have four minutes left to speak about another aspect, gathering us here, which is plunder and restitution. When we speak about pre-Hispanic art, countries are asking and claiming the evolution of works of art which are part of these plundering processes and this is something that has to be punctualized, auctions, for example, encourage this plunder in illicit traffic documented by several countries. But when there is a plunder in Spain, I speak from the perspective of the Museum of America because we have been hosting plunder works of art, the evolution happens. I know a couple of cases since I've been in the museum, three, one, several countries, 691 works of art returned to Colombia in 2014, 2015. This evolution process, which is related to a commission organized by the embassy because Spain cannot say, I'm sending you the pieces of art. The country has to require them and therefore we have a specific commission, Spain and the Ministry of Culture got in touch with the embassies in order to request the restitution of these works of art. The process ended up very well when the works of art are plundered because we are talking about plundering, illicit sites and irregular extraction of these works of art. So it's easy to understand. A prehispanic work of art should have a presence in Spain, a legal one. What happens when we speak about objects that have been moved in the 18th, 19th century, we enter into un charter territory and one of the claims, I guess you are all thinking about this, it's the Kimbaya treasure and Colombia. So we've been speaking about the Institute of Anthropology, the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and we organized three different phases of collaboration workshop, forum, made by experts in museums and patrimonia seminar with four conferences for different contexts, historical, archeological, archeometric, legal. We decided to approach it from a legal perspective to see what was the context in which to play this patrimony. And finally we also have a third phase which is a virtual exhibition, we are working on it. Conclusions that we reach with each one of these situations is that the study has to be individualized. We shouldn't generalize. Not all Colombian patrimony has been plundered. Part of it is in Spain from recent times but we have to speak about different questions. Are we talking about legal restitution or moral restitution because these are two different things, legal restitution in the case of the Kimbaya treasury. You have to take a look at the legal situation of the 19th century. What is the difference? We are talking about plundering, clear nowadays but not so clear in the 18th and 19th century and also identities, wishes, construction, imaginary, etc. Therefore there is also a temporal limit for this type of revisions and this is a question we could ask ourselves how long can we go in order to place a limit to these revisions or can we maybe go back to the past? Any date? That's a question. On the other hand, who should be restituted? Who is the owner of the works of art? Are we speaking about countries newly created and we are speaking about nations within countries, communities, people, direct descendants? Who are we speaking about in every case? Something else that has to be taken into account. In the case of state museums it's not something that I can decide nowadays as the director of the Museum of America because we are talking about the Ministry of Culture. Decisions made related to specific heritage can have consequences on other museums with similar patrimonies so they have to be agreed decisions and this is the final screen. There are some risks which are obvious and nowadays everything we are going through is very much related to the confusion generated around these subjects. First aspects related to decolonisation all the processes that I have mentioned before not only about the others but others we have in self decolonised but also restitution. Both terms are mixed. Part of the process is restitution but decolonising means much more and the use of lies by the press, fallacies, the false hint in order to deviate attention. If from a legal perspective colonists did exist or not, that's not the debate. I'm talking about America independently of vice kingdoms. Some of them cannot have any other name. I'm talking about the diversity of casualty. If colonists did not exist because this is what's been denied there is no decolonisation possible because we are speaking about different processes questioning authority and museums. We also have a voice and we have to remain silent. Equivalence, decolonising and restitution a series of fallacies that have been read and that are not on purpose but behind this there is a lack of data a lack of information and half truth and at least we should be aware of this. Great, thank you very much. Please, please. Gràcies. Bé, d'entrada. Bé, first of all we would like to thank both Bart and Andrés for being so concise and for not overextending the time you had. But we know you have to live at six so what we will do now is open and turn a round of questions about your presentations and after that we will listen to make a conference, a monographical conference that was originally designed for the closing of these international seminars. If anybody amongst our audience would like to place a question for either of both speakers please let's do this now and after that we will be able to listen to the conference presented by Clement Ameka. Well, two excellent presentations are very interesting but I see that both gentlemen who are presenting or using as excuse the fact that if we do have museums it is for dissemination of knowledge purposes that was my understanding of what has been said and I also see that what is really valued is not owning all these pieces all these works of art because they are original and because they are unique. Wouldn't we be able to do the same using copies? Couldn't we return the original pieces and keep copies in our museums? I can imagine this might be very costly but perhaps when we return all these pieces to their original countries we could pay for copies to be made because having an original Picasso or having a copy really it's not so relevant. So my question is along these lines why do we consider it so relevant that the piece is original or not? Compartim Each of these museums in the case of the MUSEUM MUSEU cities La Mexica you have a lot of archaeological pieces in the African museum we do have many objects which comes from communities which continue to exist they are alive So in some cases i també són elements funcional que formen part de les seves xarxes i les veïnes, però en moltes cases, les xarxes que tenen al Museu d'America han de ser societats que no longer existen. Per al·lusió, Marta, crec que voldria respondre a la qüestió. Sí, moltes gràcies. Jo diria que tenim 80.000 objectes culturales d'un congo. Congo, només en el Museu Nacional de la Generalitat de Kichasa, té 35.000 peces. I no parlo d'una transmissió que no és ideal. No sé si això pot ser. El objecte no és necessari. És una oportunitat de berenar les condicions per donar els objectes. Crec que és essencial que li demanem les necessitats dels interlocutors a l'Africa. I insisten en l'acció. Què és la demanda de les persones per anar en contacte amb la cultura de les parents, les grans parents, que volen entendre allò que és sobre. Per cert, això significa que retornes un nombre de peces. Però no crec que hi ha una demanda que retorni tot. Hi ha una oportunitat per a l'Africa per tenir un museu de l'Africa a Europa. Estem a Brussel·les, que ens considerem capaç de Europa, per tenir això en un escenari per la ricscòstia, per la rècorda i per la història, i també per la passada. Crec que aquesta qüestió de retornar tots els objectes és el que som sometimes here from the diaspora here in Brussel·les, here in Belgium. It is not what I hear from when I go to Hong Kong. That there is a different demand, which is about reconnecting with the culture. And culture is not about objects. Culture is about what is behind the objects. It's about spirituality. It's about the way of connecting as social beings at the time. So I don't think the question of restitution should be defined in that way. But certainly whether it is on loan or returning in full ownership pieces is something which is happening right now. But it is not the only answer to the many questions which are asked to us in Africa and in other continents. Thank you. Yo quería comentar sobre en relación con la pregunta que nos ha hecho, que es muy interesante, porque está planteando un... ...with regards to the question that you are asking. Well, you are talking about museums and about a change that's taking place in museums during the last decades. A museum of artistic representations that were replicas of things that you could see in different countries. That was extensively done in the 19th century. It became very fashionable. And at a given point in time, with this concept of reconverting art heritage in something more conventional, lost value. Now replicas are used in many museums. Sculptures made out of clay or out of yeast. It's not uncommon. Now, the question is what's the value of the concept of originality? We're projecting our own concepts on others. In Asia, for example, it is very frequent that the renovation of a temple involves the absolute renewal and change of all the materials, all the wooden elements, all the painting, etc. But for Asians, the new temple is the same temple because it's not the materials that matter. It's the spiritual value. So I think it is very interesting that you have brought up the question of the original piece, which is connected to the concept of art, but also to our values. And I think it is worth discussing. There is a higher... ...calización of heritage, which is almost accidental. In art museums, they seem to have a different consideration, a higher consideration than ethnographic museums, for example, not just when they deal about ethnographic elements of third countries. Also, when they deal with their own culture, they are considered lesser museums, because what they exhibit is considered of less value, because showing, for example, objects that come from rural areas in your country is considered less valuable than showing works of art. So here what we're doing is a projection, really, of these values. And it's probably a very European creation, this concept, because the very concept of the museum, the concept of a place where you preserve objects, this is something to be questioned. Is this a pattern, a way of understanding culture, that probably would have a very different meaning in other countries? I'm just saying this so that we consider the possibility of questioning the very concept of museum. Now, this opens quite a debate, of course. Any more questions? Well, it's a short question. You've mentioned that museums in other countries may appreciate their culture being present in a museum in Europe. To what extent are they interested in having their objects exhibited in European countries? Do they agree with the way in which these objects are exhibited? Since you work with both sides, and this is so relevant, how do you do this, how can you come to an understanding about what to do with these objects that may belong to communities that, on occasions, no longer exist? Well, I imagine your question is for Mr. Uvri, because you have mentioned the reconnection of communities with the objects, and when I say communities, I'm referring to the migrant diaspora. Their connection with the objects that you have in your collection, then I think that you could also respond to the question in terms of how do you justify, how do you link this to these demands that you receive in your own museum? No, no. I believe there is certainly a category of objects and certainly images on which we are very conservative. Right now, actually, we had a small project with an artist and he used some of the images in our photo collection. And he shows young girls, which are naked. He shown African citizens in chains. Frankly, we have struggled with this art project because he also shows some of the comments which were added during the colonial times. Some of those comments are expressly racist. Today they are completely unacceptable. We consider those images as insulting, as racist, as a way of continuing the stereotyping, the stereotyped way in which we presented Africa during the colonial time. It is interesting because actually in pre-colonial times, the way in which in our art and our history, which often Africa was presented, was less stereotyped. This is really something linked to the colonial era. And there I connect with Andreas, the other speaker, where he says decolonizing our thinking. So we have to decolonize our thinking. It is true that for some objects these are spiritual objects and they were not meant to be exhibited. Very often they were only shown at night. They were only shown to certain people, those who were, for example, a member of fraternity. And so it is true that in showing them in our museums, we are not respecting the rules, the rules of the societies where they come from. And this can sometimes be something of, can be the cause for discussion. I think our only answer can be to, you know, we're willing to go into a dialogue. I must say I receive regularly Cameroonies, Kings recently I receive Chef Coutibier, traditional chiefs from Congo. Usually they are proud to see those objects. But this is not necessarily thinking of all. And I believe that there we need, it's one of the words which I try to use often, we need some humility. Decolonizing means that we have to, you know, put aside some of our European ways of looking at our collections and at the culture of the other. And that we listen and that we have a dialogue. There is no one answer to that. And maybe for some, it's for example human remains, whatever, there is a few places in our museum where you can see a grave, for example, of a traditional chief. But I can tell you that the human remains which you see are fake. They have been printed, they have been painted. You can't see it, but it's clearly indicated. Our policy is never to expose any human remains in our museum. So there we have taken also a clear decision. For cultural objects there is not one single answer. Thank you. Thank you, this is a question for Andrés. You have said something very interesting around the otherification during the decolonization process. You have mentioned the danger of becoming distant from those that we pretend to decolonize and they become the others. So the question is who has to be decolonized because the restitution is part of this larger idea or process of decolonization, but processes are taking place here in the European society within their museums, which are the ones which are burdened with all this history. So in your discourse you continue to deny to a certain extent the responsibility buying whatever the origin of this space. So who is the subject of this decolonization? Because museums are reproducing all these discourses on subject societies and moments creating temporary fictions about these societies and they are perpetuating things through their discourses and I'm talking about history and ethnology museums now. I have also followed the conferences organized by the museum during this process and my question is, for this Spanish identity and also outside Catalonia and I'd like to clarify this, why is America so, because America is so connected to Spain and the Spanish culture, in the relationship with the American citizens who live here, what should be the value of all these pieces, all these works of art contained in Spanish museums? What do these things mean for you? And we talk about moral restitution or physical restitution, what should we do about it? Well, that's a lot of questions. Okay, who has to decolonize? I think that clearly the first phase is self decolonization. Our colleague was also talking about this. We first need to change the way that we think. We have to do this ourselves and in parallel we need to be able to listen to what other voices say, the voices of the true main characters here, the true owners of this heritage. And there were so many questions. The second question, we're talking about the Kimbaya collection which has been requested by Colombia. What does it mean for Spain? Well, in the first place it's a gift, as part of a diplomatic event. So it's part of the history of Spain. It also has a strong symbolic value because this was a gift and this was a heritage which was selected to be rescued in Spain during the Civil War and to be protected. So there is a reconstruction about the whole history and then the knowledge that people have about the Kimbaya collection. However, if you ask people in Spain where is the Kimbaya collection, most people will tell you that they don't know. The same would happen if you ask people in Colombia. So that's a little bit our fault too in terms of our inability to communicate. Now this detracts nothing from the construction of a symbolic identity. I don't know whether you were able to follow the conference by Roberto Yedas. This is a fictitious contemporary construction based on a physical objecte and it creates pain because it is no longer in the Colombian territory from where it was extracted. So this deposit on which identity is built based on objects that don't belong to the country hurts and creates hurt. Now, this is a project that is born in Colombia and they have made this request and we need to answer to this request as we would to any other. Our relations are very good. We continue to work with the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and it doesn't depend on the Museum of America whether there will be a final restitution or not. In my opinion and your last question about whether we have to talk about a legal or a moral restitution. Based on everything I have researched and this is my very humble perspective because I know there are lots of experts that have been working in Colombia trying to find legal grounds. In my opinion, there is no legal case. It is a great confusion. This was a gift. I don't know whether you know the history. I will summarize the govern of the Republic of Colombia in 1968 brought this collection to the American exhibit that was being held in Madrid with the express intention while this collection was being sold in the international market and the Colombian government buys it to give it to Queen Maria Cristina as a gift. So that is an object that is bought to be presented as a gift. Now legal issues, well, there has to be... Work has to be done here. Now moral issues, I understand that. This is a theological heritage but there is also a lot of objects from Kimbaya in the British Museum and in Vienna and in Berlin and in many other museums so we would need to analyze why if this was a gift from the Colombian government then the restitution is not based on any act of plundering because the pieces have been acquired later and I do understand it is more of a moral issue and this is a different type of restitution and this is precisely the kind of things that we need to talk about. This is what we're here to debate. Is there an actual legal case documented, supported from a legal perspective or are we talking about other perspectives? I don't know whether I've been able to thank you. Hopefully I have. Do we have any more questions? Then I simply wanted to add what I do have a question. I don't know whether to ask it here or to ask Barth directly. Now when we talk about restitution which often are made by states we have been created recently to build a national identity. What happens with all these pieces which are part of other cultures which in these new countries are marginalized or are not given any visibility? I will give you a very practical case. The case of the Spanish protectorate. Many of our pieces from Morocco come from the Amazic culture which is a minority culture non-recognized culture in Morocco. So one of the great opportunities that the Amazic culture has is the fact that we can exhibit from here all of their potential and all the specificities of their culture and their strong personalities. So my question would be do you have cases which could be parallel to this case I have mentioned with the Amazic culture in the case of the Museum of Africa I can imagine that you will have pieces from a diversity of cultures that can be found in the Democratic Republic of Congo. So do you find yourself in a situation where these cultures also want to be visible and appreciate the fact that this has been preserved in a museum where it can be seen? Barth, I don't know whether you would like to say anything about this. I believe that the one who really answered to this is Andreas when he mentioned the number of conditions for us to act in a legitimate way we do not have a monopoly of knowledge. If we as museums, if we succeed in letting the people of those communities express themselves then we may have the legitimacy to do this but for that we need an approach which is innovative which is not the approach of even a few years ago we have to admit that it's only since 20 years I believe at least here in Belgium if I look around and what you do with Africa it is not so long ago that we have started changing our focus and that we look first of all at the human being behind all those objects we have to admit that we tended to be a museum of African arts which forgot about the cultures and about the events and the whole history behind it so I believe yes we can but we should do it in another way not in the old ways so decolonization in my view and that was the previous question it is something which we have to do both of us yes we need to decolonize but in my case my African counterparts also need to decolonize it means for example that they do not limit themselves as being victims of colonization there are today sovereign nations there are sovereign peoples there are communities which live not always but which at least tend to live or want to live, aspire to live in a democratic and open society if we can factor that in I believe we can do that but only if we do it in the right way and I think that there Andreas really put a number of excellent conditions for doing that in order to be legitimate and in order to do it in the correct way bueno, si no hay más preguntas lo que haremos es... i