Through a Mirror in a Riddle: A Response to “Historical Ambivalence in a Tribal Museum”

For now we see as through a mirror in a riddle, but then face to face. In the spring of 2007, my father told me that an article had been written about Lac du Flambeau, an Ojibwe reservation in northern Wisconsin, and published in Museum Anthropology 28(2). In the article titled “Historical Ambivalence in a Tribal Museum,” Larry Nesper critically examines the development of Lac du Flambeau's George W. Brown, Jr. Ojibwe Museum and Cultural Center and the Museum's exhibits, including the social and economic context of its creation (Nesper 2005). I am well acquainted with the article's subject matter. I was raised on the Lac du Flambeau Reservation and my father, Gregg Guthrie, is a member of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians and was instrumental in developing the community's Historical Society and the Museum. While portions of the above-mentioned article warrant merit for the ethnographic insight and sensitivity developed by the author during longstanding work in his field and with members of the Lac du Flambeau community and reservation, this response is being written to protest the article's historical veracity and its ethnographic shortcomings. As a fellow academic, I found the factual errors to be extensive and the quality of scholarship to be negligent. Certainly, dissent and varied political positions exist within every community and there will always be some ambivalence in the development of institutions such as tribal museums. However, the author's research and conclusions grossly misrepresent the social, political, and economic climate in Lac du Flambeau at the time of writing and equally disrespect dignified, productive Lac du Flambeau elders and tribal authorities. It is beyond the scope of this critique to address all inaccuracies and conjectures made by the author; however, the scholarship is most substantively flawed in five specific respects: (1) the genealogy of Gauthier and Guthrie families, (2) the role and influence of Gauthier and Guthrie family members, (3) the critical interpretation of museum exhibits, (4) the role of private and tribal participation in the development of Lac du Flambeau's Historical Society and Museum, and (5) the sound methodological practice of engaging a diverse set of stakeholders. For his paper, Nesper adapts historical information from a series of newspaper articles published in the Lakeland Times (Minocqua, Wisconsin), titled Northwoods Nostalgia. Authored by Joyce Laabs, two articles from this collection feature the history of the Gauthier Family in Lac du Flambeau: “Gauthier's Lac du Flambeau Dynasty” (Laabs 1978) and “Gauthier's Dynasty” (Laabs 1980). The latter article (1980) also includes a kinship chart that clearly details the correct lineage of the Gauthier and Guthrie families. Despite referencing the Laabs collection in his References Cited, Nesper writes with remarkable inaccuracy and confusion about members of these two families. Examples of inaccuracies found in the article are provided below. Throughout the article, Nesper confuses three families and merges the personal histories of four unique individuals (Ben Gauthier, Ben C. Gauthier, Ben Guthrie, and Marvin Dillman) into one single identity. He then assigns erroneously—and at times very disrespectfully—this historical conglomerate and their respective economic ventures, along with available community hearsay, to a person he asserts to be tribal elder “Ben Guthrie.” The statement “In 1899, Ben anglicized, the Ojibwized French name, Gauthier, (pronounced ‘Go-Chee’ by most Indian people) to Guthrie” (2005:4) is erroneous in three respects. As the kinship chart makes clear, Ben and Margaret Gauthier's daughter, Hazel, married Thomas Guthrie. Thomas Guthrie was the father of Ben Guthrie. Secondly, Gauthier is a common French name in France and the Province of Quebec, not an Anglicized “Ojibwized” French name. Ben Gauthier's grandfather, French-Canadian Francis Gauthier, was born in 1805 and came to the United States from Canada in 1818, settling in Chippewa Falls (Wisconsin statehood in 1848). Lastly, the “real” Ben Guthrie was not born until 1908. Ben Guthrie is not Ben C. Gauthier. The kinship chart noted above details that Ben Gauthier's brother, Charles, married Amanda Peterson. They had seven children, five of whom lived until middle or old age: Ben C., Mabel, Mayme, Francis (Frank), and Dorothy. The Guthrie family was not, as Nesper writes, “ultimately from Lac Courte Oreilles” (2005:4). Ben and Margaret Gauthier came to Lac du Flambeau in 1886 at the request of Kenistono, Margaret's grandfather, who was a signatory of the treaty of 1854. Margaret Gauthier was enrolled at Lac du Flambeau; Ben Gauthier was enrolled at Lac Courte Oreilles. The extended Gauthier family lived in Lac du Flambeau after 1886. All the children and grandchildren of the two brothers, Ben Gauthier and Charles Gauthier, are enrolled members of the Lac du Flambeau Band. A critical premise of the article—and indeed foundational to its import—is what Nesper cites as the significance of knowing the “relationship between the exhibition and its political and economic setting” (cited by Nesper from Potter and Leone 1992).1 1. [In her essay Guthrie Martin is pointing to the quotation given at the beginning of Nesper 2005:1. In the published version of Nesper's essay two editorial errors relating to this quotation must be noted here for clarity. The relevant work by Parker B. Potter, Jr. and Mark P. Leone is not given in the references cited in Nesper 2005. It is a book chapter that is, for the benefit of the record, cited in this contribution as Potter and Leone 1992. The page number for the quotation is also not given in Nesper 2005. The quotation appears on page 478. The present editorial office independently confirmed the accuracy of the quotation as given in Nesper 2005:1.—Ed.] In addition, Nesper asserts that the paper “explores the different representational agendas and strategies the museum at this reservation employs, and reveals some of the complexities of historical complicities in the process” (2005:1). The article relates that one supporting context for these “complexities of historical complicities” is the cultural and economic impact of a Guthrie dynasty (2005:15). Unfortunately, Nesper fabricates the personhoods and power of this “dynasty.” As noted above, the author misinterprets the genealogy of the Gauthier and Guthrie families. This error compounds into a confusion of facts and a misappropriation of roles, influence, and economic ventures. As a result, Nesper obscures the historical record and somehow misses the significant private and tribal contributions in the development of the Museum. Below are a few selected corrections that clarify the roles and influence of tribal elders Ben C. Gauthier, Ben Guthrie, and Gregg Guthrie. Despite the fact that the Lac du Flambeau Historical Society and Museum have barely existed for two decades, Nesper writes that these institutions have been “dominated by the Guthrie family for the past three generations. In fact, if there is such a thing as public collective historical consciousness at Lac du Flambeau, it has been largely developed by the Guthrie family” (2005:4). This narrow appraisal completely ignores the role of the Tribe, its council, elders, tribal members, and members of the community. Together, it is these entities and individuals whose efforts truly define the “public collective historical consciousness at Lac du Flambeau” and who are deserving of public credit and scholarly esteem. Nesper inaccurately reports that: “At the age of twenty-two, Ben Guthrie, built a resort that would become Dillman's Sand Lake Lodge” (2005:5). In actuality, Ben C. Gauthier (not Ben Guthrie, who would have been 10 years old) built the resort in 1918. The resort was eventually purchased by Peg and Marvin Dillman. The section of the following paragraph found on page 5, in which Nesper draws upon Laabs (1978), should also refer to Ben C. Gauthier and not Ben Guthrie: “Guthrie built another resort and a marina after World War II. He was [the] first president of the town's Chamber of Commerce and formed the Indian Bowl Association in 1950. He went into real estate and at one time owned 40,000 square feet of frontage on the reservation when it was selling for $10 a foot.” Nesper argues that Ben used and developed “his family's tribal and liquid capital” by taking a prominent role in the formation of the George W. Brown, Jr. Museum and Cultural Center (2005:5). He supports this unsubstantiated conclusion by way, ultimately, of attributing to Ben Guthrie historical information and lineage that should be identified with not one but multiple, distinct individuals in the Gauthier and Guthrie families. Nesper continues by attributing to this “Ben Guthrie” the title of “cultural broker” (2005:4), the responsibility for the “commodification of local culture,” and the unethical gain of Indian artifacts for exhibition (2005:5). It is a shame that this latter and other deleterious statements are included at all about a productive tribal elder and community leader, let alone attributed by Nesper to a handful of anonymous sources and published in a peer-reviewed journal. Contrary to Nesper's reporting, Gregg Guthrie did not serve as the first president of the George W. Brown, Jr. Ojibwe Museum and Cultural Center (2005:1, 7, 9, 11). Administrative oversight of the Museum did not include a position of President at all; however, the Museum did have a position of Director. Mavis White, a Bad River Chippewa from Odana, served as the first Director. Gregg Guthrie, tribal member and now tribal elder, served as the Museum's first curator. If Nesper meant to reference the position of President for the Museum's Board of Directors, it should also be noted that Gregg Guthrie did not serve as the “first president” of this Board either. The quality of reporting in the article varies with respect to the Museum's exhibits and displays. Where lacking, interpretations of exhibits made by Nesper could be improved had he sought greater knowledge of the Museum's processes for archiving and exhibit creation; a better understanding of Tribal approval and oversight; and a greater awareness of text availability, donations, and cultural appropriateness or relevance. Also, Nesper could have considered that the Museum was very much “under construction” at the time of his writing. Rather than simply asserting that certain objects had more “text” than others because they represented the majority culture or a dominant family vision (2005:10, 12), the author might consider that such grassroots efforts in small communities are often reliant predominantly upon volunteers. With limited resources and many exhibits in embryonic form, the Museum's exhibit label-text would naturally vary as exhibits grew, were researched, and sanctioned by the Tribe. Here are some selected examples of where Nesper's interpretation of exhibits is either misinformed or conveniently supportive of his arguments. The canoe was not curated and placed by the Lac du Flambeau Historical and Cultural Society as reported by Nesper (2005:3). The dugout canoe was discovered in Flambeau Lake in 1980, five years before the formation of the Historical and Cultural Society. It was curated by the Tribe and placed in the tribally owned and operated library by the Tribal Council. In need of additional space, and in possession of other artifacts, the Tribe determined that it was in their “best interest” to create a museum. As recorded in Tribal Council resolutions (Lac du Flambeau Tribal Council 1986a, 1986b, 1986c, 1996), this directly contradicts what Nesper asserts: “[that it was] felt at the time by members of the historical society that the canoe deserved a larger context in which it might be displayed” (2005:3). Nesper writes that a brochure about the canoe failed to explore the “implications for metissage” (2005:3) because it was created by a non-Indian Society. Corrections 4(A) and 4(B) below address the fact that this was an appropriately representative Society fully owned by the Lac du Flambeau Tribe. As such, it was ultimately within the Tribal Council's oversight, not the Society's, to explore cultural implications or address the lack thereof. It is simply erroneous, then, to state that an Society could such a of as to be of the representational process” (2005:3) that Nesper to the development of the Museum. Nesper writes that the in the of the and with a to which they will with are in in this and While are representative for spring they are not a of as a of a into the would it and the creation of a at which is to all that in the the and are for the through the in the Nesper that the Museum is about text as are some that it in two because the is an of a I am here of the of a Nesper is when asserting his unsubstantiated that the had more “text” than others because it represented the majority the the of the Guthrie family and the museum for the exhibit did not museum or it was from a published in a local as he the of a Nesper also to his as an and that the of the by Gregg Guthrie was an Nesper writes of an that first the then the on the of the president to that to the It is that the was from exhibition because of the of its public exhibit tribal relating to the exhibition of certain including is not at all in However, Nesper an erroneous of in this article, confusion and In addition, the was not owned by the Museum's first who Nesper has identified as Gregg Guthrie (2005:1, 7, 9, 11). it was owned by tribal elder, Ben Guthrie. to the writing of this article, the had been given to the Tribe need for by the It in the possession and is made through the Cultural Tribal to the community than a single or including the Nesper to in his is on this but I will on roles and It is the time of or to the roles and between the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa the Lac du Flambeau Tribal the two owned by the Tribe Lac du Flambeau Historical and Cultural Society and the Lac du Flambeau Museum and Cultural the George W. Brown, Jr. Ojibwe Museum and Cultural and reservation and community Despite Nesper's his article of a Lac du Flambeau Historical and Cultural Society and Museum that were (2005:3) and vision of a single family” it is the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians and their Tribal Council that had the and the Museum's development and created by a the development of the Historical and Cultural Society and the Museum were and to be in the of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians and its (Lac du Flambeau Tribal Council as recorded in the Tribal Council resolutions and (Lac du Flambeau Tribal Council 1986a, 1986b, 1986c, efforts were and by the Lac du Flambeau Tribal Council and their respective were by the Tribal Council. In the Tribal Council is the of the Tribe and the Lac du Flambeau Historical and Cultural Society the George W. Brown, Jr. Ojibwe Museum and Cultural their of or Tribal Council Corrections for errors relating to private and tribal participation are below. Nesper that few non-Indian of the reservation formed a historical (2005:3) and in the article that society was (2005:3). The Lac du Flambeau Historical and Cultural Society was a grassroots for a until it was its in by the Tribal Council of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa The Society was as a of the Tribe and as such, the fully owned by the to the Tribe for its The Board of was by the Tribal Council of Lac du In addition, the Tribal Council often served directly on the Board of as noted in the Society the four positions on the three were by Lac du Flambeau tribal members during the time of which Nesper The Historical Society was for for the development of the Museum and Cultural The selling of the Society to many the reservation community and from and all the of the Tribal Council. As Nesper writes with and confusion when reporting on the and historical role of Ben Guthrie and the Guthrie family in Lac du Flambeau, the Historical and the Museum. single family or could have the development of the Society or museum and not for three generations. The Historical Society and Museum were by the Lac du Flambeau Tribal Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians as of the Lac du Flambeau Tribe in the years of and As such, the Society and Museum are fully owned by the Lac du Flambeau Tribe and are fully to the Tribe for their the Board of in the above the Museum's Board of was also by the Tribal Council of the Lac du Flambeau Tribe as to from cultural and positions within the community. of the Tribal the a Tribal a two community members, and the President of the Historical Society. the seven positions on the a of four were tribal members during the time of which Nesper The was made of four tribal members not three (2005:4). from were to the Tribal Council for approval or is not a (2005:5). is an given to owned by private individuals on Sand and Sand in Lac du Flambeau, As below will members of were not the local that to the development of the Museum (2005:3). The Tribe a for the development of the Lac du Flambeau museum. The was for and then was to with the for from the Tribe. In to what Nesper of the did not from the non-Indian local (2005:3). it was to be raised as contributions through of such a to be and the Lac du Flambeau Tribe provided the of the than a diverse of community Nesper in his article to positions by a handful of anonymous sources and the of the Tribe, its and its role in the Museum as recorded in available resolutions and The author his at the of the of tribal elders, their families, and of the work and of many reservation and community research could have in a better understanding of the complexities of the community and to a more of social and economic and more conclusions of the roles and examples are a of the Lac du Flambeau was and of and selling artifacts in the of the Historical Society in Rather than a the the of Anthropology a of of While his has been and to three years in for the of artifacts from the George W. Brown, Jr. Ojibwe Museum and Cultural is Nesper's of this that the Lac du Flambeau museum and the Tribe. Nesper by that sought to Guthrie and that he did at personal to that are (2005:15). It is made such statements and sought to Guthrie in the Museum simply to his However, a “Guthrie as by and created and reported by Nesper simply did not While the author Gregg Guthrie and Guthrie in his article he Guthrie did he to have either the article before I am not engaging these and other many inaccuracies and deleterious statements have been For who lived the history that Nesper writes it is that the of with the ethnographic in an erroneous appraisal of the Museum's development and a of the Gauthier the Guthrie the Lac du Flambeau Tribal and the community as a As of in the social we the power to create should to create such or real when we misrepresent or the and individuals of which we critique and are the of when is the person when the public and members of community in the fact that scholarship the of historical sound and ultimately, and when that is what we my father did was to to I consider it an to my father, Gregg Guthrie, a by which the historical record be and by which he into this of below the he and his Nesper's I we are as to the are we an in writing by the of personal for or for we in and writing about are we by the need to to of within the of cultural that is at a of or is at are we to or to at the of I about the need for in the need to to gain their what we must have to after all; to that has not been this need influence it to of that have it through an of to conclusions that not As time the need to and from is it to through an the grassroots development of a tribal museum and cultural by in a tribal who simply to and who have and who also to the economic development of their the the the the the the of who work to create and to not as a of scholarly or personal but simply as a of simply as a of for in with the of in the critique tribal museum and cultural in Lac du Flambeau as Nesper the of the lack of historical at a in the Museum's given the real and remarkable of the creation of a tribal museum in a creation that included the of a tribal museum in the first and the development of the Museum through the of and not to the of one of the of Ojibwe artifacts to be found in in the grossly a critique a in a in time by a who or about what he was and went his that his was all there was to that have a of what he to for he had made his about what he would well before he at the where he his tribal museum and cultural is a to the of who have a for their community and a to a of the past for the benefit of in the I but about the power of the power of the power of the when there is need to the of the the of in the of the the to the the into with Where the a they to that which is not to that which is not the to in the of the but that and I most I about the responsibility of and about as the of their the of their research and the of their If the of to be to whom we for Gregg Guthrie is the of Ben Guthrie and a member of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa He on the Lac du Flambeau He has served on the Lac du Flambeau Tribal the Historical Board of and on the Board of for the Lac du Flambeau Historical and Cultural Society and George W. Brown, Jr. Ojibwe Museum and Cultural He the Lac du Flambeau and is an Guthrie who a in from and is the of Gregg Guthrie and was raised on the Lac du Flambeau it her

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.