"Imagination guided by evidence" - History and Hollywood

In our era of the fast-paced environment and computer technology changing almost every mode of our life, the move, the cinematography and Hollywood for a long time took a leading role to interpret and historically educate our society. The following authors bring their points of view on this phenomenon by analyzing various film productions.

Discussing The Return of Martin Guerre (1982), historian and consultant Natalie Davis looks at the move form the anthropological point of view in the attempt of the moviemakers to reconstruct sixteenth-century life of the French countryside. Despite her ground work as a researcher, the movie obviously appeared with some shortages: manner of speech and conduct of the main characters, system of public trial in the Ancient régime France, appropriate dress, to name but a few. To that extend, discussing historical and cinematic criteria, Davis suggests that the first one embraces the “constructing the image of the past and lines of the historical plot” while the second is responsible for “quality, movement, and cost.” (p. 47). Inability of a director to work with close conjunction with the consultant creates an image of modernity replacing the historical reality. One of the solutions is the suggestion to present historical review on movie in the scholarly journals, but today’s generation of spectators, I am afraid, is looking more for an entertainment rather than a diligent research.

Further, Vivien E. Rose and Julie Corley are attacking the domineering approach in directorship, which was undertook by Ken Burns’ in his Not for ourselves alone: The Story of E. Stanton and S. Anthony (1999). Bringing up the idea that “historians need a public versed in history”, authors suggest for more promotion of the “historical narrative” (p. 50). We could agree, perhaps, that the Burns’ presentation of two famous suffragists (although did not survive to see the 19th Amendment coming into the effect) goes with a standard interpretation of great American heroes (heroines). However, lots of primary materials are misused: off-period photos, inconsistency in music matching the scenes, odd text and the like. “I can see it in such a way,” – is the usual defense of a director against piles of historical research and convincing evidence.
Although move seems educational it does not, by the opinion of authors, necessarily brings “scholarly credibility” (p. 56). It, however, promotes the sale of a product associated with the history of suffragist movement, which is no less important. Just as the above Davis’ article suggests, there is need for more appearance of historians in public, writhing of op-ed pieces and teaching students how to use primary source and analyze documents. Perhaps, there is time when historians having directors and producers only as an instrument for production could make their own historically accurate movies.
How about that for a change?

Although Robert Toplin in his Cinematic History agrees that more and more movie production became available to historians and students alike, he discourses the main question as to what is today’s major vehicle for public to attend history-based movies. He is trying to answer it by investigating movies that interpret history, those as the author calls it, “cinematic history” (p. 81).
The traditional narrative style is still persisting, as the audience wants to be entertained rather then undergo critical thinking, states the author. From another hand, the Hollywood was able to attract its audience by presenting the past in connection with present events (WWI, Vietnam war, the 1960s and so on). Although historians are facing dilemma on the film research, the insisted political agenda undermines, sometimes, such an endeavor. Historians, in the author’s interpretation, research film in three levels: the final product, film’s relationship to actual history, and production behind the scenes. By combining all three approaches – from both the cinematographically accurate and historical (archival) points of view, one can manage to present a whole picture of a historical event. What is missing here is the author’s lack of comparison with historical European movies and the DVD material which is frequently supplied with “how the move was made” feature. Another problem is that all of the commentaries are made postfactum, after the movie hit the screens and snatched its first millions (like it or not, but today’s movies are aimed primarily on the younger audience). What desperately needed is a rightful partnership between consultants and producers and assumption of responsibilities from either side.

Wallace’s Disney World (Section II)

One of the many recent marvels the Disney World is obviously the most renowned feature of American and world culture. Presenting a brief history of these theme parks – Hall of Presidents, EPCOT, Carousel of Progress and others, Wallace researchers the impact, which such features bring upon millions of attendees and moreover, its historical significance and accuracy.
Obviously, being inspired by Colonial Williamsburg, Disney resembles its technique – “transporting visitors back in time”(p. 135). But, as the author notices, it is more of a win-win situation; in its pursuit the corporation presents the history as a great achievement throughout the historical period. No questions needed. True, it is a popular culture (which does not need “negativities” such as war, depression or class struggle), but from the other hand it is an education brought up by an entertainment and a proper museum expo could only bring to it an additional flavor.
In the second part of this installment, the author presents the development of the Disney’s brand – in Europe, in Japan, and everywhere else, mainly aiming for heritage tourism and development. Speaking of controversy, which aroused between historians and park directors, the author stresses a deep impact when the scholars criticized the innovations calling it “sentimentalism by a nature” (p. 165). Further, it created a line of protests from the environmentalists and historic preservationists fighting for authenticity against plastic consumerism. Historians, in fact, concludes the author, should work with the place such as Disney. But just as in the case of Hollywood production, historians should be flexible and assist in recreating the truth while avoiding being preferential.

HIstory websites

Surfing through the myriad of websites in work for school and leisure, the presentation of the historical aspect of the American Revolution was always interesting. Obviously, there are websites of all colors, designs and shapes that supposed to gratify even the most sophisticated visitor. Are they?

American Revolution
http://www.americanrevolution.com/people.html

The website seems the most classical version of this kind, since it pops up almost everywhere the researcher is trying to pursue this or that subject. It subdivided by three major parts: “A History”, “Documents” and “People”. Clicking on “People”, for example, the screen automatically brings you to the most important chapters of this subdivision, such as “The Founding Fathers”, “African-Americans in the Revolutionary period”, “Martyrs and Heroes” and the like. The links are easy to navigate and they give a lot of information: biographical sketches, extracts from the mémoires and excerpts. There are lots of pictures (many of them however, of contemporary artists, which is downsize of the design), portraits and famous wall paintings. Sadly, when the website discusses Revolutionary war battles, there is no immediate map attached to the text (though major map does exist) but through the navigator it is possible to get a reference from other sites.

Sponsored by the Google, US Army Reserve and several other commercial and governmental entities, the website presents lots of exchange banners and advertisement. However, the website is designed for a general audience, for it has discussion Forum and could be as a great help to anyone looking for to obtaining preliminary information on various aspects of the American Revolution.


American Revolution
http://www.theamericanrevolution.org/

As its above namesake, the website is also divided into several subchapters: “Important People”, “Battles”, “Historical Documents” and others, including “Recommended reading” and “Chat.” Aiming towards the special audience, Joseph T. Logan, the founder of the website notes that “Scholars and educators in today's society have a difficult time in convincing our children of the importance of history. We must do our best to find better ways of making the teachings of the founding of our nation more interesting to our youngsters.”

He, however, finds the “better ways” by presenting all white, male, Christian, Anglo-Saxon, to name but a few, history of the American Revolution. Among twenty-five “Important people” there is no place for Marquise de Lafayette or Martha Washington, not to mention any of the Africans or Native Americans. From the other hands, the military section is very extensive. Not only the website provide the information on date, location and opposing forces, but by clicking on a single battle one could get a link to the information on general overview, synopsis and effects of the encounter. It also gives a recommended reading, map and pictures (some are mislabeled, however), where available.

Section on documents provides link to “who, when, where, why and what” on many primary sources from the “Boston Massacre Oration” (1774) to “Sedition Act” (1798). The author also scanned original documents and with the high quality resolution monitor one could get a nice view of many historical papers and pamphlets.
Although obviously biased, this website, certainly, could serve as an excellent assistance to the instructor, for it provides easy-to-navigate tool for introduction of the major events of the American Revolution along with numerous first-hand documentation.

Preserving History: Archives

Visit to the DOS Archive – Legal Division

Today, no major work is possible without the extensive access to the archival material in the Department of State Archive, the principal repository of many documents relating to the Florida’s environmental issues. The Archive collection I’ve been looking at contains several groups of files from the Environmental Law Section, which hold the state and local government records serving as the basis for this examination. The sample could be presented, as follows:
Record Group Number: 000520
Series/Collection .S 1442
Creator: Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
Title: Legal Reading Files, 1973-1975
Amount: 1.50 cubic ft.

With the assistance of the database, one could determine that 000520 is the subsequent number of the box; index “.S” relates to the Environmental Law Section, which submitted copies of the documents for filing. Each box in this section contains files, in this instance, for the period from 1973 to 1975. These files organized in the chronological order and contain personal and interagency correspondence, draft legislations, and the like, in the way of litigation structural (that is, case by case, date by date). Various legal notes related to the environmental issues, such as pleadings, upcoming hearings, proceedings, rulings or pending in jurisdictions are grouped together with the preceding correspondence.
Box contains ten chronologically composed files, which were collected and bound as the legal proceedings went along. Documents are not numbered, nor they have a general or local index; also, all files are aviating its turn to be digitized. The extensive interagency correspondence they do contain, however, makes possible a much fine-grained analysis of the various problems, which surrounded Florida’s environment from the legal point of view.

Nicholson Baker’s “Double Fold”

In his thoroughly researched book Baker discusses the system of the American archives and libraries, which employs the policy of “destroying to preserve”, that is, microfilming old original newspaper printed issues and selling/discarding out the originals in terms of to preserve space. Starting with this dilemma that faced the British Library, the author takes his reader along the way to various collections in the United States describing, analyzing and disgusting all together in his quest to find a solution to such problem.
Note that the author, while obviously is in discontent, is not per se against the system of microfilming, copying and/or digitizing of the priceless material. Rather, his concern is that that the major depositories, starting with the Library of Congress or NASA, are not performing duplication in the professional and diligent way. Being an old-fashion person (very much like myself), the author states “historians don’t read the old papers because their libraries don’t keep the old papers to read, and microfilm is a brain-poaching, gorge-lifting trial to browse” (p. 39). There is – and we all could agree upon – inaccuracy, loss of data, chemicals that are deteriorating and so on. But, perhaps, an era of a digital marvel could help? No good either, says Baker, for one of the famous one, JSTOR has a certain amount of typos (do not bother me, really) and problems with its character-recognition software (mostly true).
The general solution, the author suggests, that libraries “must keep its duplicates… for books became worn with use, lost, stolen or misshelved” (p. 102). How about if we added to this list more of government funds (and not only on the national level), sophisticated security system and professionally trained personnel, from an intern clerk to a director?
Towards the continuation of the preservation of the originals saga the author reveals various stories he encountered while dealing with books and newspapers – its collections, preservation, discard and destruction – and its second life, where possible (as in the case of bidding to save the material form the British Library destined to be sold out). Although stories seem a bit redundant their concept is obvious – the author worries for the future of the printed material for readers like you and me. And no double (triple? quartile?) fold test is really needed.


Roy Rosenzweig’s "Wikipedia" (from essays for History and New Media)

The author analyzes unprecedented success of Wikipedia, the on-line encyclopedia, which hit the computer world in 1999-2000 and he discourses whether serious historians/authors/scholars/students could rely on its immense history information bank. For the many, this is not a place where people advocate their research or argue their positions – this is truly unbiased source, which is in many instances a collaborative work that summaries data in the narrative way.
“But is it a good historical resource?” – asks the author. There are some topics of the American history, which are getting vast attention and those that go unnoticed at all. What drives this is a need for an interest, its prime utilization and probably, unwillingness to touch “sharp corners”, such as racism or immigration. Comparing Wikipedia’s random chosen biographies with “thick” and respective dictionaries, the author notices how thorough the e-authors conducted their research. From the other hand, the multitude of the authors highlights certain entries and diminishes the others by committing obvious errands. While the narrative is well written, some entries lack the scholarly analysis, elegancy in prose and discursive interpretation. It is still does not have a clear mechanism against “computer vandals” who might change the text in a minute, while someone is reading it in this very moment. From the scholarly point of view it reflects on both – history teachers and students in colleges, who – yes, we have to admit it – do consider Wikipedia as their major research engine. One of the solutions to this problem, the author suggests, is to teach our students to work with primary and secondary materials and explain to them the limitation of the on-line source. From the other hand, history material should be easily available and accessible; Wikipedia is just an alternative, non-commercial way of learning but is not the major one.

Addressing Oral History

Wallace’s “The Virtual past: Media and History Museums”

Continuing his saga on public history, Wallace turns to the Internet and its products, which surround us all over these days. There is a multimedia for each and every taste, age, orientation and background, created by big and small museums and offering variety of choices, thus immensely increasing the number of virtual visitors able to drop-in at anytime. What is important, though, that people could interact with each other, send notes to the curators and observe of or participate in occurrence of actual events.
There are pros and cons, of course. Some argue that virtual museums are belittling the actual historical knowledge, while others advocate for the alternation rather than replacement. Today’s situation is obviously much easier when the author publish it in 1996. The author’s concern of the web privatization, virtual replication of the objects and attachment to the actual historical context is well understood. But the author’s idea on “interpreting the world of media itself” (p. 110) is not clear. It may well worked for the modern history, which is well documented and filmed but to recreate the far past – there, again, is a need for virtual history. Here is a necessity to distinguish between heroic stereotype and historic reality, between memory and altered media.
The future of the museums is, no doubt, with the media. But it should be applied carefully, so it won’t damage the vulnerable and carefuly preserved past for the price of the admission ticket.

Smith’s “History on the Web”

Along with variety of historical presentations available today to a Clio’s servant, Smith examines the relatively new “kid on the block” – the historical websites. The major argument he proposes is whether the history being brought by such a mean of presentation is, in fact, a serious history.
The author analyzes this problem by sharing his own experience during the “Great Chicago Fire” museum exhibition in 1996, of which he was an on-line curator. In presenting the pros and cons of this undertaking, the author first describes the way as to how the website was set up: 350 web pages divided in several subchapters, which included vast amount of eyewitness accounts, documents, original photos and the like, including a panoramic view of Chicago as it looked in 1858. It produced a great response, but response of a different kind than is coming after a scholarly book. Thanks to the practically unlimited ability to include as many objects as possible, this website gave an incredible opportunity for many to “visit” this virtual museum time and again. It corresponded with the series of essays accompanying the website, which allowed learning on the city’s history and its population, thus providing a valuable resource for scholars and buffs alike; it offers learning rather than compels on it. It is not better or worse of a history traditionally expressed by the printing material – it is just different type of historical presentation, which attracts its own growing audience and assists in better understanding in more accessible way. We just need better composed and thoroughly researched historic websites.


Wiese’s “The Other Suburbanites”

If we put aside the problems of the housing market and system of suburban development in the north before 1950s, which made up certain African-American communities, Wiese’s article provides an interesting example of how historians in nowadays are using oral history in their attempt to reconstruct the past.
The author is researching a black suburb in Chagrin Falls Park, Ohio, which was established back in 1920s, a suburb that many people living there called home. He based his analysis on several dozen interviews with its former residents with the attempt to answer the simple question – what was it like to live, as a black, in suburban America after WWII?
It was not a suburban “bourgeois utopia” but rather an average “residential black suburb” (p. 1500), which was populated by low income, blue-collar hard-working African-American men and women. Chagrin Falls Park has developed to promote subdivision between rural and urban living, thus addressing various racial problems but also a possibility of a home ownership for the black families migrating from the South.
To paint the full-scale picture of 1940s and 1950s Chagrin Falls Park, the author, along with the direct interviews examined variety of documents, such as deed records, membership rosters, church books and the like. The picture is not very bright: most of the residents did not have usual utilities, which are so common in our days. But, nonetheless, residents managed to survive, raise families and more importantly, create a community, which answered their local needs. As a result of the conducted interviews with survived residents, we could picture the mode of life in African-American suburbia in contrast to the big cities. The major conclusion is that for many, the home ownership became a basic symbol to elevate one’s status in the then segregated America.
“If you never start anything, you never get anything,” said Mr. Adams to his inquiring wife, worrying about the money for their house. But this also sounds about right in our modern time, isn’t it?

READINGS ON HERITAGE TOURISM

Rothman’s article on Tourism

The author took under the scrutiny several land-marking Western places, such as the Grand Canyon, Santa Fe, Aspen, Las Vegas and the like. What penetrates through the good portion of the article is the notion that ”heritage tourism”, which started as a way how elites lavished their moneys since early 1900s being admitted either to “a western accommodations” or/and “splendid dining rooms” (p. 527), is still continued in nowadays. However, the tourism in the certain areas, such as Grand Canyon, progressed mainly due to the successful management by preserving this type of the American past in contrary to the Old continent’s medieval heritage. Because of the lack of the appropriate legislature the major beneficiary were not “the people of the region”, but rather private proprietorships (p. 529). By 1920s it continued to serve mainly to the upper classes, but, nonetheless, it become symbol of an American might and conquer. Santa Fe adorned it with attempt to build a western cultural center, mainly through the growing market possibilities and development of the system of transportation; using the old auto or wagon, they transported people to the past.
Discussing the recreational tourism, the author gives several examples of the ski resorts. New to this development was hiring the public relation specialists, who managed to present a new brand of a future American generation – strong, handsome and liked. Thus, for example, Aspen got a good reputation, especially after the WWII, when “tourist industry dramatically increased” (p. 544). There, too, was a close work with the public but through another means – use of a military training unit, which, among other things, promoted tourism with the association of not far off achieved victory. Thanks to the investments, Aspen soon was turned into the most desired resort (for those who can afford it), providing service all year round.
However, the author specifically mentions development of the various places through the means of popularity among the elite, rather than the ordinary people. The system of luxurious hotels, esp. in Las Vegas is designed to overwhelm and admire for its expenses, screaming brilliance and lavishness. It changes, however, for entrepreneurs see the cash flow coming from all levels (and generations) of society and they are trying to respond accordingly. We can agree that development of the tourist industry today goes in conjunction with the development of the technology and infrastructure, which assumes accessibility on every level of our modern society.

Sellars’ “National Parks”

The author, who works as a historian with the Park Service for over two decades brings up a thrilling story of creating, developing and recent maintaining of the American natural park system and treatment of its resources through the period of more than a century. Sellars begins the narrative with the story of establishment of the Yellowstone first “national park” in 1872 and traces the history of National parks through the two world wars up to today’s’ environmental movement and park services’ leadership culture.
“What in a park should be preserved?” – This is the main question the author is trying to discourse (p. 4), employing numerous primary sources’ documentation.
Since the establishment of the Yellowstone in 1872, the initial park concept was its preservation for enjoyment and benefit of the people, which gained certain gains and underwent certain witnesses, as well. Conferences of 1910s brought the ideas of systematic planning, which called for a protection of “natural areas to be enjoyed by tourists” (p. 23). As the time progressed, the parks accepted its first professionals – “landscape engineers”, “wildfire rangers”, which all were placed under umbrella of Park Service with its growing concern for a balance in flora and fauna. This marriage brought conflicts between biologists and park management, especially for ecological issues.
Further, the author analyzes the system of Park’s management, which underwent various changes, as the time progressed. It went from the “protection and maintenance” during the WWII (p. 151), to the “watching [of] natural process unfold” in the 1950s (p. 167) including protection by development issue. The initial concern was as previously – the public use and enjoyment. However, argues the author, this met certain resistance of wildfire biologists, advocating for preservation of “ecological integrity” (p. 204).
The era of 1960s and 1970s brought to parks a partial compromise, but form the other hand, added law-enforcement issues. At the same time, the role of management and research studies increased, thus bringing up ideas that Park service “must include scientific knowledge and concern” (p. 232). Today, concludes the author, with the main emphasis on recreational tourism, ecological problems in parks are not being addressed to its full capacity as they are kept within discretion of caring individuals, rather than designated authorities. One of the solutions to this the author sees in more enforced legislation and promotion of scientific mandate, which should both work together under the less bureaucratically oriented leadership.

Visit to the Goodwood Museum and Gardens (Part I)

Nicely preserved and managed, mainly thanks to the Margaret E. Wilson Foundation, the Goodwood house represents today a mode of life, which was well admired in decadence Europe of 1910s and 1920s desperately trying to catch vanishing Victorian era.
There is beautiful and expensive silverware, expensive beds, decorative furniture and lavishly embroidered curtains; you could almost feel a thick cigar smoke released by sedate gentlemen as they discuss politics or recent prices on cotton… However, there is no study or a library; presence of many personnel is almost nonexistent and the house is a clear distinction between the elite and “everybody else.” Excellent portrait of Fanny Tiers is looking down upon you as if she is austerely asking on guest’s recommendations.
Obviously, it does not feel completely that the “history of Goodwood is a history of the State of Florida” (as the inviting brochure advertise) but rather a stiffen monument to its prominent owners. Leaving the main hall, one could notice the first Marconi’s telephonic devise with the number “478” for Tallahassee.
What if I would dial that number?

Landmark & Legacy Tour - African-American Heritage and History in Leon County

The problem of historic preservation in Tallahassee area is still a biggest concern of the local museums, governmental entities and private organizations, as well. This Saturday we were presented with an incredible opportunity to “touch a history” by an actual participation in a tour, which covered major centers of African-American history in the area.
We started with the John G. Riley Center and Museum, which was once a home of this first educator and prominent businessmen. “Born into slavery, he died a millioner”, noted Gus, our tour-guide and an Educational Director of the House. Thanks to his own hard work and almost self-education, Mr. Riley became the principle of the Lincoln High School, first public school for blacks in Tallahassee (c. 1893). He built his house in 1890s and since 1978 it was placed in the National register of Historic Places. It contains lots of artifacts and original memorabilia, which were mainly donated to the he Riley Center from the African-American community.
Hoping on the bus (which, probably saw era of the Civil Rights movement), we rolled through downtown, which parcels of land once belonged to Mr. Riley’s. “Early Tallahassee was build by communities,” explained Gus, “where the black population partially occupied its today main area.” There were nearly 170 plantations growing tobacco, cotton and corn, where slaves performed the most of the manual labor. But after the Emancipation Proclamation, many blacks moved up north. But some remained and maintained their small business: newsstands, bakeries and shops. Further “segregation of 1960s was a bad idea, especially in the eyes of the older populations,” explained Gus, “for they thought that money now will go away from the African-American community and disperse elsewhere.” We passed Civic Center, which once was an area of a flea market and stop at the city’s Old Cemetery (est. 1829). It is still segregated – whites are buried on east side, blacks – on the west. Along with several prominent people who found their final resting place here we paid a tribute to the graves of black Union soldiers supposedly killed at the Battle of Natural Bridge in March of 1864.
Heading towards the borough known as the “Frenchtown” we exchanged the info as to how this place got its name (well, I am still a partisan of a theory that it was the small French community, which settled on the land granted by the U.S. to famous marquis de Lafayette). The area, which is predominantly populated by the African-Americans, is in the process of “revitalization”, that is, rebuilding original hoses and selling it to the local inhabitants (we only have to guess who could afford a house at the cost of nearly $250.000?). Today this area contains an original site of the old Lincoln High School, directed by Mr. Riley (now Community Center), Greenwood Cemetery for poor, which is preserved in a good condition manly through the work of its volunteers.
“Tallahassee was made of various communities,” continues Gus, “ they were known by its centers – school, church or cemetery. Hence, the Mekan, Bond, Zion names appears here and there, thus reminding us on ties that held these people together. We also passed “Ash Gallery” owned by Ann Harris; then the Miracle Hill with its first black Nursing Home (c. 1950s) and other places.
Finally, we circled near the “Integration Statue” depicting, among others, young Maxwell Cortney, first African-American student who was “allowed” to attend FSU in 1961. Here, I could not help but think about how much struggle and disadvantage black people have to overcome for their long deserved human and civil rights. Their small peaces of tangible history, although long surrounded by modern highways and governmental infrastructures, nonetheless remind us of the past and present of African-American heritage, which embraces us everyday by its simplicity. You only have to open your eyes for it.

Young's "Road Trips through History"

The author, who himself is Senior Communication Associate in the National Trust, have composed a brilliant set of short essays on various famous and not-so places around the world. There are history of bookstores, art museums, maritime memorabilia collection, the World Expo of 1893 and the like. It presents a rainbow of stories from the point of view of an sharp-eyed professional, spending descent time to travel around and note what each of us is passing by in our everyday routine.
Why do we need to preserve battlefields? What do the movie theaters at the open bring us? Is there a message in a sculpture? In a monument? Or a prison? Being a bit nostalgic of the “ol’ good days,” the author’s writing looks like a travel notebook, a diary, embracing so many notorious places,which are embraced under umbrella of historic preservation. But what about people, who makes these memorable landmarks to continue their existence? After all, this is not about buildings, old market places or stylistically constructed churches. There is also everyday’s work, usually unseen to a naked eye – a work of historians, museum curator’s and countless volunteers. Definitely, Ms. Cunningham was an extraordinary figure undertaking an extraordinary task. But from the other hand, the Russian ethnography museum, an island of Kizhi, which Young so admired – has a staff of nearly 200 people, who do exist on the very low pay and mostly on their own enthusiasm preserving this unique architectural treasure. The same goes for Manzanar site and several others. Unless I overlooked, there is practically nothing on Native Americans or Amish, who managed to preserve their historical heritage over the centuries despite competitive modernization.
The author tries to bring a significance to big and small pieces of history,which were touched by the winged time. The major point he is making, I think, is that we can’t substitute the real history with the surrogates of Las Vegas or Disney World, no mater how colorful and almost “look alike” they are. Young is absolutely right that “preservation is all about having the good sense to hang on to things that are meaningful and enduring,” (p. 9). But it is also about human’s memory and a place each of us occupies today. And to prove his theory on ”no place fast” we have to slow down a bit and look around – that’s for sure.
From the other point of view – what I specifically liked about this book, it that Young serves as an admirable example of how a public historian could bring his/her ideas to the general audience in a simple and, at the same token, penetrating manner.

Wallace's (Section III)

In this section of his book, the author examines the way of historic preservation development through the prism of various trends, organizations and the government/public involvement.
In presenting the development of historic preservation as a science and movement, as well, the author describes how, after the era, which was premised on the aristocratic (elite) view of the past, historic preservation attained public attention. First groups, which received their development at the end the nineteenth century and continued before the WWII, differed by their structure and approach. There were those, who advocated for “preserving of tangible remains,” by saving actual historic properties; those, who dreamt of the “golden days” of the power of their ancestors in certain old city centers (Charleston); there were, of course capitalists and entrepreneurs (Rockefeller’s Williamsburg). Finally, there were representatives of the art nouveaux with their ideas of “independent culture” (pp. 181-83). However, analyzes the author, although the involvement of the government, inserted certain funds into various projects, lots of property, especially in1960s, was subjected to a re-development and industrialization.
After that period, preservation approached a new era of “adaptive reuse”, which was looking for “recycling” of the old buildings that could be utilized for business/public usage (p. 189). It assisted to prevent destruction of historical objects and helped legalizing the system of preservation. But the appearance of a “new urban gentry” brought a class distinction; in pursuit for the tax break, wealthy buyers pushed away established communities and historical landmarks, as in the case of a legal battle over NYC Grand Central Station, for example.
But, as continues the author, the healthy pragmatism soon overcame the historical significance and now we see the cases of renovation old plants, offices and buildings (“facadism”). Partly, it happened because the reach corporations saw economical avenues in preserving the past rather than social. Displacement continues, but what does the author suggest? It appears that “historic preservation can survive without corporate backing” (p. 209) only in conjunction with populace activity and non-profit organizations. What should be added to this list are legal entities and scholarly professionals; I, however, second the author’s statements that the issues should be addressed with more resources and consider more adequate redistribution of commodities.
In the second part of this section, the author continues debates on “property vs. preservation” issue. Various acts were adopted, both pros and cons, when finally it came to the conclusion as to what to call “historic” (p. 231). Should it be a cultural diversity, or a rejuvenation of the minority sites or abandonment of old buildings in favor to the modern ones? The solution came with the idea of “economic revitalization of the cities”, which should assist poor and enrich the housing projects, hence the plans for improvement, rather than preservation. Finally, the environmentalists came along, thus producing an alliance with preservationists helping them in broader regulation of the land use and protection. And although the author questions on permanence of this alliance, which is widely diverse in goals, this is the way the author sees the future.

Point of interest: Florida’s Bureau of Historic Preservation “provides architectural technical assistance to the public on historic rehabilitation projects, provides architectural support for all Bureau programs (especially important in the review of grant applications), reviews applications for federal tax credits for the rehabilitation of historic properties, reviews applications for ad valorem tax relief projects in communities not qualified to review locally, and administers the Florida Main Street Program (downtown area).” http://www.flheritage.com/preservation/

Wallace’s (Section IV); Post and Launius articles

The era of Ronald Reagan brought “revision” of history to rectify the actions of his administration, whether home, or abroad. In the search of the truth, Reagan wanted to “reapply America’s spiritual heritage to our national affairs” (p. 253). However, lots of his endeavors were based of the mythical assumptions of the dramatic past (partly, due to image that Hollywood created), which should be given a new meaning. True, it created some kind of coverage (or privilege?) from the harsh reality, but, motherless, remained political for years to come.
To see how the high political agenda could interfere with history interpretation, Wallace reveals the controversies, which arose at the National Air and Space Museum (NASM) displaying exposition on Enola Gay in 1990s. One of the crucial questions, which this exposition brought, was: To what and for which audience the museum’s works should be devoted?
The original script to the proposed exposition, which underwent five changes, attracted not only WWII veterans, museum curators, but the public historians, as well. However, in the pursuit for political correctness, supposedly educational exhibit on “Enola Gay’s mission had became an effort to justify it.” (p. 281). Historians, who were opposing the partial representation of “irrevocable facts”, went along with the public voice to improve the expo but their voices, obviously, weren’t heard.
What are the possible solutions to the successful museum exposition? To paraphrase Wallace, there should be “serious analysis on the national historical development” rather than “trumpeting [its] great deeds” (p. 305). One of the approaches would be creation of the pros and cons exhibit, which demands questions and welcomes discussions; setting up research scholarships and communal projects with the assistance of the other museums and cultural associations. Now, it is time when museums are not only should display, but provide the teaching of history, as well.

Robert G. Post, “A Narrative of our time”

Continuing on the subject, Post reexamines, partly, the exhibit on Enola Gay in his quest to answer the question: how should modern museums portray historical events? The expo, which, in agreement with Wallace, presented much controversy, was obviously destined to chose between “veterans feeling good” and “consequences of the atomic bombing in Japan” (p. 374). After much debates, certain “heroic” slogans from the nonexistent National Armed Forces Museums were still on display, despite the involvement of the historians producing “extensive historiography on the decision to drop the bomb” (p. 375). At the end there was a dilemma as to how the portray a historical event: as the U.S. engineering achievement to build a plane, which could carry the first atomic weapon or the devastation of its aftermath. It met obvious lobbying from the different parts of the society, who saw in the exhibit what each of them wanted to see. As to the historians, they also parted in their opinions. Although, since 1970s and 1980s the Smithsonian called for a “non-celebrity attitude” the exhibit produced “apolitical” tone of an official presentation of history (pp. 383-84). It appears, argues Post, that the exhibit brought a sense of “practicability” (talks of a “magnificent technological achievement” for one), rather than a historical significance of the occurrence. People should not be given “basic facts concerning… history” (p. 390), concludes Post, but a chance for evaluation and fulfillment of a meaning from all points of view, including that of the public historian’s.

Roger D. Launius, “American Memory…”

This article could summarize the above two installment, for it outlines the question on what, in fact, is right or wrong in the today’s world of the museums. In other words, what do museums signify to individuals who visit their big and small halls?
As an example, the author uses the Smithsonian, the most attended museum in the U.S.
Moving from a simple compilation of themed objects to its broader representation, the history of the past transformed from its “triumphant view”, to a “dismantling of one-nation, one-people consensus” (pp. 15-16). More than ever there is a controversy between “official” and “vernacular’ memory (p. 22). To support his argument, the author offers a gradation on how people today do comprehend history.
It comes from the personal experience and involvement of a particular individual, to the family/friends sphere and finally, to the generalities of historical past, which has no immediate connection to the person. It appears true, but still, certain groups, practicing “living history” have their own image of the past, which allows them to create “their own spheres of collective memory”(pp. 24-25). But will they allow stranger with a different opinion to become a part of their “sphere”?
Finally, Launuis offers a countdown of the proposed exhibits, which less likely will take their place at the NASM. In his call for an “intellectually honest and politically acceptable” exhibits, the author suggests that each individual will re-thing his place in the history where museum and public historians could assist to overcame myths.

Mike Wallace's essays (Part I)

Although admitting that “we prefer the present”, the author (professor of history at CUNY) nonetheless, explores in the series of essays the importance of the past history for Americans, whether it would be a new or old reconstructed monument, genealogical research or reincarnation of a particular individual in the CW battle reenactment. He examines “the way Americans have grappled with the preservation of history in public settings.” Today, we have a new interpretation, which shifted from the traditional, classical view of the past to the controversial one, based on the new era of civil rights movement and sometimes, a struggle. It includes new exhibits in the museums, theme parks, such as Walt Disney’s, as well as “historical revanchism” being brought by the powerful political figures.
Starting with two controversial pictures (Gov’s Palace of 1967) and Black History Program (1990) at the Colonial Williamsburg, the author shows various examples of how, through the generations, people saw their own history. It came from the Americanization of the historical past, esp. in early 1900s NYC in purpose of to make” good citizens of these many foreign youth”, to the Skansen, an artificially created outdoor museum, which brought mainly a romantic nostalgia on disappearing crafts and rural traditions. Sponsored by Rockefeller, the first installment of the colonial Williamsburg commemorated “the planter elite” as it was seen by its creators and sponsors. It took bitterness of the social crisis of the 1960s to acknowledge that the history belongs to all parts of the society.
Giving the example of MCNY, the author discusses that museum should not only try to tell the story, but to make people as the actual part of this story. One of the solutions Wallace sees in a closer interaction of the local population with museum authorities including the actual donation of memorable objects. It should involve more of oral history, interviews, video and sound clips, that is a creation of museums without walls, a “living history” of our past (good example is an exhibit at the Chicago Historical Society, “Chicago goes to War” ).
Big debates opened in the mid 1980s re “interpretative approach” of relocation of the AMI from the State of Liberty to Ellis Island. The previous exhibit showed one-sided story of immigration; the renovated Great Hall expo stunned people with its sincerity, truthfulness and cry for emotions, as tourists – many of whose are actual descendants of the immigrants - follow the glassed stands and endless artifacts with the pieces of human history. Of our mutual history. But will it serve to us as an assistance today, discussing our recent immigration problems?

"Written in stone"

In writing the book, the author’s intention (who is himself a constitutional lawyer) was to demonstrate the meaning and importance of a cultural perception of people towards their past and present based on the monuments, commemorating various political events of their own history. Admitting that he is the expert on the southern culture “use of public space”, the author, nonetheless, is drawing a colorful picture on the monumental propaganda home and abroad, from Beijing to Moscow, from Tirana to Zimbabwe. For example, when discoursing on the pieces of the communistic “leftovers” it is possible to agree that the author properly determined the uselessness of the certain creations, which remains as symbols of oppression (or, in contrary, “to big to be noticed”). However, what the author is failed to see is that the old works serve as a most memorable composition for the older generation, which recent post-communist governments are still relying upon as their potential voters. On the other hand, in the case of Russia, a lot of Tsars’ monuments were preserved by the communists and some – which were destroyed – even built anew (but it is for a discussion at some other time; the book was written in 1998).
Interesting to note the solution on the “Liberty Monument” in New Orleans, with a plaque addressed to both sides, monument to Alamo, Gettysburg, and the like. “History became what the written text said it was,” cites the author. Well, this slogan could be attributed to almost any of today’s societies. The museums, theme parks would be one of the solutions, especially if they could absorb the numbers of monuments produced over time.
The author also explores the legality in certain matters, such as flying the Confederate battle flag (which still falls under the First Amendment). But, concludes the author, it should not violate the freedom a free speech. It is mainly for the US Constitution to change certain views in “the power in either national or state government.” But from the other hand, a real democracy is the right of an individual “to wave flag as well as to burn one.”
The end of the book covers Austin monument erected by 1901-03 where the author offers certain solutions/additions to rectify the situation with the slogan inscribed. Leave it as it is, for it was created in completely different time frame. I think today, especially after 9/11 and the “Katrina” the monumental erections serve as an aftermath remaining to the posterity of the strong spirit and valor, rather than preference to commemorate an event and/or racial or social distinctions in the way of an architectural structure. The future monuments are those which should unite us all.

"Paradise Lost" - Part 4 (14,15)

While admiring the Florida’s historical heritage, editors note that “historians initially failed to gaze beyond the human activities.” The earlier attempts usually dealt with environment (Dovel) or with “human drama” (Hanna). The following works of 1970s and 1980s more and more drove their attention to connection between the past and recent changes of the Florida’s environment, especially re flora and fauna. The recent work is the attempt to explore “Florida’s past through the lens of environmental history.”
The installment composed by Bruce Stephenson, A ”Monstrous Desecration” (Ch. 14) discusses the devastating ecological situation of the lagoon at Boca Ciega Bay, which even provoked a political controversy in 1950s and 1970s. Giving the short history of the region and its resort, the author shows, how the “postwar building bum” damaged the surrounding environment, especially its water wells. Various committees tried to conserve national resources, regulate dredging operations and assist in proper planning. But the entire campaign turned out to be a dilemma (including legality as well as supervening illegality) of how to modify various projects on the expense of the opponent. As the result of the controversies between varies organization, the Boca Ciega lost much of its initial marine and landscape. Situation, concludes the author, still continues with the recent administration (by the time when book was published) and the lessons learned “have been lost.”
I always wanted to ask this question: is there a way to develop an area without damaging its environmental surroundings so pursued by the capitalistic entrepreneurs?

Gordon Harvey in “We must free ourselves…” (Ch.15) explores another involvement of politics into environment, referring to Florida as a “victim of its allure.” Taking as an example Everglades watering system, the author analyzes ecological problems in region, notably, an occurrence of “evapo-transpiration” thanks to the human intervention. Some places, such as Big Cypress Swamp, being under pressure from the developers, even lost governmental protection. As with the case of Boca Ciega Bay the biggest problem became a water supply for the area and necessity to balance economic and environmental needs. The author clearly specifies that the situation with Cypress became a vehicle to promote somebody’s political agenda (during the Nixon’s reelection of 1970s) where protection was substituted with acquisition. Thanks to the Florida’s governor Reubin Askew, legislative was actively asked to get involved in preservation of the state “for the people and all other living things, which makes Florida a place worth living.” However, it produced a huge controversy between the government and the private proprietorship. After much debate, involving system of government bond issues and federal involvement, in 1974 Congress voted to establish Big Cypress National Preserve, that is, a national park. It later was converted to the establishment of the Florida’s environmental policy for the years to come.
However, what seems to be omitted in this article is the voce of the ordinary people, who were living on the land; surely, not all of them should be referred as “communists taking over American lands.”

The Presence of the Past

The “Presence of the Past” by Rosenzwieg and Thelem could be a real stepping stone in our assessment of the past. We leave in the “digital society”, but our history, our human roots and personal experience is what makes what we are. The authors did a great job by undertaking such a project, which involved people w/different background and their reaction to the historical events. One of the striking examples is the conveyance of the past by the Native Americans and the Westerners, who, although living at the same time, responded differently to same events. People more and more concern about their cultural identities; form the other hand, more and more, especially the younger generation is trying to get “Americanized’. But generally, people want to know their history, and they want it for their children, so they could proudly bear the heritage of the ancestors.
However, for certain categories, this started only when they come to the US to look for better opportunities. It appears, that local grouping “consume” people’s identity and although they are part of the country now, their bounds to the mother-country are still strong. Some learn of the history through the big events, such as WWII, Civil Rights movement, Gulf War and the like. But mostly, the authors assembled “local” narratives, interviewing people for specifically designated questions about their family, work, marriage etc. Media played an important role as well and some respondents got “addicted” to various serials from which they’ve learned of the past, and compared it with the personal experience.
Overall, the book produces a very good analysis of the people’s involvement, “dealing” with the past (although some people feel excluded) as a part of their own heritage and importance of carefully preserving it, as such, for the further generations. This understanding moves slowly from the older generation to their posterity, because it is our “American collective past,” a true field for the public historian.