花招：行為藝術與博物館藏品的倫理

6月，巴西藝術家伊萊·薩圖齊(Ilê Sartuzi)從倫敦大英博物館的陳列櫃中取出一枚歷史硬幣，並將其放入博物館大廳的捐款箱中。這部名為“Sleight of Hand”的表演作品的片段作為他的研究生 MFA 論文展覽的一部分進行了展示。

Brazilian artist Ilê Sartuzi's performance piece, Sleight of Hand, has sparked a debate on heritage, museum collections, and the role of performance art in highlighting social issues.

巴西藝術家伊萊·薩爾圖齊 (Ilê Sartuzi) 的行為藝術作品《花招》引發了關於遺產、博物館藏品以及行為藝術在突出社會問題方面的作用的爭論。

Sartuzi's performance involved removing a historical coin from its display case in the British Museum and depositing it in a donation box in the museum's lobby. The event highlighted issues relating to heritage, access to collections, and the safety and security of museums.

薩爾圖茲的表演包括從大英博物館的展示櫃中取出一枚歷史硬幣，並將其存放在博物館大廳的捐款箱中。該活動強調了與遺產、收藏品的獲取以及博物館的安全和安保有關的問題。

Sartuzi, a student at Goldsmiths, University of London, spent a year working on his plan to “steal” the coin, developing his technique and observing the museum and its staff. He worked with a lawyer from the conception of his idea to ensure that no laws were broken.

薩圖茲是倫敦大學金史密斯學院的學生，他花了一年的時間研究「偷」硬幣的計劃，提高自己的技術並觀察博物館及其工作人員。從他的想法開始，他就與律師合作，以確保不違反任何法律。

Sartuzi was assured that he was safe from a legal standpoint but, especially as the performance was designed to draw attention to the ethics of collecting, is he morally in the clear?

薩爾圖茲確信從法律角度來看他是安全的，但是，特別是當表演的目的是引起人們對收藏道德的關注時，他在道德上是清白的嗎？

The role of performance art in highlighting social and cultural issues is significant, often used to draw parallels between the two sides of an issue. As it is generally staged in public, it can reach a wide range of people. Performance art may be accompanied by text, but the focus is naturally on the visual aspect. This is where Sleight of Hand becomes ambiguous – by definition, it seeks to create a false impression.

行為藝術在突出社會和文化問題方面的作用非常重要，通常用於將問題的兩個方面進行比較。由於它通常在公共場合上演，因此可以接觸到廣泛的人群。行為藝術可能伴隨著文字，但焦點自然是在視覺方面。這就是「花招」變得含糊不清的地方——根據定義，它試圖創造一種錯誤的印象。

The artist is aware of this paradox. Indeed, it is the central tenet of his project – to highlight the “hidden” nature of museum collections, held in trust by self-appointed cultural stewards. There is a deliberate irony in the choice of a British coin for the substitution, given the current focus on the historic acquisition of objects from around the world, especially by European collectors. The artist says he chose an English civil war-era coin because “it is one of the few British things in the British Museum”.

藝術家意識到了這個悖論。事實上，這是他的計畫的核心宗旨——強調博物館藏品的「隱藏」性質，這些藏品由自封的文化管理者託管。鑑於目前的焦點是來自世界各地（尤其是歐洲收藏家）的歷史性收購物品，選擇英國硬幣來替代是故意的諷刺。這位藝術家表示，他選擇了一枚英國內戰時期的硬幣，因為「它是大英博物館中為數不多的英國藏品之一」。

The British Museum has been increasingly under scrutiny regarding the acquisition, retention and repatriation of objects from around the world. While the institution has, of late, been making attempts at reparation and holding inclusive dialogue on the ownership and care of collections, Sartuzi’s work underlines the fact that the discussio is, rightly, far from over.

大英博物館在從世界各地收購、保留和歸還文物方面受到越來越多的審查。儘管該機構最近一直在嘗試賠償，並就藏品的所有權和保管問題進行包容性對話，但薩爾圖齊的工作強調了這樣一個事實：討論理所當然地還遠未結束。

However, aside from the core statement behind this performance piece, there are other aspects to consider. The central focus of the project was the coin, its removal from its display and its deposition in a donation box at the museum. Sartuzi has described the practicalities of the project, which included preparing a replica of the coin to replace the original, and the focus of reporting has been on the objects. But it should not go unnoticed that people were (unknowingly) drawn into the performance.

然而，除了這個表演作品背後的核心陳述之外，還有其他方面需要考慮。該項目的核心焦點是這枚硬幣，將其從陳列中移除並存放在博物館的捐款箱中。薩爾圖茲描述了該項目的實用性，其中包括準備一枚硬幣的複製品來代替原來的硬幣，而報道的重點是對象。但不應忽視的是，人們（不知不覺地）被吸引到表演中。

The museum worker from whom the coin was unknowingly “stolen” during a session when the public were allowed to handle museum objects was a volunteer and, the day before, another volunteer guide stopped the previous attempt. These types of sessions are built on trust. Staff have the right to not be put in a difficult position, and the public (including artists and other professionals) have the right to continue reaping the benefits of direct engagement with artefacts.

在允許公眾處理博物館物品的一次會議上，這枚硬幣在不知不覺中被「偷」的博物館工作人員是一名志願者，而前一天，另一名志願者導遊阻止了之前的嘗試。這些類型的會議建立在信任的基礎上。工作人員有權不陷入困境，公眾（包括藝術家和其他專業人士）有權繼續從直接接觸文物中獲益。

Where does this leave that relationship if access has to be withdrawn or restricted due to extra security precautions which, for the most part, should not be necessary?

如果由於額外的安全預防措施而必須撤回或限制存取權限，而這種關係在大多數情況下是不必要的，那麼這種關係將在哪裡？

Theft from public museums is relatively rare, but the seeming ease of the coin switch implies otherwise. Various media reports on the performance used the word “stole”, despite emphasis that the coin never left the building – perhaps an indicator that despite the legality of the deed, the optics are saying otherwise.

公共博物館的竊盜事件相對較少，但硬幣轉換看似簡單卻暗示了事實並非如此。各種媒體對錶演的報導都使用了「偷」這個詞，儘管強調硬幣從未離開過這座建築——這也許表明，儘管這一行為合法，但光學卻另有說法。

The original coin was uncatalogued, but as part of a collection that the public is allowed to handle the guidelines for storage and use are different. Much has been made of the recent losses from the British Museum’s department of Greece and Rome, and this new “loss” has been added to the mounting pile of negative press. (Sartuzi asserts that the timing of these cases was an unfortunate coincidence.)

最初的硬幣沒有編目，但作為收藏品的一部分，允許公眾處理，存放和使用的準則有所不同。大英博物館希臘和羅馬部門最近的損失已經引起了極大的關注，而這一新的「損失」又被添加到越來越多的負面新聞中。 （薩圖齊聲稱這些案件發生的時間是一個不幸的巧合。）

Nevertheless, at a time when many museums are understaffed or underfunded, and rely heavily on volunteers who generously offer their time and knowledge, such scrutiny places the heritage sector under even more pressure.

然而，在許多博物館人手不足或資金不足，並且嚴重依賴志工慷慨提供時間和知識的情況下，這種審查使遺產部門面臨更大的壓力。

Historically, artefacts have not always been acquired or managed ethically, but contemporary museums adhere to a common code of practice, with the Museums Association producing and regularly updating a sector-wide code of ethics. Most museums deal with a large amount of retrospective documentation but have plans in progress to manage it – this is also a condition of accredited status, which is awarded for achieving the industry standard and is also subject to regular review to ensure continued accountability.

從歷史上看，文物的取得或管理並不總是符合道德規範，但當代博物館遵守共同的行為準則，博物館協會制定並定期更新全行業的道德準則。大多數博物館處理大量的回顧性文件，但正在製定計劃來管理它們——這也是獲得認可地位的一個條件，獲得認可地位是為了達到行業標準，並且還需要接受定期審查，以確保持續的問責制。

The audience for Sartuzi’s exhibition has broadly applauded his performance, hailing it as a strong statement on the acquisition and ownership of heritage. Others have been more critical, while the British Museum has expressed its “disappointment” at the deception involved.

薩爾圖齊展覽的觀眾普遍稱讚他的表演，稱讚這是對遺產的取得和所有權的有力聲明。其他人則更為批評，而大英博物館則對所涉及的欺騙行為表示「失望」。

Some have questioned the museum’s integrity and whether it has the right to feel that way, in light of its controversial history of acquisition. Sartuzi’s project seems

鑑於博物館頗具爭議的收購歷史，有些人質疑博物館的誠信度，以及它是否有權有這樣的感覺。 Sartuzi 的項目似乎