Katharine Fernstrom on the joy, lessons of working with Indigenous art
A Q&A with curator, professor Katharine Fernstrom on the ethical challenges of presenting, studying Native American art, culture.
In her research on Native North American and Pacific Island art, professor Katharine Fernstrom keeps a close eye on the fine line between cultural appreciation and appropriation.
The anthropologist, independent curator and professor in TU's College of Liberal Arts and College of Fine Arts and Communication has dedicated her career to uncovering and preserving the cultural narratives within Indigenous art. Here, Fernstrom discusses her academic journey, the complex sociopolitical dimensions of Indigenous art and the ethical challenges involved in curating cultural heritage.
What initially drew you to anthropology, specifically Native American and Pacific Island art and material culture?
Anthropology has been on my radar since childhood, as my dad briefly studied [the related field of] archaeology. I loved hearing the stories he’d share about his studies—my favorite books were the ones about French cave paintings! At the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, I took anthropology and archaeology courses as core requirements and enjoyed them so much that I changed my major. My first archaeology field school was focused on a Native American site in Arizona, and that solidified my interest, which I pursued through my master’s. Later, for my doctorate, I worked on a New Guinean collection at the University Museum at Southern Illinois University-Carbondale, which led me deeper into Native North American and Pacific Island art and material culture.
What projects are you working on right now?
There’s a few in the works, including an exhibition featuring works on paper by Inuit artist Myra Kukiiyaut and a study on Tiffany & Co.’s use of Native American designs at the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition. My research on Tiffany & Co. specifically explores the role of artistic identity within the context of American nation-building. This adoption of Indigenous elements reflects a broader colonial process. Tiffany & Co., founded in 1837, became known for integrating global ethnic styles into their silverwork. When they are inspired by other, globally powerful cultures it sends a different message than when they are inspired by subordinated Indigenous people within their nation.
What are the challenges and rewards of curating Indigenous art for institutions like the Baltimore Museum of Art (BMA)?
When I was at the BMA, I found that curating Indigenous art allows for firsthand appreciation of the diversity among tribes and artists and is especially rewarding when audiences engage deeply and connect with the material. It also brings challenges, such as presenting accessible history without reinforcing stereotypes and ensuring that affiliated communities are informed of collection contents, as required by the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). Additionally, conserving fragile pieces for public display requires a careful balance, and it is important to present exhibitions that inform without overwhelming, leaving visitors with a meaningful understanding.
What can we learn about Native American societies from early art?
My third project is looking at human figures in pre-contact North American cultures. These are widespread and crafted from diverse materials, including petroglyphs, earthen mounds, wood and clay. While some pieces are well understood, others remain mysterious and only selectively studied—often reflecting broader social hierarchies and ritual practices. I find it significant that, unlike Indigenous ceramic pots, these human figures have not been studied as a continent-wide body of work, which may indicate a colonial bias that still affects our understanding today.
This area of research is just the beginning for me, so much about the figures’ sociopolitical and ritualistic significance remains unknown. However, I suspect they played various roles within their communities. By investigating the diversity of sizes, materials and poses across different societies, we can start mapping patterns to reveal the figures' meanings. I see these studies connecting through colonial relationships and viewpoints, like my research on Tiffany & Co. and Myra Kukiiyaut, both of which explore these complex colonial dynamics.
How does art contribute to broader understanding about cultural heritage and identity?
Addressing appropriation is a central issue in contemporary art. Artists today are asserting their right to create art on their own terms, pushing back against narrow definitions of what Native art should be. By engaging with Indigenous and dominant cultures, we open broader conversations about identity, heritage and the power of artistic expression. It’s important for audiences to respect art even if they don’t fully understand or like it—it’s about paying attention and learning.
How do you ensure that the Native communities’ voices and needs are considered in this work?
We’ve been moving toward greater ethical considerations for decades, especially with the passing of legislation like NAGPRA. This act opened the door for conversations between museums and tribal communities, allowing for the repatriation of objects of cultural and religious significance. Listening to the needs of Indigenous communities is critical, and it’s an ongoing process that will shape the future of anthropology, exhibition and curation.