Being in the UK I can't comment on NAGPRA (whatever it is) but I've
been following the repatriation debates here with some interest.

The debates here have mostly focussed on major pieces, such as the
Parthenon (Elgin) Marbles & the Benin bronzes, both at the British
Museum. It's interesting that, although these issues tend to get
'shock horror; there'll be nothing left in the BM' type coverage in
the mainstream media, those involved often have quite sophisticated
arguments way beyond just demanding everything back.  For example,
for the Benin bronzes there has been some discussion about what it
means for black british people to have African history exhibited, & I
have seen one example of a Maori house of ancestral spirits (sorry I
don't know the exact name) which was removed from its original site
100yrs ago & brought to England by an evil imperialist, & used as a
boat shed. Its now been restored (sensitively) & is in the grounds of
a house belonging to the National Trust somewhere near London. This
building has become 'culturally live' again since it was discovered
by the Maori community in London (including some descendants of the
original family) who use it as appropriate - so it provides them with
a fairly unique resource for continuing their cultural traditions on
the other side of the world.

Secondly, and partly in response to whoever it was who pushed the
repariation to the total extreme, I don't recall ever having seen any
culture demand _everything_ back, rather it usually seems to be
requests either that the material is handled /exhibited in a more
sensitive way, or theat certain, particularly important items are
returned. I have also seen representatives from various countries
saying
 a) that while rich countries can pay for better care of the collections,
the objects are better off there, and
b) that they are pleased that examples of the things their culture
has produced are on display in other countires so that people there
can learn more about them.

Ethically then, its a fairly complex issue in some cases, but one
that can be improved by reasonable dialogue, which I would think
museums have a duty to foster. With specific reference to items taken
from Native Americans at Wounded Knee etc, if as it sounds from
your posting, there is a demand from within the culture for the
return of items, then the museum surely should discuss this & change
the way in which the items are used or return them as appropriate.
From trade journals it sounds as if people are often happy with a
more culturally appropriate treatment of items within the museum...

Also, what about war
> trophies taken from other groups during the various wars during
> this century alone? Or is this a can of worms that museums generally
> don't want to open?

Setting aside the issue of returning these items, museums that have
objects like this in their collections, could do some very interesting
and thought provoking work with them, as they would be powerful
statements against the brutality of war, & the structural violence of
a society which allows such things, also discussion of de-humanising
'enemies', definitions of 'otherness' racism, xenophobia & the
implications thereof. It would be interesting to see objects with
such negative historical connotations being used to try & do some
good?

I too would be interested to hear of any specific places which have
taken on board these issues, either through the list, or personally
at: [log in to unmask]
Cheers,
Jane