Preservation and National Memory

 A person's memory is one of the most important functions of the brain, and one of the most integral functions of history.  Memory actively engages a person with the past in a ways that books or exhibits may not.  People have strong emotions attached to people, places, and points in time stemming from their own personal database.  This weeks readings focused on the various aspects of memory in the historical context.

One of the common themes of the books and article was how does memory affect perception, recollection, and understanding of the past?  This was interesting because more often than not your recollection of the past can be completely different from the reality of it.  Historians interpret the past instead of remembering it, which makes a significant difference when doing public history. This dynamic between memory and history explained in different arguments. In Memorial Mania, she explores the relationship between people and memorials, she argues that monuments and memorials in many ways represent the emotions of past event in the same way a memory would. A monument can almost become a substitute for an actual memory, because of the emotions it can evoke from people that see it.  It is also personal in sense that everyone may have a different perspective from viewing it.  Similarly Public History and the Study of Memory, differentiates  a personal perception from the consensus view of the past.  Glassberg explored some interesting question as to how the consensus perceptions are established?  Those views could extremely contrast a personal perception of it. How can you incorporate both into public history? The connection between memory and history is most important to public historians, because of their obligation to engage the community. The way people remember events and how historians interpret them have to compromise.

What is a Museum

What is a museum? A museum is to public history as Wall Street is to a stockbroker.  The museum's function is to provide the venue for history to serve the community with knowledge of the past. Museums also serve as bridge connecting different groups together. In Private History in Public, Tammy Gordon examines exhibits comprised mostly of ordinary people instead of public historians.  This type of history which is found in small towns, local businesses, and homes in many ways provide the same services as a museums.  

The display of everyday life from the past is just as important as an exhibition in large cultural institution, because it more identifiable and personal.  For example someone might find a old photo of a child from the early 20th century more interesting than an important  document from the same time period, because the photo of child can be identified within their own life. The interaction between the people and exhibit is what gives an exhibit its significance. The approach to how museums are able to create those interactions with the  public while still continuing its educational mission is observed in the works New History in an Old Museum by Andrea Witcomb and Re-Imagining the museum by Richard Handler and Eric Gable. 

New History in an Old Museum is primarily based on Colonial Willamsburg and the conflicts and politics of the museum.  Those conflicts are how to incorporate new studies and findings into older exhibits, what type of message should those exhibits send, and how to objectively address political issues in the museum?  Another  interesting theme of the book was how museums have to balance being an educational institution, but still has to place a great emphasis on finances.  The financial side of the industry is just as important, because it can be the deciding factor on what is displayed and what is not. Museums have a difficult task in balancing between cultural, political, social, and historical influences all in one place, but this what makes a museum unique.  A museum is place that can bridge all of these influences together to create the perfect learning atmosphere.  

 

The Presence of the Past

The perception of history in America is one that deviates among a culturally diverse group of people with their own personal perspectives of history's significance. The historians within the field often times a have completely different connection with history than the people they intend to engage. Roy Rosenzweig and David Thelen with the help of other historians examine the role of history in the lives of everyday Americans, who do not work within the field.

In The Presence of the Past, the researchers used a survey to determine how Americans feel about history, and how it has affected their lives. The results varied among different groups of people. One of the more interesting results of the survey was that minority groups such as Native Americans, African Americans, and Mexican Americans shared similar viewpoints. These groups shared distrust to the history that they were taught in school, and placed more emphasis on the history of their ancestors rather than the history of their nation. According to results of the data most Americans regardless of demographic trusted the accounts of the people who were present, as opposed to a scholar or expert of the subject the matter. In many instances people would verify things learned from schools, museums, or books with older relatives or people who were present. It is also important to note that in the information age many people do independent research on the Internet as way of being involved in history and as a way to check learned information. These results show an important difference, because historians use more formal tools of research instead of relying solely on oral accounts from people.

The Presence of the Past promotes important discourse on the relationship between non-historians and history, but also how history should be presented to those same people. This issue is present in History Wars with controversies like Enola Gay, which portrays how the perspective and intent of historians' work can be misunderstood and distorted by the general public. It also shows how the perceptions of historical events evolve with ideologies of the present day. Though it is impossible to satisfy everyone, historians have to find a medium between academics in history and the general public to serve the community as a whole.

Fundraising the Dead

There are several components and  intricacies that it takes to operate a museum that are often unknown to the general public.  In most cases these institutions rely mostly on the dedication of their staff, whose passion for the arts out weigh the their pay scale.  These intuitions encounter several problems that range from funding, lack of resources, old of date technology, procedural issues, and even theft.  Sheila Connolly in her book Fundraising the Dead explores these dynamics through the perspective of Eleanor Pratt the director of development for a small, yet prestigious historical society in Philadelphia.
      The story revolves around Eleanor Pratt, who is known by Nell and her daily duty as the fundraiser for the society.  Eleanor is a honest, hard working,and passionate employee for the society.  Nell's primary objective is to aid in the success and growth of the society and its collections.  This is hindered when it is discovered that many of the society's most valuable artifacts have been stolen.  After careful research and detective work of her own she discovers that the thief is someone that works within the institution.  The problems is finding what has been taken, and  by whom  through a flawed and out of date system in the institution.
     Connolly touches upon major issues with the procedure and operation that most museums, libraries, archives, or other institutions still use. The biggest issue that they face is managing such a vast amount of material with limited staff and limited funding.  Many of the instutions that have been faced with theft often do not want to take action for fear of public ramafactions.  The reputation of a instutions is just as important as the actual collections within them. Another major theme of the book is the idea that the people who have passion and love for arts are being taken advantage of by those with ulterior motives.  This theme of one person manipulating another under false pretenses for personal gain is all throughout the book. Overall Fundraising the Dead is well written and enjoyable book.  It over romanticizes the problems with museums, but most importantly get issue to the forefront. I would recommend it to anyone with interest in public history.