94
Abdulaziz Dino Gidreta
interventions. In this way, the spectacles provided western audiences their first exposure
to non-Western material culture.
Almost incomparable to other colonized regions, Africa has generally been hurt by colo-
nialism and colonial expositions. African material culture had been on display in European
collections for at least two hundred years by the 19
th
century (Korasick, 2005: 12). In this
regard, the most common evidence for cultural racism is drawn from travel literature and
material culture exhibits of the 19
th
century. Many written accounts were indeed filled with
negative critiques of Africans. The depiction of the image of Africans as ‘cannibals’ and
‘idolatrous heathens’ impacted the minds of the Western public. These images tended to
provide a rational for slavery, and eventually, a public excuse for colonialism (Korasick,
2005: 6).
By these, one can notice that colonial exhibitions told the story of mankind, in the very
same narrative that accompanied and legitimized colonial expansion. They have simply
shown “light against dark, and order against violence”. Particularly, according to Corbey
(1993: 141), African colonies were exhibited as true personifications of “dark continent”.
The European and American display of Africa were different in process, but comparable in
drive. The display of African material culture in the US differed from the displays in Europe
(Korasick, 2005: 2). The US did not have actual imperial interest in Africa, and conse-
quently, unlike the Europeans there were no displays featuring colonial trophies. However,
like the European displays, the US museums magnified the primitiveness of Africa and
the need for Western culture to modernize and raise Africans from their condition. This
become one of the roots for the instigation of modernization paradigms of development
communication (Chandra, 2004: 217). The American displays emphasized strangeness
of the African objects, so foreign but accessible to American sensibilities. They were also
informed by the science and popular biases of the time. They often depicted Africans as
the lowest of savages (Korasick, 2005: 3). The only programmed message communicated
together with the primitiveness of African societies was the emphasis on the economic
potentials of the continent.
Nevertheless, such images were not always received by the audience in the way intend-
ed. The reaction of the audience was often positive despite displays that were often
overtly racist. From the audience, rather than focusing on the primitiveness of the objects,
there was an appreciation for the aesthetics and craftsmanship of the pieces. According
to Korasick (2005: 3), this visitor appreciation grew steadily, and by the first decade of
the 20
th
century, “popular opinion moved these very foreign, non-representational, pieces
from the status of curios to fine arts”, both in the US and Europe.
The idea here is that such historical trends of ‘showing Africa’ have then highly influenced
the visitors’ ways of ‘seeing Africa’, and their further perception and attitudes towards Af-
