RESTITUTION
is limited. Among the more than 4,000 objects that
make up the Musée du Quai Branly – Jacques Chirac’s
Côte d’Ivoire collection, only 145, most of
which are insignifi cant, are a clear match to these
criteria.
Observing this limitation to be the case was
probably what caused our pair of experts to extend
their fi eld of requisitions to various families
of individuals decreed guilty of despoliation. This
includes the entire population of expatriates who
lived in Africa from 1885 to 1960, beginning with
the “agents of the colonial administration,” as if
the simple fact of having had a job abroad was suf-
145
conclusions that they apply to forty-eight countries
based on cases from only four. It is equally
regrettable that not a single dissenting voice
was considered nor is there a mention of a host
of essential realities, such as the fact of the rich
collections France has given to its former colonies,
particularly those at the Musée des Civilisations
de Côte d’Ivoire in Abidjan and the Musée
Théodore Monod in Dakar.
In the fi rst part of the report, after having subjected
colonialism and attendant dispossessions
to a lengthy trial, the document attempts to convince
its readers that “permanent restitution” of
The objectives of missionary collections are caricatured in a few terse
lines, effectively reduced to the hackneyed and reductive cliché of the
priest dressed in a cassock and colonial headgear exchanging “bloody
idols” for statues of Saint Bernadette.
cultural material is the powerful and irreplaceable
engine that will restore the dignity of African populations
and the panacea that will resuscitate their
“truncated and prevented” memories. This fantastical
belief is spreading among neophytes, who,
though suddenly struck by it, are fully convinced
of its veracity. However, until recently the notion
failed to gain many converts: In the sixty years
since the independence movements, the elites of the
African continent have never so much as thought
of assembling collections of this art, though they
have had the same opportunities as everyone else.
But, suddenly, the African representatives of the
restitution mission are indignant at the discovery
of the important objects at the Musée du Quai
Branly – Jacques Chirac that have been available
for all to see for many years, through the internet
if not in person.
The declaration goes on to enumerate the categories
of items subject to restitution and, justifi -
ably, puts at the head of the list objects of material
culture that were seized in alleged lootings, as war
booty, or through requisition. These include examples
acquired before 1899, although they have a
different legal status. The number of these objects
fi cient to cause a person to be a party to infamy.
Every human society has a certain proportion of
wrongdoers and profi teers. Even if the particular
and dominant position of Whites in the colonies
meant there would have been more than an average
number of such individuals in that context, can
one really lump such opprobrious offi cials together
with all the government employees who worked
honestly as civil servants? Those who had the
open-mindedness to be interested in the material
culture of the people they lived among were often
part of this second category.
Having now addressed Côte d’Ivoire, Savoy
turns her forced march-paced attention to the Gulf
of Guinea, skipping over the fabulous artistic treasures
of the southerly latitudes of the Congo and
Ogooué Rivers. She would undoubtedly have relished
adding to her list the merchants in the companies
that resembled the fi ctitious “Compagnie
Pordurière du petit Congo” in Céline’s novel Voyage
au bout de la nuit (Journey to the End of the
Night), whose wrongdoings historian Mrs. Coquery
Vidrovitch denounced and exposed. The experts
also could have uncovered the racist colonials in
Simenon’s novel Le Coup de lune (Tropic Moon),
“
“