This week we read Private
History in Public by Tammy Gordon, "A Historian's Brief Guide to New
Museum Studies" by Randolph Starn, "Anatomy of a Controversy" by
Edward Linenthal, and "Fred Wilson, PTSD, and Me: Reflections on the
History Wars" by Ken Yellis. These readings discussed the impact of
exhibiting history and the public's reaction to "public" and "private"
history.
I believe the main goal of the readings is to explore how the public perceives
what historians and museum professionals are producing. Sometimes it is easy to
forget the public when historians are engulfed in historical method and hidden
away in archives. The fact of the matter is that museums have gone through a
change in mission. They are no longer for the scholar alone, but are now for
the public. Museums are for the layperson, and the interpretation of exhibits
should be accessible and relatable on some deeper human level. Both Yellis and
Starn referred to the change from "temple" to "forum".
Museums have changed from "sacred temples" of knowledge reserved for the select
few, to a public forum; influenced and altered by the public. I have read the
Linenthal piece before for an "anthropology of museums" course. Every
time I have read it, I have gotten something more out of the piece. In the
context of anthropology, it was a story about public perception and influence of
federally funded institutions on public memory. Now reading through the lens of
a public historian, I see more of the change in historical interpretation. We
have learned in our Methods course that objectivity is something that all
historians should strive for, but can never be achieved. There are multiple
historical "truths" out there, and the particular truth historian's
choose to tell says a lot about the time. The museum professionals working on
the Enola Gay exhibit chose to tell a darker narrative, rather than a heroic
and patriotic narrative. This choice outraged veterans all over the country. This begs
the question: who is in control of the narrative behind artifacts? No matter
what you think about the way the Enola Gay was presented, the public was able
to control what happened to the exhibit. On one hand this can be a good thing;
the public has the power to shut down offensive or incorrect historic exhibits.
But on the other hand, where does collective memory end and truth begin? Should
museum professionals allow the public to control so much of what is put out
there? These are tough but important questions to consider.
The book Private
History in Public: Exhibition and the Settings of Everyday Life by Tammy Gordon
is a book I can see myself referencing for years to come. I love it so much I
want to frame it and hang it on my wall. Gordon was able to put to onto paper
all of my thoughts regarding "private" history and small museum
curation. Gordon states that her book is not meant to be a glorification of
historical inaccuracies, but an investigation of exhibits which tell an
individualized perspective. She splits these private (meaning localized history
based on feelings, belief, and memory) museums into three distinct exhibit
types: Community exhibits, Entrepreneurial exhibits, and Vernacular exhibits. Gordon
explains that while scholars have approached the academic exhibit as normative,
visitors have not (pg. 30). Visitors find large museums which tell a national
narrative to be boring, stating that they don't relate to the material or
objects. However in community museums or curio shops, visitors are engaged,
interested, and feel intimacy with
the past. Exhibits in non-museum settings make objects highly accessible. (pg. 27).
This book validates all of the reasons I would love to work in a rural area,
with strong ties to cultural heritage and lived experience. After immersing myself
in public history, and studying anthropology of the senses with one of the most
influential anthropologists in the field (Dr. Paul Stoller), I feel more
connected to the community exhibition than ever.
See some of Dr. Paul Stoller's work with The Huffington Post
HERE; which I would consider "public anthropology"
 |
| Enjoy Da Yooper's wonderfully bad website HERE |
Comments
Post a Comment