This
book was published alongside the British Museum’s eponymous
exhibition, but as a slim volume, just over 60 pages This is
essentially a picture book (which is not a criticism, I like
pictures), with brief notes similar to the captions that would have
gone alongside the objects in the actual exhibition. (I presume at
more full blooded catalogue wasn’t produced to leave a suitable gap
in the Market for Neil MacGregor to publish his 500 page book also
associated with exhibition later this year).
I
was sorry not to get the chance to go to the exhibition, as the
engagement with belief as the starting point is unusual. The
National Gallery in 2009 had an exhibition “The Sacred Made Real”
on Spanish Religious Art and the British Museum in 2011 had an
exhibition “Treasures of Heaven” which brought together various
Medieval European Christian objects, both of these did explore belief
to some extent, however my sense is that the starting point was a
coherent group of artworks which just happened to be religious in
origin. But with Living with Gods it is a completely diverse group of
objects brought together only by the fact that they share a religious
significance.
In
the introduction Jill Cook writes “perhaps we should review the
species name sapiens meaning wise or clever and consider the
alternative Homo religious, the species that tries to adapt to the
complexities of the world and our emotions by calling upon
nonmaterial forces?” That is a bold statement, and as someone of
faith an attractive one, but…
That
“but” need a lot of unpacking.
The
exhibition brings together a wide range of objects, and with them a
wide range of beliefs, and as the British Museum absolutely should
do, those beliefs are presented in a non-judgemental way. Within the
book, and therefore I expect the exhibition, objects are not grouped
by religion but by cross-cutting themes, sometimes to contrast
different responses to the same issues, but more often drawing out
the commonality of response across seemingly diverse religions.
Although
I didn’t go to this exhibition, I did go to the other two I
mentioned above and I found them challenging experiences because they
were made up almost exclusively of objects of devotion, but objects
removed from a devotional context. In some ways the “sensitive”
treatment made it worse, for The Sacred Made Real many of the gallery
spaces had been arranged in chapel like ways to help experience the
art work in something like its original context. So should my
response be to a historical artwork or to the Passion of Christ?
Of
those objects not in the British Museum’s own collection the
majority were on loan from the State Museum for the History of
Religion, St Petersburg which has a “complicated” history as much
of its collection came to it through the repression of religion
within Soviet Russia. This means we are asked to engaged with the
beliefs associated with the object despite the fact that the
particular object in question might very literally have been ripped
from the believer’s hands. While there is an exploration of the
ways that the atheist states actually expresses many “religious”
tendencies there didn’t seem to be an acknowledgement of the dark
side of those regimes' role in supplying material for this
exhibition.
I
have recently written about the British Museum’s Regarding the Dead
about how the Museum manages its holdings of Human Remains and there
are many common, if unacknowledged, ethical issues, some of these
religious objects could have than greater cultural power and
significance than an individual’s Human Remains. Thinking back to
the “Treasures of Heaven” exhibition, it included a significant
number of Human Remains, as many of the objects were reliquaries in
which their relic was still present. The key principle that Regarding
the Dead upholds, ie Human Remains should never be treated as an
object, was not manifest on my visit to “Treasures of Heaven”. It
was a fascinating exhibition but left me with a deep sense of unease.
Clearly
the format of this book (booklet?) did not allow the exploration of
these issues. I am pleased that the British Museum has opened the
can of worms, but I am not sure their response is completely
successful.