So, far in the course of writing the 1st draft of my next book ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes’, I have identified 2 types of widespread Cognitive Error by Museum Curators, Trustees, and their political masters:

·       Fallacy; and
·       Anachronism.

Today I discovered a 3rd – ‘Orientalism.’

I frequently encountered the arguments set out below in my research reading over the summer. What follows is an AI summary of the proposition:

‘Orientalism’ is a cognitive error that influences museum curators’ attitudes toward the repatriation of cultural heritage. Orientalism involves a patronizing Western view of Eastern cultures, portraying them as static and inferior, which can manifest as a reluctance to return artifacts, a belief that Western institutions are better custodians, or the framing of cultural items as belonging to a ‘universal’ history rather than a specific cultural one. This framework can lead to a failure to recognize the harm of colonial collection practices and an inability to fully grasp the cultural and political importance of repatriation for the communities of origin.

Orientalism fosters the idea that Western societies are more ‘rational’ and ‘developed’, leading some curators to believe that their museums are more capable of preserving, studying, and presenting artifacts than the country of origin.

The act of removing and displaying artifacts is inherently linked to colonial power. Orientalist thought frames this act not as theft, but as a legitimate collection of objects from ‘lesser’ cultures, making repatriation a politically and culturally charged issue that challenges the curator’s authority and the museum’s established power structure.

Curators who operate under an Orientalist mindset may continue to exhibit artifacts in ways that reinforce harmful stereotypes, such as portraying the ‘Orient’ as exotic, mystical, or barbaric. This can lead to the artifact being decontextualized and a failure to recognize the harm of its original dispossession.

Orientalism prioritizes a Western perspective, often at the expense of the lived experiences and cultural histories of the people from whom the artifacts were taken. This can result in a dismissive attitude towards repatriation claims and a failure to recognize the harm caused to the communities that have been dispossessed of their cultural heritage.

Instead of seeing repatriation as a matter of righting historical wrongs, Orientalist thinking can frame the issue as a matter of museums ‘hoarding’ artifacts, and repatriation efforts as a political problem. This can lead to a reluctance to engage in meaningful dialogue and a tendency to delay or deny repatriation requests.

I will integrate what I read over the summer with full citations as I develop this section of the book. The starting point of course is ‘Orientalism’ by Edward W. Said. See my comment below. When I was studying part-time at King’s College London, University of London, as an enrolled M.Phil/PhD student – which after 4 years I had to drop out of because of the full time pressures of running my own practice, this was one of the first books that my principal supervisor encouraged me to read. It altered my worldview