In the third section of his work Mickey Mouse History, Wallace expounds upon his theory that history and politics are intricately linked. He does this by explaining the background of historic preservation in American, and trials that the field has experienced. These trials are due, in a large part, to politics.
Wallace illustrates how politics are connected to historic preservation by addressing different eras in the movement. Between the 1880s and 1940s a few main groups of the social elite led the country in preserving historical properties. These included New England businessmen, Southern gentry, and millionaire industrialists. Using their political clout, these groups managed to get the Antiquities Act passed in 1906, helping to establish national historic monuments and sites.
Since the 1940s, the movement of historic preservation has experienced regular high and low points. These have been influenced by different presidential administrations and the political climate of the times. Before and during World War II, New Deal programs instituted by Franklin Roosevelt created a surge in interest of preserving historical sites. After the war, urban renewal became popular, and many historical properties were destroyed to make way for new construction. In the 1960s preservation experienced a reversal of the post-war boom, and President Kennedy's administration led the way by example when Jackie Kennedy restored the White House. This preservation upswing influenced the passage of the Historic Preservation Act of 1966.
In the 1970s, corporations got involved with the movement because they realized how to generate tourism and profit from historically restored areas. Additionally, new construction became costly, and this influenced ordinary citizens to fix up their historical houses instead of buying new ones. Eventually this led to a backlash in the 1980s under Reagan. Social and ethnic factors became very pronounced in historic preservation as restored properties skyrocketed in value and the gentrification of urban areas became widespread. Reagan's anti-preservation attitude damaged the preservation movement and significantly shrank the political support base for the movement.
According to Wallace, historic preservation can get back on its feet with by forming alliances with groups he views as natural allies to the movement. Environmental and civil rights groups, local conservationists, unions, and public housing activists are just a few examples of groups Wallace feels should come together under the banner of historic preservation to influence the next era of the movement. He believes organizing on the local level in essential to preserving collective American memories, and this will be the way of historic preservation in the future.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Monday, September 24, 2007
Reagan and the Enola Gay
Wallace presents a critical view of Ronald Reagan's presidency in his chapter about the politics of history. These two subjects are inseparable to Wallace, as he has stated earlier in his book. Reagan makes the perfect example of why it can be harmful to abuse the combination of history and politics. The political power given to Reagan made him a trustworthy figure, the embodiment of "America" and its people. This power was abused when he gave did not give the public factual information historical information, and on several occasions flat out lied about historical events.
Identifying Reagan's behavior as a product of Hollywood, Wallace believes Reagan was trained to lie in the film industry. This affected Reagan's future in politics because of the content of films during the era. The vast majority of Hollywood films produced while Reagan was an actor during the 1930s and 1940s touted American patriotism and portrayed historical American events. Wallace concludes that these films led Reagan to believe that he was a part of these fictional versions of historical events, and his position of political power allowed for Reagan to share these untrue stories.
Wallace probes further into Reagan's presidency when he asks why Americans believed the revisionist history they were hearing. He attributes this phenomenon to the post-war disillusionment of Vietnam and the need to grasp a new and improved version of America's past. As one writer calls it, Reagan lies were "an orgy of re-illusionment". While many people rushed to embrace this version of history, thinking it was better to embrace myths than relive the truth, Wallace is very opposed to this idea. He believes it is actually better to confront the unpleasant or controversial things in history rather than write the story all over again. Wallace says that history is not comforting, but rather it is supposed to continually challenge us to collectively remember the past and engage with the realities of historical events.
The same can be said for the controversial Enola Gay exhibit at the Smithsonian. Wallace draws a parallel between the exhibit and Reagan's abuse of history and politics. A strong advocate for museums, Wallace presents the challenges faced by the Smithsonian's staff when they were confronted with telling the story of the atomic bombs and the challenge of presenting it to a public audience. Instead of taking the Reagan approach and seeping the exhibit in American patriotism, the first draft of the show was balanced and allowed for an American and Japanese perspective to be represented.
Then politics got in the way, and the Reaganising began. The first draft was targeted by governmental and military groups who called the exhibit revisionist and unpatriotic. This is because the National Air and Space Museum was founded by an ex-military man and curated by ex-military for years, and America had always been portrayed in a positive light under their reign. The groups who protested even went so far as to call into question the backgrounds of the exhibit curators, claiming they were un-American and presenting their personal views in the show. This damaging behavior led to multiple revisions of the exhibit, and eventually the original historical integrity of the show was breached due to political pressure.
Armed with the examples of Reagan and the Enola Gay, Wallace makes his final point about the responsibilities of historians to preserve America's history. He says they must continue to push the boundaries of accepted historical narratives to cultivate pride and not shame about the past. It is essential for museums to be engaged in current debates and have authentic voices represented in relevant exhibits in order to ensure future success. If museums retreated to the Reagan view of ignoring or rewriting the unpleasant, they would be headed for disaster. Instead, museums and historians now must embrace controversy and factual history, and continue to build bridges and trusting relationships with the community.
Identifying Reagan's behavior as a product of Hollywood, Wallace believes Reagan was trained to lie in the film industry. This affected Reagan's future in politics because of the content of films during the era. The vast majority of Hollywood films produced while Reagan was an actor during the 1930s and 1940s touted American patriotism and portrayed historical American events. Wallace concludes that these films led Reagan to believe that he was a part of these fictional versions of historical events, and his position of political power allowed for Reagan to share these untrue stories.
Wallace probes further into Reagan's presidency when he asks why Americans believed the revisionist history they were hearing. He attributes this phenomenon to the post-war disillusionment of Vietnam and the need to grasp a new and improved version of America's past. As one writer calls it, Reagan lies were "an orgy of re-illusionment". While many people rushed to embrace this version of history, thinking it was better to embrace myths than relive the truth, Wallace is very opposed to this idea. He believes it is actually better to confront the unpleasant or controversial things in history rather than write the story all over again. Wallace says that history is not comforting, but rather it is supposed to continually challenge us to collectively remember the past and engage with the realities of historical events.
The same can be said for the controversial Enola Gay exhibit at the Smithsonian. Wallace draws a parallel between the exhibit and Reagan's abuse of history and politics. A strong advocate for museums, Wallace presents the challenges faced by the Smithsonian's staff when they were confronted with telling the story of the atomic bombs and the challenge of presenting it to a public audience. Instead of taking the Reagan approach and seeping the exhibit in American patriotism, the first draft of the show was balanced and allowed for an American and Japanese perspective to be represented.
Then politics got in the way, and the Reaganising began. The first draft was targeted by governmental and military groups who called the exhibit revisionist and unpatriotic. This is because the National Air and Space Museum was founded by an ex-military man and curated by ex-military for years, and America had always been portrayed in a positive light under their reign. The groups who protested even went so far as to call into question the backgrounds of the exhibit curators, claiming they were un-American and presenting their personal views in the show. This damaging behavior led to multiple revisions of the exhibit, and eventually the original historical integrity of the show was breached due to political pressure.
Armed with the examples of Reagan and the Enola Gay, Wallace makes his final point about the responsibilities of historians to preserve America's history. He says they must continue to push the boundaries of accepted historical narratives to cultivate pride and not shame about the past. It is essential for museums to be engaged in current debates and have authentic voices represented in relevant exhibits in order to ensure future success. If museums retreated to the Reagan view of ignoring or rewriting the unpleasant, they would be headed for disaster. Instead, museums and historians now must embrace controversy and factual history, and continue to build bridges and trusting relationships with the community.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Mickey Mouse History
Public historian Mike Wallace presents his strong views on modern museums in his book Mickey Mouse History. Wallace criticizes many issues in the museum world and gives his own solutions to what should occur in the field. He detests conservative Federal intervention in museums, believing that this always skews the presentation and interpretation of exhibits. Believing these institutions should be in the hands of the private sector or small local governments, Wallace states that this is the only way to run a museum. The local community must be involved with the museum in order for it to have an effective message. Partnerships and cooperation with sister institutions is also necessary.
Wallace understands the role that point of view and interpretation play in museums. He sites many museums and specific exhibits that have been unsuccessful over the years because they have failed to recognize alternative point of view on a particular subject. This includes minority voices and "real" versions of some historical events. His suggestion to solve this dilemma is to present two or more narratives side by side to represent that there is more than one way to approach a subject or an event. He applauds places like Williamsburg that have incorporated this into their institution. Williamsburg once gave only a white, European, elitist view of history, and now incorporates an African perspective and addresses slavery.
In addition to multiple perspectives, Wallace also champion controversial exhibits. While he clarifies that these are not the only types of exhibits that can be successful, they are the most innovative and beneficial to the community. He believes that it is the job of museums to push the social envelop, and that politics are directly integrated with history. Wallace disagrees with conservatives who say that it is not the job of museums to participate in history, but merely to present it. He rattles off a list of creative exhibit ideas and encourages the field to embrace controversy.
Wallace also addresses the role of media in museums today. He uses the example of his baby granddaughter and how her generation will grow up in a completely media saturated world. He argues that in order for museums to continue, they must embrace and incorporate the digital revolution within their institutions. However, Wallace also states that there will never be a complete disconnect from objects and artifacts, and this these will continue to be the lifeblood of museums as a whole. Overall he presents the reader with a critical analysis of the museum field today and the changes that must be made in order for the field to progress and maintain its relevancy to future generations.
Wallace understands the role that point of view and interpretation play in museums. He sites many museums and specific exhibits that have been unsuccessful over the years because they have failed to recognize alternative point of view on a particular subject. This includes minority voices and "real" versions of some historical events. His suggestion to solve this dilemma is to present two or more narratives side by side to represent that there is more than one way to approach a subject or an event. He applauds places like Williamsburg that have incorporated this into their institution. Williamsburg once gave only a white, European, elitist view of history, and now incorporates an African perspective and addresses slavery.
In addition to multiple perspectives, Wallace also champion controversial exhibits. While he clarifies that these are not the only types of exhibits that can be successful, they are the most innovative and beneficial to the community. He believes that it is the job of museums to push the social envelop, and that politics are directly integrated with history. Wallace disagrees with conservatives who say that it is not the job of museums to participate in history, but merely to present it. He rattles off a list of creative exhibit ideas and encourages the field to embrace controversy.
Wallace also addresses the role of media in museums today. He uses the example of his baby granddaughter and how her generation will grow up in a completely media saturated world. He argues that in order for museums to continue, they must embrace and incorporate the digital revolution within their institutions. However, Wallace also states that there will never be a complete disconnect from objects and artifacts, and this these will continue to be the lifeblood of museums as a whole. Overall he presents the reader with a critical analysis of the museum field today and the changes that must be made in order for the field to progress and maintain its relevancy to future generations.
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Written In Stone & Paradise Lost?
Author Sanford Levinson offers a survey of selected commemorative monuments in his book Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies. He focuses on monuments and historical symbols in the United States and offers European examples as a background to his argument. Levinson presents a complex analysis of the erection and interpretation of these historical memories encapsulated in stone, and ultimately leaves the reader with no solid conclusion. This is because the world of controversial monuments is very gray, and will always be debated by the public.
Levinson makes a good point that the controversy of many monuments stems from the inability of people to embrace their history as a whole. History is not a neat, pretty subject, and undesirable things have occurred since the beginning of time. As part of human nature, we reject any undesirable happenings and attempt to erase them from our remembered history. When this remembered history is displayed on a monument, at a historical site, or symbolized by a flag, it is easy to destroy.
The question Levinson raises is should this destruction of history take place? Does one single entity have the right to decide what is remembered, such as the government or private organization? Of course it is impossible to please everyone involved when it comes to a controversial monument. Levinson notes that there will never be one united point of view on any subject, controversial or not. However, compromise is possible when it comes to preserving history. Even if the object or symbol to be preserved is undesired by some, in the proper historical context it can serve as an educational tool for all. This is why Levinson states cases of museums preserving publicly undesired monuments and the establishment of statue parks. While these instances do not solve the issue of historical monuments, they can provide a compromise and a premise for dialogue.
Chapter 6: The Everglades and the Florida Dream
The history of the Everglades since man has inhabited Florida is largely one of destruction. Greed and power have led to the demise of the state's most unique natural habitat. While the Everglades is now a protected National Park, the struggle for this to occur has been a long and hard one. The area will never return to its original expansive size, and can not ever fully recover to its once untouched state.
Since the 1800s, the Everglades has been studied and explored by scientists and entrepreneurs alike. In the early twentieth century, the first efforts were made to "reclaim" the area and make it suitable for human inhabitation. This reclamation consisted of draining the wetlands and forming plots to sell to farmers. While numerous survey reports had been conducted on the Everglades throughout the 1900s, most were politically sponsored and produced incorrect and dangerous information. This information was used to justify the draining of the wetlands, and eventually backfired when none of the efforts worked. It even led to the loss of thousands of lives in the 1920s when hurricanes destroyed man made dikes and re-flooded the area.
Today, conservationists have taken a strong stand against further destruction of the Everglades. Governmental attempts to preserve the area have also been active in the form of the Comprehensive Review Study, which aims to "restore the environmental health of the beleaguered Everglades." Even with these good intentions, the government will never fully restore the wetlands, and may eventually cause more damage with their newly planted artificial saw grass marshes.
Though preservation attempts are being made, the Everglades will never fully recover. This serves as an important lesson to man about trying to fight nature. It is our duty to respect nature and try to live with it, rather than to tame or destroy it all together. Hopefully others will learn from the Everglades and preserve our country's natural beauty for future generations to enjoy.
Chapter 10: Alligators and Plume Birds: The Despoliation of Florida's Living Aesthetic
Alligators and plume birds have long been iconic symbols of Florida. They represent the exotic elements of the state, and have attracted tourists and new residents for over a century. Before Florida was widely settled, these animals numbered in the multi-millions. Today alligators have undergone a recovery from near extinction, while many plume birds have not been so fortunate.
These animals have suffered a parallel to the nearly extinct bison of the midwest. All were hunted for sport, fashion, or simply out of boredom. As bison were shot out of moving trains and their carcases left to rot, so too were the alligators and birds of Florida. However, Florida's animals suffered an even greater blow when they were found to be highly marketable in the early 1900s. Alligator hides created a lucrative trade that employed many Seminole Indians, and plume birds became highly valuable when their feathers became high fashion for ladies hats.
The only good thing to result from the devastation of these animal populations was the conservation movement became very active in Florida. The Audubon Society raised awareness, lobbied legislation, and established sanctuaries for birds. Alligator activists also helped by adding them to the endangered species list in the 1970s. While the devastation of these animals was so great that they will never return to their original numbers, the movement of conservation and activism has had a positive effect on the animals and Florida as a whole. The state is fighting hard to return to the natural paradise it was once noted to be, and with the continued efforts of these naturalists, hopefully it will succeed.
Levinson makes a good point that the controversy of many monuments stems from the inability of people to embrace their history as a whole. History is not a neat, pretty subject, and undesirable things have occurred since the beginning of time. As part of human nature, we reject any undesirable happenings and attempt to erase them from our remembered history. When this remembered history is displayed on a monument, at a historical site, or symbolized by a flag, it is easy to destroy.
The question Levinson raises is should this destruction of history take place? Does one single entity have the right to decide what is remembered, such as the government or private organization? Of course it is impossible to please everyone involved when it comes to a controversial monument. Levinson notes that there will never be one united point of view on any subject, controversial or not. However, compromise is possible when it comes to preserving history. Even if the object or symbol to be preserved is undesired by some, in the proper historical context it can serve as an educational tool for all. This is why Levinson states cases of museums preserving publicly undesired monuments and the establishment of statue parks. While these instances do not solve the issue of historical monuments, they can provide a compromise and a premise for dialogue.
Chapter 6: The Everglades and the Florida Dream
The history of the Everglades since man has inhabited Florida is largely one of destruction. Greed and power have led to the demise of the state's most unique natural habitat. While the Everglades is now a protected National Park, the struggle for this to occur has been a long and hard one. The area will never return to its original expansive size, and can not ever fully recover to its once untouched state.
Since the 1800s, the Everglades has been studied and explored by scientists and entrepreneurs alike. In the early twentieth century, the first efforts were made to "reclaim" the area and make it suitable for human inhabitation. This reclamation consisted of draining the wetlands and forming plots to sell to farmers. While numerous survey reports had been conducted on the Everglades throughout the 1900s, most were politically sponsored and produced incorrect and dangerous information. This information was used to justify the draining of the wetlands, and eventually backfired when none of the efforts worked. It even led to the loss of thousands of lives in the 1920s when hurricanes destroyed man made dikes and re-flooded the area.
Today, conservationists have taken a strong stand against further destruction of the Everglades. Governmental attempts to preserve the area have also been active in the form of the Comprehensive Review Study, which aims to "restore the environmental health of the beleaguered Everglades." Even with these good intentions, the government will never fully restore the wetlands, and may eventually cause more damage with their newly planted artificial saw grass marshes.
Though preservation attempts are being made, the Everglades will never fully recover. This serves as an important lesson to man about trying to fight nature. It is our duty to respect nature and try to live with it, rather than to tame or destroy it all together. Hopefully others will learn from the Everglades and preserve our country's natural beauty for future generations to enjoy.
Chapter 10: Alligators and Plume Birds: The Despoliation of Florida's Living Aesthetic
Alligators and plume birds have long been iconic symbols of Florida. They represent the exotic elements of the state, and have attracted tourists and new residents for over a century. Before Florida was widely settled, these animals numbered in the multi-millions. Today alligators have undergone a recovery from near extinction, while many plume birds have not been so fortunate.
These animals have suffered a parallel to the nearly extinct bison of the midwest. All were hunted for sport, fashion, or simply out of boredom. As bison were shot out of moving trains and their carcases left to rot, so too were the alligators and birds of Florida. However, Florida's animals suffered an even greater blow when they were found to be highly marketable in the early 1900s. Alligator hides created a lucrative trade that employed many Seminole Indians, and plume birds became highly valuable when their feathers became high fashion for ladies hats.
The only good thing to result from the devastation of these animal populations was the conservation movement became very active in Florida. The Audubon Society raised awareness, lobbied legislation, and established sanctuaries for birds. Alligator activists also helped by adding them to the endangered species list in the 1970s. While the devastation of these animals was so great that they will never return to their original numbers, the movement of conservation and activism has had a positive effect on the animals and Florida as a whole. The state is fighting hard to return to the natural paradise it was once noted to be, and with the continued efforts of these naturalists, hopefully it will succeed.
Monday, September 3, 2007
The Presence of the Past
In 1989, historians and researchers Roy Rosenzwieg and David Thelen gave birth to the ideas that would form The Presence of the Past. Their research stretched into the 1990s, and enough data was gathered for the book to be published at the end of the decade. Devoted to their project, the authors surveyed over 800 Americans and included a smaller minority sampling, to present an overview of how Americans interact with and perceive history. Their finding are encouraging, as they concluded that 91% of those surveyed had participated in at least one of the ten historical activities included in the survey over the past year. These results are invaluable to historians in the academic world, as they mean that almost all Americans have an active interest in history. The responsibility now lies with professionals in the field of history to facilitate and encourage a deeper interest in history by creating educational experiences for all Americans. For instance, public historians working at a museum have the responsibility to create the best possible experience for their visitors, ensuring that they will visit the institution again in the future, and hopefully other historical institutions.
Making history personally relevant is an important theme in The Presence of the Past. Whether this is done by a public historian connecting museum visitors to historical exhibits, or sharing family stories at a reunion, this personal connection to history is the most important element. Those surveyed for the project were asked about the most important event in their life. Many of those events were personal, but even those that were national events carried a personal attachment to what occurred. Americans are active in history as long is it pertains to them on an individual level. This helps us to understand why many participants described high school history class as "boring", because they could not and did not want to relate to a top-down overview of events irrelevant to their lives. This is important for academic historians to understand, because they have the opportunity to bring the rich subject of history into more lives if they can tackle the subject on a personal level and make it relevant to their audience.
The inclusion of Native Americans and African Americans at the end of the book is very important. As students of public history, it is our responsibility to understand all sides of a historical narrative. Everyone should be included in the story, not just those of white European descent. History had long been constructed by the dominant force in society, but that does not give anyone a right to disregard the other contributing voices. Those outside the majority have their own rich history to respect and learn from. As this survey shows, Native Americans and African Americans have as much of an attachment to history as the rest of the nation, if not more so because of traumatic events in their past.
The Presence of the Past is an important tool for all in the field of history. It shows us that we do not have that task of filling an empty vessel with historical knowledge. Instead, we have the privilege of working with our audience to build upon their experiences, and continue to make history personally relevant to the American public.
Making history personally relevant is an important theme in The Presence of the Past. Whether this is done by a public historian connecting museum visitors to historical exhibits, or sharing family stories at a reunion, this personal connection to history is the most important element. Those surveyed for the project were asked about the most important event in their life. Many of those events were personal, but even those that were national events carried a personal attachment to what occurred. Americans are active in history as long is it pertains to them on an individual level. This helps us to understand why many participants described high school history class as "boring", because they could not and did not want to relate to a top-down overview of events irrelevant to their lives. This is important for academic historians to understand, because they have the opportunity to bring the rich subject of history into more lives if they can tackle the subject on a personal level and make it relevant to their audience.
The inclusion of Native Americans and African Americans at the end of the book is very important. As students of public history, it is our responsibility to understand all sides of a historical narrative. Everyone should be included in the story, not just those of white European descent. History had long been constructed by the dominant force in society, but that does not give anyone a right to disregard the other contributing voices. Those outside the majority have their own rich history to respect and learn from. As this survey shows, Native Americans and African Americans have as much of an attachment to history as the rest of the nation, if not more so because of traumatic events in their past.
The Presence of the Past is an important tool for all in the field of history. It shows us that we do not have that task of filling an empty vessel with historical knowledge. Instead, we have the privilege of working with our audience to build upon their experiences, and continue to make history personally relevant to the American public.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)