This article discusses how exhibition making can be seen as a creative method for building anthropological knowledge. Situations of conflict between social classes, curatorial practices and disciplines remind us of the existence of a very subtle and enduring museum lexis which governs how political ideas are put on display. Research was conducted in tandem with an exhibition the author curated in the National Museum of the Romanian Peasant 21 years after the collapse of the communist regime in South-Eastern Europe. Reflecting upon this process, the author shows how museums use a specific lexis that is based not only on existing practices but also on contingency. These facets each engage two different notions of temporality: while practice involves repetitiveness, predictability and continuity over different historical periods, contingency creates unexpected groupings of things, settings and meanings. It is the balance of the interplay between practice and contingency that dictates how the audience engages with museum discourse.
BaudrillardJ (1994) The system of collecting. In: ElsnerJCardinalR (eds) The Culture of Collecting. London: Reaktion, 7–25.
2.
BădicăS (2011) National Museums in Romania. In: AronssonPElgeniusG (eds) Building National Museums in Europe, Conference Proceedings from EuNaMus, European National Museums: Identity Politics, the Uses of the Past and the European Citizen, Bologna, 20–30 April. Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 713–731. Available at: http://www.ep.liu.se/ecp/064/030/ecp64030.pdf (accessed 5 November 2012).
3.
BeltingH (2004) Towards an anthropology of image. In: WestermannM (ed.) Anthropologies of Art. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 41–59.
4.
BennettT (1995) The Birth of the Museum: History, Theory, Politics. London: Routledge.
5.
BuchowskiM (2012) Intricate relations between Western anthropologists and Eastern ethnologists. Focaal63: 20–38.
6.
BurtonCScottC (2007) Museums: Challenges for the 21st century. In: SandellRJanesRR (eds) Museum Management and Marketing. Abingdon: Routledge.
7.
BuskirkM (2003) The Contingent Object of Contemporary Art. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
ButlerB (2007) Return to Alexandria: An Ethnography of Cultural Heritage, Revivalism, and Museum Memory. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
9.
CarterP (2004) Material Thinking: The Theory and Practice of Creative Research. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
10.
CraneS (2004) Memory, distortion, and history in the museum. In: CarbonellBM (ed.) Museum Studies: An Anthology of Contexts. Malden: Blackwell, 304–321.
11.
CvetkovićM (2008) Displaying nationalist culture in antinationalist times: The Ethnographic Museum in Belgrade under socialism. In: MihăilescuV. (eds) Studying Peoples in People Democracies II: Socialist Era. Anthropology in South-East Europe. Berlin: LIT Verlaag, 285–306.
12.
DerridaJ (1996) Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
Dominguez RubioF (2016) On the discrepancy between objects and things: An ecological approach. Journal of Material Culture21(1): 59–86.
14.
DumitrescuS (2010) Intervention in a press conference entitled: ‘Between renovations’, 5 February, Room Irina Nicolau, National Museum of the Romanian Peasant.
15.
ElliottJM (2012) Sculptural biographies in an anthropological collection: Mrs Milward’s Indian ‘types’. In: HillK (ed.) Museums and Biographies: Stories, Objects, Identities. Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 215–228.
16.
EnwezorOOguibeO (1999) Reading the Contemporary: African Art from Theory to the Market Place. London: INIVA.
17.
FosterH (1996) The Return of the Real: The Avant-Garde at the End of the Century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18.
GilbergT (1990) Nationalism and Communism in Romania: The Rise and Fall of Ceauşescu’s Personal Dictatorship. Oxford: Westview Press.
19.
GreenSLavioletteP (2015) Rethinking Euro-anthropology: Part two. Social Anthropology23: 492–493.
20.
HarrisCE (2012) The Museum on the Roof of the World: Art, Politics and Representation of Tibet. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
HedeșanO (2008) Doing fieldwork in Communist Romania. In: MihăilescuV. (eds) Studying Peoples in People Democracies II: Socialist Era Anthropology in South-East Europe. Berlin: LIT Verlag, 10–40.
22.
HerzfeldM (2004) The Body Impolitic: Artisans and Artifice in the Global Hierarchy of Value. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
HudsonK (1987) Museums of Influence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26.
IlieCC (2010) Schimbarea denumirii Muzeului de Istorie a Partidului (The changing of name of the Museum of the History of the Party). Istorie și civilizaţie8.
27.
JoyC (2012) The Politics of Heritage Management in Mali, from UNESCO to Djene. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast.
28.
KaneffD (2004) Who Owns the Past? The Politics of Time in a ‘Model’ Bulgarian Village. New York: Berghahn Books.
29.
KligmanG (1988) The Wedding of the Dead: Ritual, Poetics, and Popular Culture in Transylvania. Berkeley: University of California Press.
30.
KonrádGSzelényiI (1979) The Intellectuals on the Road to Class Power. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
MacdonaldS (2002a) Behind the Scenes at the Science Museum. Oxford: Berg.
33.
MacdonaldS (2002b) On ‘old things’: The fetishization of past everyday life. In: RapportN (ed.) British Subjects: An Anthropology of Britain. Oxford: Berg, 89–106.
MarcusGMyersF (eds) (1995) The Traffic in Culture: Refiguring Art and Anthropology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
36.
MetzC (1985) Photography and fetish. October34: 81–90.
37.
MihăilescuV (2008) A new festival for the new man: The socialist market of folk experts during the ‘Singing Romania’ national festival. In: MihăilescuV. (eds) Studying Peoples in People Democracies II: Socialist Era Anthropology in South-East Europe. Berlin: LIT Verlag, 55–80.
NicolescuG (2015) Art, politics and the museum: Tales of continuity and rupture in modern Romania. Unpublished PhD thesis, Goldsmiths College, University of London.
40.
NicolescuG (2016) Decorativa: The monopoly of visual production in socialist Romania. The centralised organisation of museum displays in the 1960s and 1970s. Journal of Design History, Special Issue ‘Design Dispersed’, ed. DrazinAGarveyP: 71–87.
41.
PinneyC (1992) The lexical spaces of eye-spy. In: CrawfordPITurtonD (eds) Film as Ethnography. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
42.
PriceS (2007) Paris Primitive: Jacques Chirac Museum at the Quai-Branly. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
43.
RancièreJ (2004) The Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible. New York: Continuum.
44.
RivièreGH (1989) La Muséology celon Georges Henri Rivière. Paris: Dunod.
45.
Sansi-RocaR (2007) Fetishes & Monuments: Afro-Brazilian Art and Culture in the 20th Century, New York: Berghahn Books.
46.
SchȕsslerA (ed.) (2009) Villa Sovietica. Soviet Objects: Import, Export. Geneva: Musée d’Ethnographie de Genève.
47.
StarnR (2005) A historian’s brief guide to new museum studies. American Historical Review110(1), February: 68–98.
48.
StewartS (2001[1993]) On Longing: Narratives on the Miniature, the Gigantic, the Souvenir, the Collection. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
49.
ThomasN (2010) The museum as method. Museum Anthropology33(1): 6–10.
50.
TythacottL (2012) Classifying china: Shifting interpretations of Buddhist bronzes in Liverpool Museum, 1867–1997. In: HillK (ed.) Museums and Biographies: Stories, Objects, Identities. Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 173–185.
51.
VerderyK (1991) National Ideology under Socialism: Identity and Cultural Politics in Ceauşescu’s Romania. Berkeley: University of California Press.
52.
WilsonF (2001) Fred Wilson: Objects and Installations, 1979–2000. Baltimore, MD: Centre for Art and Visual Culture, University of Maryland.
