1. What thought(s) is/are most evocative for you, individually or as a collective, in the conversation about African objects in Western museums?

JP: it’s actually shocking that this conversation is still happening, and it’s crazy that so many of the museums that have all these objects that are not theirs don’t feel guilt or shame or whatever. It actually hurts me to think about it. I hope we are just opening it up wider for more people to learn and get involved.

Njoki: I really like what JP has said; also for me, the objects are just the beginning. The objects are the things people are proud to display or proud to keep in storage, and so many of them are stolen, taken violently, in terrible circumstances. So can you imagine the things they are actually ashamed of, that the colonial apparatus and its remnants and descendants have worked to hide from us? It’s dizzying to consider.

Jim: We’ve been working on this project for two years now, and I have been struggling lately with the overwhelming feeling that we don’t have much that is tangible to show for two years of work. Rather, we have had the opportunity to witness the structural, legal and ‘intellectual’ blocks that ringfence the meaning and actuality of African objects in Western museums. I suppose that bearing witness to these blocks makes us more eloquent and fluent in explaining to our societies why there can never be a critical mass of movement of African objects from the Western museums, let alone moral restitution for the mostly-illegal actions that led to them being there in the first place.

2. Tell us more about the concepts of your artwork for this exhibition.

Jim and Njoki: Our artwork is mostly based around engaging with the database of Kenyan objects abroad (that the IIP project has generated) as Kenyans, and as Kenyan (and African) artists and cultural workers. We consider the literal number of objects, the provenance information we have on them (and the ethnographic problematics of that provenance information), and the ephemeral idea of the value of these objects. We also consider particular objects considered to be of national importance by the Government and people of Kenya, and revisit the biographies of some of the collectors of these objects. There’s a lot of reflective text, which is mostly because it is an extrapolation of the database itself, but there are also several artistic object interpretations as well.

3.How has the process been for you, as artists involved in this kind of cultural conversation whilst navigating exhibition research and production?

JP: As a collective we’ve learned a lot, especially from museums, regarding how they handle objects, why they choose to keep objects in storage or take them out for display, and all of that. We now have an idea why some museums do what they do. It may not be right, for sure, but we now have a lot of insight into why these institutions do what they do.

Njoki: It’s been maddening. A lot of the research was written as though black people would never look at it or dare to have opinions about it, and we’ve really understood that a lot of historical labour or work is also deeply emotional and unaccounted for. We’ve had to sift through a lot of idly racist opinions and thoughts, then have to reflect on them, in order to find even the shreds of information about our ancestors and their contemporaries. To think that it is this way for many other Africans, for black people and people of colour around the world in their relationships with the very problem-ridden field that ethnography and anthropology can be, is absolutely dizzying. It’s also shown us what power there is in taking the ability to frame, to define, to recalibrate, for ourselves. It is part of reparative work, and reparations, the things that we take for ourselves without them having to be given. We (and by we I mean the wider gathering of people in this field) will definitely continue to lobby and work towards the return of our objects, and the other data they represent/symbolise, as well as negotiate more equitable relationships with cultural institutions especially in the global North. But we are continuing the work that our forebears began, re. decolonising, also taking back for ourselves what we can.

Jim: As Njoki mentions, we are increasingly clear that projects such as IIP that engage with problematic histories rarely account for the emotional labour that comes with sifting through the facts of racist histories. It is difficult, as an African, as a Kenyan and as a black person, to read and sift through information that speaks to a time when we were seen as lesser beings, as curiosities, as subjects of research, probing and uninvited curiosity. There have been moments when it has been difficult to push through the required tasks due to the anger, resentment and frustration that this information inevitably gives rise to.

4. What additional roles did you take on for the IIP exhibition, beyond conceptualising and making your own art pieces?

Jim and Njoki: Jim was a member of the wider curatorial committee (we decided to curate ourselves as a group, and so each partner institution had a representative on this committee to guide the overall process of the exhibition. We have also been part of the thinking around what public dialogues, engagement and communications will be in each different exhibition space. We also took part in a conversation with Shift about how trust works in these tense, power-driven conversations around object ownership, restitution, return and justice. We’ve also really enjoyed getting to know other Africans working in this space, like our Kenyan friend Chao Tayiana Maina, and South Africa’s Molemo Moiloa, of Open Restitution Africa, and Ghana’s Nana Oforiatta Ayim of ANO Institute of Arts and Knowledge, and are looking forward to further conversations and possible collaborations with them and others in different ways.

5. What are the most important aspects for you in this exhibition? What do you want the different publics to see and experience about this topic through your artwork?

Jim and Njoki: For us we’re happy to be having a conversation around the numbers in the database, and about the objects that are of particular interest and importance. We’re also interested in what the different publics (and the sub-demographics within them) have to say about this topic, beyond what they see: what new insights they have, what the exhibition makes them feel, what questions it rouses in them, both in Kenya and in Germany. We doubt, a little, the effectiveness of the exhibition format in communicating some of the more affective issues we’ve discussed above - particularly as the structure of the IIP group (consisting of parties from wildly differing worldviews, backgrounds and skillsets) tends to average our ideological positions towards the neutral - but perhaps, in a post-truth world, neutral positions invite more introspection within audiences than polarizing stances?

1. As a museum, what do you want the Germans and the global north at large to learn about these Kenyan objects through this exhibition?

One of the aims of the exhibition is to give visitors an insight into the diversity of histories of the Kenyan objects and in relation to this an introduction to restitution and the debate surrounding it. In this context, we would like to give the German public an opportunity to develop a sensitivity for the effects and consequences of colonialism, which still exist today. To this end, provenance research and cooperation with people (here artists, scientists) in the countries from which the objects originate is of enormous importance. To make this clear in the exhibition is an essential.

2. Have these objects been exhibited before? If so, does this exhibition bring any new information about them to light? If not, what has been exciting for you to learn about them?

Some of the objects from the Kenya collection of the Weltkulturen Museum have already been exhibited. These were especially the objects collected by former curator Dr Johanna Agthe. In the 1970s she curated an exhibition about arts and crafts in Africa and wanted to fight prejudices in Germany about art from Africa. The current exhibition has opened up new perspectives on the objects, especially from our partners in Kenya, and gathered new information about their provenance and social significance which some objects still have or would have today.

3. The WKM has been part of several international and cross-disciplinary teams over the years. Has IIP, and working with Kenyan objects, museum personnel and artists with regards to object restitution, given you any new insights?

What is special about the IIP is that it is a cooperation between scientists from different museums and artists. Everyone has a strong opinion and certain ideas about the project which partly differ greatly due to these different professional backgrounds. Combining these in an exhibition is challenging, but also very exciting. Furthermore, there has not been much detailed research on the museum's Kenya collection so far. IIP gave us the opportunity to do that.

4. Your role in the exhibition ‘Invisible Inventories' involves being the one of the German hosts, as well as presenting your own pieces as a museum. Can you tell us a little more about that?

We consider it important to combine the various contributions of the artists and the museums in the exhibition. But it is also important for us to show our own collection. On the one hand, to deal with the collection and the stories of the objects in a transparent way, especially in an exhibition that addresses questions directly related to objects in museums of the global North. On the other hand, based on our experience, it is also exciting for the visitors when they see what objects are in our museum. This gives them a direct, physical connection to our museum, the collection and the theme of the exhibition.

5. In your opinion, how can more people plug into this conversation beyond the museum exhibitions?

Low-threshold entrances are an important part of getting more people involved in the conversation. Through more public discussions that do not only appeal to an academic audience. And above all, the interest in the topic must be awakened, e.g. by an exhibition like ours.

1. As a museum, what do you want the Germans and the global north at large to learn about these Kenyan objects through this exhibition?

We would like to shed light on the entangled stories behind the objects and the many different perspectives on these artefacts – and what the absence of these objects in Kenya means to Kenyans in the country and in the diaspora.

2. Have these objects been exhibited before? If so, does this exhibition bring any new information about them to light? If not, what has been exciting for you to learn about them?

To my knowledge the objects have not been exhibited before. But they still might have been exhibited in the past as some of the objects already came to the museum in 1905 and by that time we did not have a proper documentation yet of what was exhibited.For me it has been exciting to see how objects that at the first glance might seem to be rather unspectacular like a necklace made of old coins, a piece of beadwork or a small pipe can spark discussions within Kenya and among Kenyans in the diaspora about topics like national politics, Pan-Africanism or women’s emancipation. It shows the importance of these objects for discussions in Kenya and in the diaspora.

3. The RJM has been part of several international and cross-disciplinary teams over the years. Has IIP, and working with Kenyan objects, museum personnel and artists with regards to object restitution, given you any new insights?

What is special about the IIP is that it is a cooperation between scientists from different museums and artists. Everyone has a strong opinion and certain ideas about the project which partly differ greatly due to these different professional backgrounds. Combining these in an exhibition is challenging, but also very exciting. According to my opinion the debate is much more open and intense than in other projects I have been involved – which I personally value very much.

4. Your role in the exhibition ‘Invisible Inventories' involves being the one of the German hosts, as well as presenting your own pieces as a museum. Can you tell us a little more about that?

We consider it important to combine the various contributions of the artists and the museums in the exhibition. A central concern of the installation is to make the "Invisible Inventories" visible - the roughly 80 objects of the Rautenstrauch-Joest Museum, which originate from Kenya. It also aims to shed light on the entangled stories behind the objects and the many different perspectives on the artefacts.

5. In your opinion, how can more people plug into this conversation beyond the museum exhibitions?

Low-threshold entrances are an important part of getting more people involved in the conversation. Through more public discussions that do not only appeal to an academic audience. And above all, the interest in the topic must be awakened, e.g. by an exhibition like ours.

1. What thoughts are most evocative for you individually in the conversation about African objects in Western museums?

I don’t remember learning much about Germany’s colonial past in school in Bavaria. Usually, this part of our history is told as an episode of political normality and adventure - if it is told at all. In general, the European colonial enterprise has not received much attention in Western courses of study. The german public claims that their colonial past was "relatively short" - only 45 years. But that does not mean at all that it was less cruel - instead, it has far reaching effects.

The Kenyan objects and artefacts are not only unique artefacts per se, standing alone by themselves. I perceive them, in fact, as streams of objects, immense streams of material that have crossed the Mediterranean for centuries, coming from the Global South, upwards to the North. Therefore these objects represent many histories, and are striking traces of a colonial past that is widely unknown and unconsidered in Europe. These objects in European museums talk to us. They are loud. They shout out at us as valuable evidence. Museum's storerooms are actually filled to the ceiling with evidence.

For me it is quite evocative that the African objects in Western museums are diligently watched over, as keeping the objects is quite expensive. When IIP started to investigate and compile a list of Kenyan objects abroad, we went through a process of re-attribution and re-ascription. We learned how facts had been controlled and descriptions were corrected. Hopefully, from here, we can continue to reconsider and re-evaluate these objects.

During the 2-years process of IIP my opinion has shifted: While in the beginning, the objects were pretty much attached to the attributes "loss" and "guilt", they have now become "traces" and "evidence". They represent an uncomfortable truth. I think they should be shown publicly en permanence, every day, discussed and presented under a completely different banner - as reminders of a concealed part of our history.

2. Tell us more about the concepts of your artwork in this exhibition.

LIGHTNING STRIKES THE OBELISK is about the famous case of the repatriation of the Axum "Stele No. 2" that was returned from Italy to Ethiopia in 2005, after more than 65 years in exile. I am looking at what is left from the obelisk, today, in Rome and if there is a possible way of remembering the story attached to it. I am also trying to find out more about the obelisk's return campaign, and the popular grass root movements in Ethiopia, leading to it's restitution. TAKEOVER is an intimate historical document. It is about one man talking for 5 minutes on a stage that was not built for him, at a panel discussion where he was not planning to speak. Wandile Kasibe from South Africa talks in an ethnographical Museum in Cologne / Germany during the closing panel of the "Museums in Motion"- Symposium 2019. The artwork reflects on the power of his words. What impact can be made, when somebody speaks out from the position where he comes from? In this speech, Wandile Kasibe speaks about the fact that ethnographical museums in the West are not open to everybody. They are very restrictive in their way of looking at histories and objects, so they normally only talk to a very limited, white and well-off audience. Meanwhile, many of them claim to act for the benefit of mankind, as "universal museums".

3. What additional roles did you take on for the IIP exhibition, beyond conceptualising and making your own art pieces?

I was mainly active in communicating with the German museums and collecting their datasets for IIP's database

4. What are the most important aspects for you in this exhibition? What do you want the different publics to see and experience about this topic through your artworks?

As much as this is about history, it also speaks about the present. This story is ongoing. The topic "Restitution" is quite emotional, as it reveals the deficiency in dealing with global connections, on all continents. Museums are not neutral spaces, and they never were. They were and are part of a system of collection, description, power expansion, submission, and plunder.

5. As an artist in the global north, have you worked in such a project before? If not, how has this experience been for you?

This project is special to me as it started as an artist initiative that then invited Kenyan and German museum professionals to join. From the start we as artists wanted to be in full control of everything, including the budget - contrary to similar initiatives that originate from institutions, that then invite artists to do "interventions" within their framework. From my understanding, science and art often have contradictory ways of working. This is surely expressed in our discussions, and will also be in the outputs.