Is Louvre Abu Dhabi a case of nation branding?

Louvre Abu Dhabi

Or why should anyone care? Acquisition of the both historically and culturally revolutionary French institution that has never had any foreign satellites cannot but bring public and professional attention to the signed deal.

A bizarre amount of money paid by the newly emerged Oil Nation to the culturally and historically rich French side placed Louvre Abu Dhabi in the long-lasting and still relevant today discussion about the vested political and economic interests involved in shaping the formation of museums and art today. In this essay, I will argue that Abu Dhabi deliberately used this deal as part of their national branding strategy that intends to place Abu Dhabi among the key cultural influencers and renovate the narrative and image associated with this region.

The theory behind nation branding

In today’s highly competitive and yet interconnected world, nation-states face the need to present themselves in a way that their image and brand is welcoming. Carolin Victorin et al in Nation Branding in Modern History describes nation branding as “a deliberate, collective effort to generate a viable representation that enables people at home and abroad to view a state as legitimate and credible” (2018).

Keith Dinnie’s definition in Nation Branding: Concepts, Issues, Practice aligns with that of Victorin et al and further states that “Whilst not granting governments carte blanche to manipulate national identity for narrow party-political ends, the concept of identity as being both given and constantly reconstituted implies that governments can attempt to harness and highlight certain aspects of national identity in order to shape national image perceptions” (2008). According to Dinnie, sustainable, long term strategy and dedication to the process of brand-building is necessary for successful national branding, while “brand management should be treated as a component of national policy, and becomes implicit in the way the country is run” (2008).

Dinnie also highlights the importance of national culture and cultural branding in the construction of a nation-brand: “Culture’s the distinguishing role will form the basis for at least some of the nation’s brand values, and the integration of culture into the nation-brand will also help elevate nation-branding campaigns above being merely trite, superficial PR/advertising campaigns” (2008).

Lastly, Chernatony in Dinnie highlights the importance and role of key stakeholders such as government representatives or businesses in the development and delivery of the nation's brand construction (2008).

Louvre Abu Dhabi

Museum as an instrument in national identity-making

First and foremost, according to Andrew McСlellan in Journal of Curatorial Studies, museums are “identity machines”, due to the fact that the museum’s history is closely intertwined with the history of nation-building. Museums could store and display common heritage, traditions, and customs around which the sense of communal identity was built in the way to “form narratives of historical becoming, a mythology of origins and a belief in their own civilization”(2012).

Museum’s crucial role in the process of national identity creation is also supported by Flora Kaplan in A Companion to Museum Studies, who describes museums as “secular sites of contestation and representation and as places where groups vied with each other to define and redefine “themselves” as nations” (2011).

Following this, there are three ways in which museums served the political, economic, social, and cultural agenda of the nations to which it belongs that I would like to discuss further. One of them is, according to McClellan, the renowned reputation of the museum “as respites from conflict and sites of cross-cultural understanding and reconciliation”, which can be illustrated by many examples one of which is Vatican’s Museo Pio-Clementino that served as a safe neutral space for the meeting between the Heads of Catholic and Protestant churches(2012).

Another symbol of using museums in a bridge-building is a traditional call of the international peace-making organizations towards museums “to restore a unifying vision of humanity to a shattered world” in the after-war period (McClellan 2012). Museums, including the Louvre in Paris, have also been used as the display of pride and power that was at the time showcasing, as Kaplan puts it, “successful players’ colonial control of distant trade and markets”, and later was transformed into in McClellan’s words “assertion of newly won independence and statehood”(2011;2012).

And lastly, museums play a role in “national memory preservation and creation” striving to represent its nation as “culturally coherent in the eyes of the developed world” on one hand, and its simultaneous involvement in the forgetting process on the other (McClellan 2012). Sheron MacDonald in “7 Modes of Museum Forgetting” in addition argues that urbanization, speeding up of life, and “accelerated metabolism of objects” which is reflected in the short life of objects being produced now, results in “modernity forgetting” or even “cultural amnesia”, which makes museums even more important.

However, according to MacDonald when we give out the agency of remembering and allow museums to become “a memorial form of remembering that acts as a partial substitute – a self-consciously created place-memory, it results in different modes of forgetting reinforced by the museum’s structure that can be manipulated by agencies such as nation-states. From MacDonald’s study, it can be concluded that although museums possess a great danger for the loss of culture and history of one’s nation, it also once again proved its capacity to influence the national identification process through deliberate choices that can be listed in the national branding development process.

History and cultural significance of Louvre in Paris

Elizabeth Rodini describes Louvre which at the time was also known as “The Musée Central des Arts” as a “container for art”, as it served as a place to display the monarch’s collection of sculptures, paintings, technical wonders acquired around the globe, which were meant to symbolize the power and status of the monarchy and also display the officially accepted art that was showcased during privileged, elitist gatherings. However, everything changed with the French Revolution that made art and knowledge accessible to everyone, turning the Louvre into one of the first public art institutions. Taylor Poulin in Inquiries describes this political and cultural shift as “a bow to the victory of the French Revolutionaries, who had fought against the monarchy for an equal and fraternal society” (2010).

Thus, a visitor, who, according to Rodini, followed Louvre’s pompous corridors that constructed the path starting from the development of art in ancient Egypt and culminating with French paintings, simultaneously participated in the “ritual of citizenship, tracing a hierarchy in which France was represented as the rightful heir to these earlier traditions, the apex of aesthetic progress—and of civilization itself”.

Therefore, we can conclude that the nationalization of the Louvre not only punished the rich, but also promoted knowledge, education, and democracy across social classes, as well as introduced new ways of displaying the cultural and militaristic power of the nation, which was shortly highly supported by Napoleon and its conquests resulting in the enlargement of Louvre’s collection.

Heinrich Reinhold (after Benjamin Zix). The Marriage of Emperor Napoleon I to the Archduchess Marie Louise of Austria in the Grand Gallery of the Louvre on April 1, 1810. 1810-1811, Philadelphia Museum of Art.

Louvre Abu Dhabi as a case of nation branding

In the opening press release, Louvre Abu Dhabi is said to “celebrate the universal the creativity of mankind and invites audiences to see the humanity in a new light; the museum focuses on building understanding across cultures: through stories of human creativity that transcend civilizations, geographies and times; is a testing ground for new ideas in a globalized world and champions new generations of cultural leaders.” (Louvre Abu Dhabi).

This proclamation of Louvre Abu Dhabi’s dedication to cross-cultural dialogue and universalism is enhanced by the discussion of its inclusivity programs: “Its international exhibitions, programming and Children’s Museum are inclusive platforms that connect communities and offer enjoyment for all. In 2019—the declared Year of Tolerance in the United Arab Emirates—Louvre Abu Dhabi will continue to be a hub for all cultures and a symbol of openness, hope, tolerance and inclusivity in the Arab world” (Louvre Abu Dhabi).

Moreover, the press release openly declares its orientation on tourism development when it says that “Saadiyat Cultural District on Saadiyat Island, Abu Dhabi… will be a nucleus for global culture, attracting local, regional and international guests” (Louvre Abu Dhabi). This positioning of Louvre Abu Dhabi as an inclusive cultural hub is further supported by the response of Bassem Terkawi, the spokesman of tourism development and investment in Abu Dhabi, declaring that “direction is to position Abu Dhabi as the cultural capital of the region. Were trying to bring world-class cultural facilities that are not available in this part of the world” (Poulin 2010).

We find further explanation of Abu Dhabi’s political agenda as well as the vector of its nation-brand construction in the interview of the Emirati minister of state in the United Arab Emirates government, Zaki Anwar Nusseibeh, on cultural diplomacy: “cultural diplomacy is an important mechanism with which UAE executes and implements its foreign policy. Its agenda aims to project global imprint as an open and tolerant society and to strengthen its relations with international partners through cultural exchanges that… highlights the nation’s identity… underlining values of moderate Islam, and promoting religious tolerance, multiculturalism” (Keobandith 2019).

According to McClellan, “in the wake of 9/11 aspiration to advance a positive image of Islam has been increasingly adopted by museum officials and government ministers in both the West and the Middle East. In 2005 a Saudi prince gave $20 million to create a new Islamic wing at the Louvre that would, in his words, ‘bridge a cultural divide’ and ‘assist in the true understanding of the true meaning of Islam, a religion of humanity, forgiveness, and acceptance of other cultures” (2012).

It was then followed by another Saudi benefactor that funded an Islamic gallery at London’s Victoria & Albert, which was then followed by Sheikh Sultan Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, Chairman of the Abu Dhabi Tourism Authority, that “anticipated that Saadiyat Island would serve as a bridge crossing a cultural divide” (McClellan 2012). McClellan further states that “the Abu Dhabi museums are central to a long-term strategy of building a sustainable economy around high culture and tourism.

‘Good Islam’ is crucial to branding Abu Dhabi a safe and civilized place to visit, and in which to live and invest” (282). Even these public statements make the national branding obvious as they directly respond to the characteristics and definition of national brand construction described before (i.e. involvement of key stakeholders, brand management being part of national policy, etc).

Louvre Abu Dhabi

The setting of the “universal museum” exposition

Jean-Francois Charnier, Scientific Director of Agence France-Muséums, the chief curator responsible for the exhibition displays in Louvre Abu Dhabi says: “after a prologue of masterpieces from multiple periods of time, an enigma prompts visitors to reflect on the meaning of universality…” (Trend 2017).

According to Nick Trend in The Telegraph, “in the Paris Louvre, artifacts from Sumerian and Egyptian civilizations are housed in separate parts of the museum. Here they were shown together, and Charnier told me that this was at the heart of what he was trying to do – to strip away the boundaries that divide traditional museums of world culture; to set works in new contexts, “in explorations of the general spirit of their times” (2017). According to Carol Vogel in The New York Times, “The curators are not out to create a mini-Louvre but rather a new museum melding two cultures and two traditions.

Among the acquisitions are a standing bodhisattva from the second to third century A.D.; a Chinese white marble head of Buddha from the Northern Qi Dynasty, A.D. 550-577; and a 16th-century polychrome painted copper ewer from Venice.” Below are the pictures of different civilizations’ artifacts placed close to each other creating the “universal museum” a spirit that my friend took for me while visiting Louvre Abu Dhabi.

Amanzhol, Alina. 2020. Author’s personal collection.

In conclusion, Louvre Abu Dhabi is a very ambitious yet still fresh cultural and political project. Abu Dhabi as one of the newly emerged Oil Nations is doing all it can to promote its brand in the international arena.

Nation brand construction is a new yet already very popular concept among nation-states, as it allows nations to build a competitive portfolio in order to succeed in this highly competitive time. Louvre Abu Dhabi aims to continue the ongoing legacy of Abu Dhabi’s cultural diplomacy promoting international cooperation, religious tolerance, and overall inclusivity and innovations.

French cultural, political, and social heritage that is being brought by the Louvre’s name and institutional support acquisition also symbolize Abu Dhabi’s ambitious intentions to proclaim itself as a cultural and revolutionary cradle. However, although this deal might be of a high benefit for Abu Dhabi’s side, its influence on the French culture and identity is under question, which is also reflected in the public and professional disapproval.

Marzhan Alpysbayeva (B.A. European Cultures and Society in European University of Flensburg, Germany)
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0064-0406