Objects can be placed with certain allusion to meaning and the ways in which museums and other exhibition sites accord objects particular significance, the politics of exhibitions, and display strategies are all imperative to understanding the interpretive differences between art, anthropology, and history. .
James Boon studies the notion of viewing cultures in museums as sad, seeing what little museums truly reveal about cultures as falling short. "Museums perhaps make me sad because of what they reveal about representation representations without immediate reference- (Lavine and Karp 1991: 257) Boon points out that one cannot view an exhibit and take true meaning from it without having a background to frame it. He calls for this ideal of according objects particular significance with respect to their true origins, meanings, and values. In experiencing a museum in a purely aesthetic sense, we may lose sight of what the meaning of the subjects are. In a similar sense, as evidenced by Professor Hummon's decision to leave out the African American section rather than place one work to represent an entire genre, we must be careful not to place meaning for an entire grouping based upon one artwork. There must be a clear and concise referencing for the object to be rightfully represented.
Further elaborating on the relationship between artifacts and their meanings, Spencer Crew and James Sims in "Locating Authenticity: Fragments of Dialogue," suggest how historical study gives meaning to material culture and how our possession of objects for the human past influences the way in which we understand the past. Their discussion reflects upon issues of reality within a museum context. For the authors, true cultural representation is dependent upon a holistic study of the history of the object. .
"The perception and valuing of the object as autonomous event either ignores its history or substitutes for that history genealogy in the form of provenance, its location to a simple linear progress of ownership.
