Ha, ha, ha!  I almost joined in the karaoke, but I realized I didn't know
the words!!  I just  hummed along.
O

On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 07:27:55 -0500 Tricia Edwards <[log in to unmask]>
writes:
>Maybe he'll weed out all the song lyrics, too....
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Olivia S. Anastasiadis [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: Thursday, January 21, 1999 10:23 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: filters
>
>
>I say we give these guys a break until John gets back, up and running
>weeding this stuff off for us.  As all you out there have suggested,
>the
>delete key is the best weapon.  It's a lot quicker too and you don't
>have
>to type an entire message to all of us.  I do it because I type fast;
>and
>for those stodgies who like proper spelling, I try to get that done
>too.
>
>O
>
>
>On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:00:12 +1000 "Millward, Peter"
><[log in to unmask]> writes:
>>can someone please advise me if there is a filter I can apply to stop
>>getting all the emails from people who wish to sign off the list and
>>who it
>>seems have been unable to locate the VERY SIMPLE INSTRUCTIONS they
>>received
>>when they joined.
>>Peter Millward
>>Manager Education & Visitor Services
>>Melbourne Museum
>>9651 8162
>>
>>> ----------
>>> From:         Matam P. Murthy[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>>> Reply To:     Museum discussion list
>>> Sent:         Friday, 22 January 1999 10:57 AM
>>> To:   [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject:      Re: joint ownership of aboriginal artefacts
>>>
>>> signoff museum-l
>>>
>>> I want to get off of this list, someone please tell me how.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> YuhangAt 09:51 PM 1/21/99 -0000, you wrote:
>>> >I have wondered for some time if there isn't room for another,
>>> intermediate,
>>> >category of ownership. Given that museums exist to hold objects
>for
>>ever
>>> &
>>> >thus remove them in some ways from the material(ist) world, it
>>ought to
>>> be
>>> >possible for us to use anotherform of intellectual
>>categorisation....
>>> >
>>> >What I imagine is something that maintains the legal ownership of
>>an
>>> object
>>> >in the museum but also allows for a form of intellectual/moral
>>ownership
>>> of
>>> >the object by representatives of the originating group - much in
>>the way
>>> as
>>> >you could own a painting but the artist still retain copyright
>over
>>the
>>> >image.
>>> >
>>> >In this way the 'home' culture could be acknowledged in any
>>literature
>>> and
>>> >advise on the interpretation and care of the artefacts. The object
>>would
>>> >then be jointly managed by the museum who wants to store it for
>>ever and
>>> >interpret it to the public and originating culture who may wish to
>>see it
>>> >treated respectfully and in accordance with their own values and
>>> practices.
>>> >
>>> >Obviously there might be problems if the two were in contradiction
>>(which
>>> >reminds me of the Japanese business man who bought some Van Gogh
>>flowers
>>> and
>>> >said he wanted them cremated with him.... but that's another
>>story!) -
>>> but
>>> >could it not be a useful principle to inform practice?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>     "...The question of how, when, and where the indigenous
>>> >>     objects were obtained creates a mine-field of both
>>> >>     legal and moral dimensions..."
>>> >>
>>> >>     That was well said, and I agree completely.  The matter
>>> >>     DOES require serious consideration from a variety
>>> >>     perspectives.  I don't think there is a simple answer
>>> >>     applicable to all cases, except perhaps that museum
>>> >>     folk should/must afford indigenous people's claims the
>>> >>     right to serious examination and consideration in such
>>> >>     matters.  My knee-jerk reaction to your original post
>>> >>     was in response to the implication that original owners
>>> >>     were always still "rightful" owners.
>>> >>
>>> >>     Even the car analogy, presuming that you sold it to me
>>> >>     outright and with no liens or other encumbrances,
>>> >>     doesn't always work.  In ND if a person under 21 years
>>> >>     of age sells something, he/she can state they didn't
>>> >>     understand the matter and re-claim the sold item (and
>>> >>     return the purchase price) until they ARE 21.  We found
>>> >>     that out the hard way when we accepted an artifact
>>> >>     donation from a 16 year old.  She later changed her
>>> >>     mind and the lawyers held that we had to return the
>>> >>     item even though we'd gotten the teenager's mother to
>>> >>     countersign the deed of gift.  We no longer accept
>>> >>     donations from people under 21.
>>> >>
>>> >>     Good luck.
>>> >>
>>> >>     Chris Dill
>>> >>
>>> >>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>> >>C. L. Dill, Museum Director
>>> >>State Historical Society of North Dakota
>>> >>612 East Boulevard
>>> >>Bismarck  ND  58505-0830    USA
>>> >>P: (701)328-2666
>>> >>F: (701)328-3710
>>> >>E:  [log in to unmask]
>>> >>Visit our Web site at: http://www.state.nd.us/hist/
>>> >>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>
>___________________________________________________________________
>You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
>http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
>or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]