To round out the semester we return to Mike Wallace and his often pessimistic views of history. While he does go overboard at times, a healthy amount of skepticism is essential to be a good historian; questioning information and sources is paramount. In this section of Mickey Mouse History, we actually address the topic of Walt Disney World. Wallace analyzes how Disney World has contributed to the portrayal of American history.
Disney Main Street and Epcot are two of the areas that Wallace focuses on. Main Street is the "recreation" of Walt Disney's home town, and paints a picture of middle class suburbia bliss. However, this is a fantasized depiction of history. The same is true for Epcot and the numerous corporate sponsors who want the idealized version of history told in the theme park. These Disney parks show the happy side of history, and never incorporate anything controversial. Wallace is opposed to this, because as we know, he is a fervent proponent for social history and the inclusion of all those who are underrepresented. He explains Disney's reasons for this fictional history because most visitors can relate to this middle class history and it makes them feel good.
Wallace continues his analysis of Disney by telling about the park that never was, Disney's attempt to create a theme park about the history of America. While this park was never built, Wallace comments about the ramifications it would have had on real historical education. Disney parks present the public with an ideal world, so how would a truthful representation of history have fit into this ideal? Wallace points out that this is the conflict, and one of the main reasons why the project was canceled.
As we have read throughout the semester, Wallace seldom agrees with history that is not strictly history, and doesn't include those of all social, economic, and racial walks of life. While this is certainly a biased perspective, Wallace has given us some valuable points to contemplate. He addressed the role of film and the internet in history, and how entertainment is now becoming edutainment. How should we face these issues and challenges as public historians? His questions promote debate and communication within the field, which is essential if we are to tackle these issues. Wallace has certainly made me think, and discussing his book has prepared me to deal with controversy and the changes to come for public historians.
3 comments:
The fact that you mention the topics that Williams focuses on as biases was interesting. It made me think about how different ways of looking at and presenting history might be viewed as being biased by an outside party. The concept that historians do not operate in a vacuum are amplified when history is carried out in the public field. History conducted by individuals may arise from bias, but there at least one can narrow down the source of bias and examine the work from a new perspective. In public history this line can become blurred, as these works are typically more collaborative in nature and involve more than one party. Bias and interpretation must be looked at very carefully when conducting public history.
Hello. This post is likeable, and your blog is very interesting, congratulations :-). I will add in my blogroll =). If possible gives a last there on my blog, it is about the Câmera Digital, I hope you enjoy. The address is http://camera-fotografica-digital.blogspot.com. A hug.
It would seem that you are saying that history is being presented only as someone wishes it could be, is that correct? As if we might be able to change the bad things that have happened, just by pretending they never were?
~ Just Joany/Yaya
Yaya's Home
Red Wagon Flights
Post a Comment