All of my searching for objects was done on the National Museum of the American Indian website. The first thing that I noticed as I began my search for the object that would become the center of my four views project was the sheer volume of objects that I could talk about. Even after narrowing it to North America and only to certain kinds of objects I was still inundated with hundreds of objects to choose from. Among these objects it was also very difficult to choose which one I should focus on, they were all so interesting and had so much information to give as objects. The second thing that I noticed was the lack of written information, each object had only its provenance and physical descriptions. There was no information given about the object’s context or cultural significance, neither was there any information describing its symbolic meaning. I found this made it difficult to choose an object and find a reliable starting point for sources in my research. Something else that was both difficult for me as well as encouraging was the volume of modern native made objects. This was difficult because I wanted objects that had history, and had a historical context in which they were made that was more relevant to the time period our class covered. I felt encouraged by this though because it signaled to me hope that many of the items which were once held in museum collections have been repatriated. In line with the goals of the museum as stated in the article about the Siksika objects. I think that searching for these objects online rather than within a physical museum separates us from them, even more than a museum even does. Not being able to look closely, see all sides, and feel the object, not being able to interact with its physical form and study it closely removes us from it. We are purely observing, observing those angles and frames that someone else has decided are significant enough for us to see. We cannot truly deeply understand these objects being so removed from them, historically, physically, and societally. The knowledge given to us, the perspective given, is monopolized by the hegemonic ideas of importance. We are sequestered to what another might decide what we should know, and see, rather than having the agency to decide for ourselves.