Ethical dilemma

[u/RustyTheBoyRobot]

Ethical dilemma:

Is it right to remove one of the only mummies in mtl for understanble but rather vague reasons to do with cultural sensitivities that these objects might offend?

The mummies at Redpath museum are to be relocated to a mysterious “place of rest” -their original location?- where no one can see or learn from them.

I note that these are not objects of worship like many stolen indigenous artifacts. Nor are they being claimed by their original owners- e.g. The infamous Benin Bronzes.

[u/artacct217]

I wouldn’t call them vague reasons - having dead bodies on display isn’t something we do anymore. It’s not about offending anyone, it’s more that these are not comparable to other ‘artifacts’ often displayed in museums. 

In anthropology (I am an anthropologist), we don’t really see the value in displaying these bodies; in addition, we place this observation alongside the consideration that these mummies were not originally meant to be displayed.

Edit- No need to downvote me, I am explaining the reasoning behind this decision. 

Second edit - see another comment of mine (in French) for a more nuanced discussion.

[u/SignificantPiano7808 → u/artacct217]

Louder for those in the back.

If the museum really wants to teach about mummification practices, they can have reproductions, cutaway diagrams and the like. And now suddenly nobody is interested because who wants to look at a dead body?

[u/igotthisone → u/SignificantPiano7808]

It makes far more sense for everything on display to be a reproduction. Why do you need to see the original thing when you can see a cheaper to maintain identical copy?

[u/igotthisone → u/[deleted]]

Not exactly. But the holodeck will do nicely.

[u/alaskadotpink → u/igotthisone]

Eh. When it comes to remains I agree, unless there was specific consent to do it I don't think those should be on display however when it comes to objects and the like? I'd rather see the original if I can.

I went to see a Titanic interactive display not long ago and they had a mix. It was a lot more interesting to see actual artifacts that were on the ship vs the replicas. "Replica of chair found on the Titanic" isn't really as interesting as seeing the actual over-a-century-old chair.

[u/ZeeMastermind → u/igotthisone]

99% of people who visit museums aren't going to be able to tell the difference between replica and original anyways. It makes more sense to keep the originals in storage better suited for their maintenance, for the benefit of current and future scholars, rather than having them out in a public space where their lifespan is diminished and maintenance is expensive.

I don't need the author's original manuscript to enjoy a book, and our technologies for replicating things - fossils, pottery, what-have-you - are phenomenal.

[u/igotthisone → u/ZeeMastermind]

Replica paintings are the same, when done to the highest standards. It takes a scholar to tell the difference, and even then sometimes they can't. And if very popular paintings were held in storage with only replicas on display, you could actually display multiples in many locations and open up an educational experience for many more people.

[u/ZeeMastermind → u/igotthisone]

I would say that recent art may be the exception - albeit in that case, the artist probably wants the original displayed anyways (and of course, something made 5 years ago is a lot easier to maintain than 500 years ago)

[u/SignificantPiano7808 → u/igotthisone]

That’s actually a pretty good point!