Ferguson & Museums

Q1: Should museums be involved in current politics/movements & should they be taking a stance? If so, in what ways?

This week’s readings are difficult to respond to because they are just so easy to agree with. If I’m remembering correctly, the goal of early museums was to strengthen the community, promote deeper thought, and encourage civic engagement. As women and people of color have started to become more equal participants in our society, this early museum goal should simply extend to include them.

Additionally, I agree that museum employees should seek to create meaningful relationships in their community, not just crawl out of the woodwork whenever it becomes convenient and marketable to support minority groups. The advice that museum management should strongly encourage their employees to spend time volunteering is fantastic. The time spent building camaraderie within the community will undoubtedly pay for itself tenfold.

I wonder how much the educational requirement of working in public history (i.e. requiring advanced degrees) hinders our ability to truly become democratic institutions within the community. As it stands now, the situation is tied deeply to economic privilege and creates a top-down power dynamic.

Q2: If they want to address current politics without taking a stance what would a neutral version of interpretation look like?

A neutral interpretation would be a nearly impossible challenge. Perhaps, poising two sides of the argument against one another in the interpretation and then leaving the conclusion up in the air for each person to determine for their own selves could create a neutral position.

Critics would still find a way to find fault in the interpretation. You would have to be meticulous in making sure that one “side” of the interpretation has an equal number of words and artifacts as the other.

Q3: Find somebody who’s arguing for museum neutrality/not taking a stance in modern times? Include a link if you can find one.

I was unable to find an article or link arguing this, so I’m looking forward to seeing with other people can dig up.

However, I think museums with really niche topics can absolutely get away with not making a stance about hot topics. For example, in my hometown sits the Cowgirls of the West Museum. While they could probably manage to tie women’s history and representation to Ferguson, their lack of funding and expertise on issues of race would likely result in a very superficial interpretation. A rushed interpretation might do more harm than good. In these cases, Craig Ferguson’s advice about voicing your opinion seems apropos. [Warning: Video contains cursing.]

However, this does not excuse niche museums from working towards a more inclusive overall story. The Cowgirl museum can (and should) still work towards including a diverse collection of cowgirl stories in their exhibit, but they don’t necessarily need to be front and center when it comes to Ferguson or other trending news.

If anyone is still interested, here’s the link to the mock border crossing I mentioned in class last week.

Ferguson Readings

MLM Ferguson Readings
2/8/15

These readings were excellent. Thought-provoking reads.
My take-home messages:
-Relevance.
-Courage.
-Trust.
-Social responsibility as cultural institutions in communities.
-Relationships! Nothing will be “right,” with out that solid base.
-Museums and other cultural institutions as “welcoming” places for ALL, not a select few (“the Temple” concept)

My notes on each reading:
American Alliance of Museums: Diversity & Inclusion Policy
Key words: respect, values, celebrate diversity = institutional excellence
All members, partners, key stakeholders + board/staff/etc: embrace these values..
How do institutions hold their staff responsible for this?
Articulating policies are critical, but leadership demonstration from Boards, managers, etc is even more critical. Museums are community leaders.
Best quotes: “Even when people appear the same on the outside, they are different.”
“Diversity always exists in social systems. Inclusion, on the other hand, must be created.”

New England Museum Association – Advocacy
Contradiction between personal consciences and the institution can cause problems, which may make museums reluctant to engage publicly.
“Think Tank” sessions – great idea on how to make museums more socially responsible and involved in social change, dialogue, problem-solving.
Best quotes: “As key pillars of their communities, museums play an important role in helping make sense of life’s
challenges, contextualizing the news, and improving the circumstances of the people they serve. The great power of museums is their ability to transform the lives of individuals who walk through their doors. Their greater power, and fundamental duty in my opinion, is to act as agents of transformation to society as a whole.”

Museum Commons.com: Practical Compassion
What is the appropriate role for museums? Should they be more responsive to community issues? Regular engagement (not reactionary/issue-specific); Collaborate (use facilitated discussion so everyone is heard); Talk to key stakeholders first – this is OK, but make sure not railroaded by stakeholder reticence or power to sway institution action; Staff: community involvement, leadership- this s a really important point. Why? Networks…but more importantly, relationships! That is foundational.

#Black Lives Matter Movement, Nik Hill
Shared histories – we are not homogenous, so respect diverse opinion and share it.
Actions matching words.
Best quotes: “…fear that our institutions are not staying relevant.”

“Making statements in support of the current movements won’t fundamentally change the ways in which we relate to black people in our communities. I recognize that our silence is complicity, but I don’t think we have to jump further ahead than where we are. Let’s be honest with ourselves and with our communities about where we need to criticize our selves, strengthen our relationships and let’s work to build the trust that will help us grow sustaining relationships with black people in our communities. Those actions will speak louder than any of our words ever could.”

Anti-Oppression Museum Manifesto, Nik Hill
“Why don’t persons of color participate at same rates as other groups?” by Porchia Moore.
– Uneven power distribution
– Invisiblizing
– Who is telling the stories? Through what lenses ar stories being told? (consider multiple perspectives, generations, etc)
– Fiscal decisions – constrained budgets, “open and honest” can lead to decreased visitors and interest, loss of base = loss of funding = survival issues
Best quote: “For museums to truly be a forum for visitors of color, and not a temple for those with privilege”

Assoc of African American Museums – Samuel Black, Pres., statement on behalf of AAAM Conference (AAAM)
Use education and outreach, creativity to contextualize African American (or any) struggle. Collaborative of museums, curators, designers, artists, poets, playwrights” – continue to tell the story as people the freedom/democracy/justice.

Taking a position. AAAM certainly did! This was a very powerful, strong, (and possibly politically risky) statement for the President of AAAM:
“As a national organization and like most Americans of conscience we cannot sit idly by as unchecked police power cheapens our lives and creates a “failure of government not witnessed since the dark days of lynching.”

Incluseum: Museums and Social Inclusion: Chieko Philllips and Leilani Lewis (NAAM)
Assoc of African American Museums (AAAM) – statement bloggers response
NW African American Museum’s response to Ferguson
“An act of learning, healing, protest and community”
Relevance again- and shifting cultural landscapes – make museums more relevant?
“Journalist Charles Mudede posed this question in his complimentary article, “Northwest African American Museum Just Became a Lot More Relevant” published on September 10, 2014, in
Seattle’s weekly newspaper, The Stranger.” Relevance as the “golden egg of the museum field”
-Museums lay ground work for collaboration (real-time, social media, collective mobilization = provide opportunities to engage and act.)
-High value on collaborative: multidisciplinary, multiage, multigenerational, multicultural: identity is dependent on this
-“Conduit of Connectivity” –I loved this! rather than claiming the spotlight – networking, “democratization of museums by creating spaces for multiple voices to be heard.”

#BlackLivesMatter (Feminist Wire), Alicia Garza
Conference calls created space for open communication
All Lives Matter – dropping the “black” from “lives matter” meant erasing, furthering the divisive legacy, “a watered down unity” – had not really thought about that.

Ferguson Must Force Us to Face Anti-Blackness, Op-Ed Michael Jeffries
Michael P. Jeffries is an associate professor of American studies at Wellesley College, author of “Paint the White House Black: Barack Obama and the Meaning of Race in America.” National shame; polarizing.
Best Quote: “Chants of “black lives matter!” have not weakened the critique of institutional
racism; they have strengthened it. And if we are to survive, they must grow louder.”

Joint Statement Museum Bloggers/Colleagues on Ferguson
Museums are part of educational/cultural network (Schools/ed orgs, teachers; arts orgs; pop culture icons).
Museums are “mediators of culture” – this is very true…it’s important for them to connect with contemporary issues – regardless of museum’s collection, focus, mission. Silence can speak volumes – at the time of the blog publication, only Assoc of African American Museums had joined the statement:
“We believe that the silence of other museum organizations sends a message that these issues are the concern only of African Americans and African American Museums.”

Role of museums as institutions that claim to conduct activities for public benefit – and what can they do? Connections between museums and social justice:
1.Look at own staff diversity/equity in policy and practice. It’s hard but they must institute policies and work hard on them, have internal discussions, treat one another on staff with the respect they want in community.
2.Helping volunteers and partners: race, violence, community – volunteers are a very difficult issue. Not on payroll, volunteering time, often not supervised.
3.Offer museum meeting space for meetings and conversations. – that’s good.
4.Join the community to address issues (“respond and invest”)
Best quotes: “The recent series of events, from Ferguson to Cleveland and New York, have created a watershed moment. Things must change. New laws and policies will help, but any movement toward greater cultural and racial understanding and communication must be supported by our country’s cultural
and educational infrastructure.”

We believe that strong connections should exist between museums and their communities. Forging those connections means listening and responding to those we serve and those we wish
to serve.”

Diversity of museums = diversity of perspectives! Example: American Alliance of Museums (http://www.aam-us.org/); theAssociation of Science-Technology Centers; (http://www.astc.org/) the Association of Children’s Museums (http://www.childrensmuseums.org/); American Association for State and Local History (http://about.aaslh.org/home/). In Boise: ISHS, BAM, Black History Museum, Basque Museum & Cultural Center, Discovery Center, Peregrine Fund World Center for Birds of Prey, local city museums, WarHawk, Old Pen, oh and what in the world will JUMP bring?

Social Justice Alliance for Museums
Joining of organizations, individuals to encourage debate about the museum’s role in “promoting racial equality and cultural understanding.”
Get involved…this was from Liverpool; international organization.
Think globally!!!

Social Justice and Museums

MLM Social Justice and Museums
2/8/15

This week’s readings got me to thinking about risk-taking with sensitive subjects such as social justice in Boise. Just think about the recent “Add the Words,” education issues, and other political debacles in Idaho. It’s hard to think of being a risk-taking public institution in an insular community with closed-minded leaders. BUT…

Should museums be involved in current social movements?
Yes!
-Museums are cultural institutions, and therefore, are responsible for taking the lead on broaching difficult social, political subjects with the public.

-Most are publicly funded, which lends credence to collective leadership on social issues, short of advocacy.

-Museums are the perfect place to educate the public about issues, difficult or not. They are usually in community centers, can be non-threatening places for conversation, and can include various people at different social levels for diverse conversation. Community means gatherings, shared histories, memories and places.

-“Agents of change” – leading the way – communities matter…

-Relevance – staying abreast of current issues connects museums to the public – should move them closer to their constituent base, not farther away.

-Silence is complicity (ie; #BlackLivesMatter).

-Multidisciplinary, multiage, multigenerational, multicultural opportunities- reciprocal participation w/audiences and communities.

-Places for multiple voices, democratic ideals.

-Museums are invested in their communities – reciprocal investments: public will invest in institutions.

Arguments for museum non-action, or neutrality, in contemporary issues:
-Budget and fiscal issues: losing funding or visitorship due to social action.

-Possible divisiveness of individual personal opinion, or contradiction between personal consciences and the institution = inaction, silence. (Don’t rock the boat publicly.)

-Politics. Powerful people control the messages, funds, and therefore, actions, of the institutions. Fear of politicians, elected officials, strong community members.(Do you have a diverse board? Who funds? Who speaks for the institution?)

-When missions collide with social justice. Example: diversity. Is the institution mission narrowly defined, with no articulated goal of cultural education, diversity, broad representation?

-Mission clearly articulates “no advocacy.” This works well for being neutral, but it can also work to disadvantage if appearance is this is due to fear of taking a position for cultural change.

-Risk-averse: stay with “what has worked well in the past.”

-Institution is reluctant to change with the times, or stay in the “facts-only” mode. Limit interpretation and stories to minimal exploration – no critical thinking, just presentation of facts and no story behind them – prefer no public engagement, as this will give up institutional authority and control.

-Prefer to talk “to,” not “with.” (Safer?)

-Untrained staff, leaders, docents/volunteers, or some that are unable to embrace social change, deal with difficult issues, or critical thinking.

-Fear of the media. What happens when a reporter calls?

-View of purpose: “temple of privilege?” for whom is this institution for?

-Untrained in contemporary modes of communication, including social media, technology. Not fast enough, integrated enough, lack of reach.

-Hidden agenda of Boards, leaders, managers, staff, volunteers.

-“The man behind the curtain.” Faceless bureaucrats or institutional employees who claim powerlessness due to hierarchical structures, Boards, funding contributors, rules, regulations.

-Internal division – prefer to remain neutral than risk a combative staff, especially with one another.

Museum Visit(s)

Museum Visit(s) 02/08/15
Meggan

What a beautiful Sunday. Great weather and good museum visits, plus lots of stimulation for public history!

BOISE ART MUSEUM
-Excited to see Liu Bolin’s “Invisible Man” exhibit!

-Greeted by a staff member who was a bit in disbelief I was a student. Hmmm…
-Then, greeted by a small monitor, with barely-audible sound/”bleeps” for prompts with alien-looking faces: “Why At Museums Have Rules.” (The “no’s”: backpacks, pens – use pencils, kids, touching, wall-leaning, etc.) Basically “no-no-no,” not a first “Welcome to our museum! We want to thank you…” visitor greeted by the no’s…hmmm. I was put off, definitely.
-I know rules are important for all to be aware of, but this was most negative welcome I have had to a museum in a long while…and it was rather unobtrusive, so possibly some would ignore or miss it.

-“Invisible Man” exhibit: very cool! Thoughts: emotional connections…what it means to be invisible, meaningless, voiceless in society. Similar to the “erasing” black history in the Ferguson articles. The 45-foot dragon tie-in was even more meaningful, and visually impressive with beauty and strength – got the messages clearly: “Normal people” with forbidden access, “Are we all descendants of aggression and dominance?” “Have we lost the ability to investigate and think?”
-History: “the truth and falsehoods of history” tied directly to our readings this week, plus the issue of whose story is it? Are we “blinded by lies,” or lies of omission? I loved those words in the exhibit.

-“A Matter of Taste – Food for Thought”
Food Exhibit: what a missed boat. There are SO MANY things that exhibit could have done, and some many participatory things missed for visitors…even a discussion table!

-Participatory Elements – and suggestions for improvement/inclusion:
o“Sensory Stations” – little more than small monitors with headphones, and a few video-audio clips (shssh! quiet!) Broadened the story, but not really participatory

o“Art Experience” Kids’ Gallery: this is great! Drawing, observations, tactile section, books, computers, shapes and forms, and questions for older kids to answer: what did you like the most? What would you change? Age? Come back?
oReading Room – addresses those who need quiet space and independent exploration – books, smaller exhibits, viewing films through video library. Good and meaningful.

oSurvey station – well-meaning…one did not work. Is this really participation, or is it just another survey method?

oThe “live posts” were kind of neat – shared opinion and conversation.

oI was interested in the explanation onscreen of the “new interpretive components of BAM’s exhibits” – “A New Way to Experience BAM’s Permanent Collections” – so that visitors can interact with artworks. The touch-screen computers were to have “art games, film clips, music, virtual curation programs, cell phone tours. Could not find much this at BAM, other than the static video kiosks. The family exploring paks, however,were great for each exhibit. I did not find a whole lot of follow-through on this for “integrating interactive educational components” into BAM’s exhibit paces, transforming the experiences into a participatory, self-guided exploration of art.” “Create a label” and “Create a postcard” were good ideas, though!

Suggestions: Can we do something like the kid room for adults? An invisible portrait booth? A photoshop computer game? Questions about race, “invisibility” in society, “erasing” – for community conversation?? A table for the food experience? Questions about food, or a place to post recipes, or favorite foods? Hook in somehow with local restaurants? Food and culture??!!

IDAHO BLACK HISTORY MUSUEM
-It was open!!!
-Greeted by a very congenial young man who was so thrilled to have visitors, and there were a fair number of families coming in. It was welcoming.
-The interp panels are rather old, and the objects scarce, but it had a good feel.
-Panels are text-heavy, but span a lot of years – decent messages and photos/art.
-TONS of books – very cool.

Suggestions
oThey have 2 non-working monitors, that may or may not be able to be used…in their stead, the museum staff person suggested they may put up a video screen and play looped videos of music, MLK speeches, etc. That would be neat – I offered that the music at Basque Museum adds yet another sensory dimension, and adds to the cultural history.

oI asked if they would be open to sharing info with other museum about culture in Boise, like the Basque Museum, or combining forces with those who know Chinese history. He thought that would be very cool.

oSlider panels directed at kids (read answers to questions)– but they are very boring. Some sort of interactive and certainly more graphic elements would engage kids.

oThey have a genealogy room! This could be a huge draw! I’d advertise that and set up workshops. As a matter of fact, Basque Museum could do the same….exploring personal heritage is great, and it would be participatory. Much like the Ellis Island search rooms?

oNo interpretation on the Baptist Chapel itself –that would be really neat and to incorporate photos of those who had been married in that chapel, what it looked like on BSU campus, a recording of a sermon or music???

BASQUE MUSUEM & CULTURAL CENTER
-Participatory elements: boarding house kiosk that is really old and semi-functional. You all know my ideas about doing something cool with boarding houses!

-The pelota onscreen game – pretty cool. I like the recreation of a fronton room.

-Video/voices of Lucy Garatea and boarding house women – voices are really important. I’d maybe include more and always have the music going. The CJU house has some wonderful voices in the sound kiosks. This is compelling.

-Very warm and welcoming – to anyone. I think this is critical – access is #1 importance to me…open, accessible.

Suggestions:
oThere is so much that can be done here with participation!

o“Changing names” exhibit – you come in much like the Titanic exhibit, with a Basque name – by end of visit, your name (and identity) has a huge chance of changing – Spanish/French/English names, new jobs, work-home life, etc.

oTake a ship to America, then train trip to Boise.

oBoarding houses – make this a real-life exhibit in the museum (the CJU job is excellent). Add an interactive, digital boarding houses –or diorama of some sort – push buttons? what Boise used to look like (with train station, Chinese, etc) Voices?

ALL OF BOISE’S MUSEUMS
Suggestions: It seems that there is a great opportunity for the museums to join forces more, at least in Boise. The Idaho Association of Museums may be helpful, but that includes a lot of very small, local museums. Boise could “pilot” some projects that are museum collaboratives, regarding societal issues – for instance, what about all of them, including the Idaho History Museum, tackling multiculturalism history – and contemporary diversity issues? Yes, even “Add the Words!)

Funding is a real issue…and participatory efforts can cost money.

We have major corporations, businesses, and interested/able individuals in the valley – let’s get to work on contacting potential sources of funding, and collaborative grant-writing! Our History502 class has the brain power, contacts, and willpower to shake things up and make it happen!!!!

More later on our assignment to come to class with possible projects…

Museums for Everyone

A few years ago, my former roommate and I were talking about our crazy college escapades.   I began reminiscing about how fun it was to have friends over every Sunday for dinner and a drive in my Volkswagen Bus to the foothills.   Turns out, those people who came over were MY friends and that, in fact, my roommate couldn’t stand them.   She was just being polite and put up with them because she did not want to cause strife. I was shocked!   I had no idea that she had a different perspective from my rosy memories. All these years, I had assumed that she had the same view.

Every rural museum seems to have the same type of exhibits – the general store, a blacksmith shop, and an early American living space, such as a kitchen or living room.   So with this week’s question of politics in museums, I was wondering what political statement bland and boring exhibits are making. Initially, my thoughts turned to the idea that stale exhibits are a critique on the lack of state funding given to historical endeavors – but then, after the readings, I thought about WHAT collections are displayed and realized what these exhibits are “saying.” Whose history is being portrayed with the lavish living room, the general store, etc.? And even though I assumed that they reflect our collective history, more than often, they reflect MY history as a white, middle-class American. And just like my roommate, I assumed that these type of collections speak to everyone’s experience.

When I was looking for political neutrality in museums, a few interesting points emerged. Museums have been using the same model for so long that the underlying messages are not considered political, even though inherently they are. For example, a museum chock full of ancient goodies usually don’t mention that many of the artifacts were looted by a 19th century rich European man.   Or, if pieces are donated to the museum by a wealthy benefactor (with a prominent acknowledgement to said benefactor), what message does that give to the masses that live at the bottom of the hill?   My quest for an article about museum neutrality continues.

My favorite articles this week came from the Incluseum and Museum Commons. I felt that these articles gave great concrete ideas on how to bridge racial gaps in America’s narrative within the museum paradigm.   While other articles encouraged people to show indignation via social media or by wearing a T-shirt, it seems like those ideas are a tiny and temporary Band-Aid for a gaping wound. The Museum Commons acknowledged the importance of giving people a chance to voice their concerns, but stressed the importance of having a trained discussion leader in charge of the meeting, lest the meeting makes things worse. In turn, the Incluseum actually gave people a voice to many community members, so they could work through the feelings together. Also, the Incluseum has tried to foster a long-term relationship with the community so that when a controversial event happens, they are already seen as a compassionate place in which to discuss, not an entity that is trying to seem relevant and “cash-in” on tragedy. Finally, their programs that show the various ways that Seattle is becoming more inclusive and collaborative between groups is a great way for people to learn about the many positives that are going on.

This type of collaboration is imperative in order to create a museum space that reflects all of our histories

Museums and Ferguson

I believe a history museum or historical site is a perfect location to discuss Ferguson and race issues in the US.   It is the history of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation and institutional racism that has created an African American underclass that is daily reminded that their place is still at the back of the bus.  They are bombarded with media images of the wealth, abundance and success that is unattainable to so many people that are marginalized through discrimination.  Is it any wonder that many young African Americans turn to anti-social behavior when the approved path to success and respect is closed to them?  What affect does it have on young African Americans to know they will be followed in stores, are unwelcome outside of their neighborhoods, will be pulled over for DWB, and are generally suspect?  How can a person not internalize at least some aspects of society’s rejection?

According to Adrianne Russell‘s writing in Cabinet of Curiosities (December 11, 2014),  every museum “should commit to identifying how they can connect to relevant contemporary issues irrespective of collection, focus or mission.”  Writing in Museum Commons (December 16, 2014), Melanie Adams concurs, because for her museums are supposed to be places of learning and therefore should provide educational opportunities for the entire community.  She addresses four points to facilitate successful community engagement: (1) Have inclusive exhibits/programs throughout the year so addressing a current event does not appear reactionary, (2) partner with organizations that have experience and expertise in fostering dialog with diverse groups, (3) communicate with stakeholders and, (4) as much as possible have museum employees at all levels active in the community.  For those who may ask why a museum, whose mission has traditionally been viewed, in a conservative mindset, to collect, preserve and present, should discourse on current events, Deborah F. Schwartz replies in Museum (January 4, 2015) with “history is a vital modality for understanding the dilemmas of contemporary life,” for the past helps us comprehend our now and our tomorrow.

But before museums jump headfirst into issues that may be controversial Rebecca Herz cautions in Museum Questions (December 5, 2014), that museums need to look at their own make up and strive for greater diversity particularly at the senior level and in terms of the museum board’s make up.  If not, communities may perceive so called public engagement as privileged people going through the motions of compassion without really caring.  Moreover, if museums tackle controversial topics they need to have “strategies for facilitating politically loaded conversations” to provide a safe space with conversation that is geared toward learning and empathy rather than one that degenerates to name calling and further misunderstanding.

I think for history museums it is reasonable to host any current event that can be linked to our country’s history.  Therefore, most hot button issues that raise the hackles or cheer the soul, depending on your outlook, are possible topics.  But if a museum does address current issues how does it ensure it isn’t unfairly favoring one point of view over another?  In August 2014 the Missouri History Museum hosted a town hall meeting concerning youth and community in the aftermath of Ferguson.  It was moderated by African American civil rights activist Kevin Powell, whose message is understanding, reconciliation and justice.  By some standards he would be called a “liberal,” so does this mean the MHM should offer a “conservative” speaker the opportunity to talk about the same topics?  If a museum gave space to a group discussing historical discrimination against women and how it relates to disparate pay today, should it have to offer space to a group whose counterpoint is that it was not, and is not discrimination, but divinely assigned gender roles that everybody should embrace?  Should a publically funded science museum have to allow an exhibit on creationism if it has one on evolution?

I asked some conservatively minded friends about the MHM’s town hall meeting and they wanted to know if the Police Officers’ Benevolent Association wanted to use the MHM to present a talk on the difficulties and dangers of policing in an armed society if they would have been given the space to do so.  Others felt that public museums are supposed to be apolitical and any kind of current event dialog is going to engender disputes between extremes taking away from the museums learning agenda.  These were the reasonable comments.   Some, recounted how Michael Brown had robbed a convenience store and assaulted the owner, had a rap sheet as “long as your arm” and either assaulted the police officer or tried to kill him.  I asked, “regardless of the circumstances” doesn’t it seem like law enforcement is institutionalized to “protect and serve” in wealthy or middle class neighborhoods, somewhat indifferent to poor white communities, but focused on “policing” poor African American neighborhoods?  I was told the police go to where the trouble is and if people were obeying the law, they’d have nothing to worry about.  It’s always interesting to note, that poorer white Americans have, on an economic level more in common with poorer black Americans than they have with wealthy white Americans, but seem to be the demographic most stridently opposed to any empathy for African Americans (arguably my own middle class bias or condescension on display here).  Another legacy of slavery perhaps, where even if you were the “lowest of the low” in white society, at least you were not black.  More than one person thought of museums as moribund places where “old stuff” is, and they found it inconceivable that a museum would host something like the MHM had.  They saw an abuse of government funding and assumed the event was designed to inflame passions in another act by race hustlers who refuse to take responsibility for their actions.

In an AP story on January 2, Jim Salter reported that the MHM was collecting artifacts from Ferguson’s public protests after the shooting in order to document history as it occurs.  He reported the MHM Library and Collections director as saying an exhibition is not currently planned, but these are artifacts of a significant political event in our history that should be preserved.   After the AP story appeared several conservative websites, such as Before It’s News and The Black Sphere, misreported this as “creating a museum of Ferguson” and stating “If this guy believes a black guy being a thug, then being killed by the cops is history, then that better be one HUGE museum.”  And you can only imagine the comments on the site in relation to this.

According to ProPublica’s website (October 13, 2014), young black men are twenty-one times more likely to be shot by the police than are young white men.  How many white parents who have “the talk” with their teenage sons are not talking about sex, but how to deal with the police so they are not shot?  As reported in the Boston Globe on November 26 of last year, this rite of passage included one father who took away all his son’s hoodies because he was worried that they invite police attention.   White kids get the benefit of the doubt and black kids get labeled as potential threats to be responded to in a preemptive manner.

Alan Virta, Former Head Archivist for Albertson’s Library

Interview with Alan Virta, former head Archivist from Albertson’s Library and Special Collections

I met with Alan on Wednesday, his day to volunteer for 4 hours at the Albertson’s Library and Special Collections. I found him there, processing a manuscript collection from the now defunct McCall Mine. Although Virta retired from Boise State in 2011, after a nearly 24-year career, he is not ready to completely give up the process of creating beauty from boxes of chaos. Since I completed an internship there this past summer, I understand (and miss) the spell that working with archives and manuscripts can have on a person.

Alan Virta’s initial interest in archiving came from doing research as an undergraduate student at various archives and historical societies. Since he loved spending time in the historical environment and looking at primary documents, he decided to make public history his career. Virta began his own career at the Library of Congress after receiving a MLS. There, his principal role was that of descriptive cataloguer in the manuscript collection. This means that each year, he created a reference source of manuscript collections held by all the libraries at the time, which numbered about 2,000.

After 13 years at the Library of Congress, Virta wanted to expand his experience and applied for head archivist at Boise State University.   He got the job and went to work establishing the collections.   Then, the department consisted of only himself and an aide. The highlight of his career was being able to process the Nell Shipman collection and help teach others about her contribution to film during a time when there were few female filmmakers.   Virta feels that the best perk of archiving is that the archivist always learns something. Archiving is the introvert’s dream- mostly solitary work that requires “little heavy lifting or sweat-inducing work.”   Also, archiving attracts people with compatible personalities. He is careful to stress that archiving is not for everyone, and that people looking at the field need to determine their tolerance for taking boxes and boxes of disorganized papers and turning them into a coherent research tool.

Regarding problems in archiving, the most pressing problem is that of electronic records that have never been on paper in the first place.   Technology changes so fast that it is difficult to know what to do with those cassette tapes that have been donated for study     (and have no transcript or a list of key words).

While watching Alan process the mine collection, I got the sense that he is a practical and sensible person. He is not the type of archivist that keeps every single thing that arrives to the archives in ratty old boxes – only that which he feels will be beneficial for researchers.

Virta is practical with his advice for students hoping to break into public history.   First, his suggestion is to get as varied as one can in internship opportunities.   Also, being able to write grants is a bonus.

Virta is realistic about job prospects for budding archivists in Boise. Unfortunately, jobs in this field are in greater demand in larger states such as New York and California. He suggests looking for jobs with USAjobs to find work within the National Park System or the American Museum Association.   The AMA is a good resource because it will only have jobs with accredited museums.

Virta admits that knowing other people in public history and being able to show off a skill set are imperative to breaking into the local field. Also, applicants need to be open to working part-time, if staying in the Treasure Valley. If an applicant is open to a cross county move, then there are great opportunities out there for those interested in the collections field.

Hush? Interesting article today…

Remember our discussion about “hushed, quiet” museums? Well, you may be interested n this share from Great Britain….it’s today’s post from the Museums Association Journal by Richard Wendorf, Issue 115/02, pg. 14, 2.02.15

About a year ago, I visited my friend Steven Parissien at Compton Verney, where he is the director, to see the exhibition of English landscapes he had curated.

It was a rich, lovely show and, as we wandered from room to room, we became quite animated. At one point, we were approached by someone who had broken away from a tour of the gallery. “Don’t you realise this is a museum?” he asked.

“You’re making so much noise that we can’t hear what our guide is saying.”

We bit our tongues and gave each other a bemused look. Later, however, as I made my way back to my own museum, I entertained several conflicting thoughts.

The first was an appreciation of the irony of the situation, in which two museum directors had to be reminded where they were standing. The second was that it was terrific that these museum-goers were hanging on to a guide’s every word. The third was a sense of mild embarrassment that our excitement had distracted other visitors.

But my final response, which I wish to examine here, was to think more generally about the kind of behaviour we would like to see displayed by visitors. Don’t we, more than anything, want people to become engaged with what they are viewing, and isn’t a vigorous conversation just what the arts should generate?

Why should galleries become hushed temples of visual culture? Isn’t there room for a museum of exuberance, both in the art that is displayed and in our reaction to it?

And now the caveats. I am not condoning any kind of behaviour that is so intrusive that it prevents other visitors from concentrating on the art on display.

We have all had exasperating experiences of this kind, often in large museums, where surging crowds focus on a particular iconic object, cameras in hand and phones at the ready. Some may see this as engagement, while others will see it as disrespectful to the art and distracting to other visitors.

I don’t wish to adjudicate these disputes. However, I do wonder just how our galleries devoted to painting, sculpture, prints and drawings became the hushed and hallowed sepulchres they often appear to be – or aspire to be. Like others, I have argued that libraries, museums and concert halls have become the chapels and cathedrals of an increasingly secularised society.

Libraries and concert halls naturally call for a respectful silence, as readers and listeners engage with texts and performances. But is a hushed atmosphere the healthiest way in which to engage with visual art? And isn’t an exchange between viewers one of the social and cultural productions that artists hope to generate?

I was a trustee of Boston’s Museum of Fine Arts for a decade before moving to the UK, and nothing gave me more pleasure than taking my children through its galleries on Saturday mornings. I always gave them the same assignment: after half an hour or so, tell me which one painting you would like to take home and why.

They loved this exercise and excelled at it, blending emotional responses with increasingly solid aesthetic ones. And they both became excited, just as Steven and I had done, and inevitably caused a raised eyebrow or two. I thought that was fine then – and I still do today.

Nothing gives me more satisfaction in my own museum than hearing animated conversation and laughter well up within the central hallway of the manor house. I sometimes take a look down at our visitors from my perch on the top floor to see what they are responding to – and then I return to my office and, if necessary, shut the door.

Richard Wendorf is the director of the American Museum in Britain, Bath

Slavery and Public History

I thought this was a powerful read that was jam-packed with inspiring reflections on the links between collective memory, place, and the intricacies of presenting difficult history. I must be a glutton for punishment, because I’d love to be involved in the tricky interpretation at the types of sites explored in these essays, especially the national parks.

Blight’s piece on memory and history stood out to me as the root difficulty of interpreting sites or historical moments of shame or conscience. Particularly useful was the equating of history and memory to a contrast between reason and emotion; history stands out in its (theoretically) secular tradition of carefully crafted, painstakingly researched argument, whereas memory functions as the sacred property of an individual or group, blurring together a site and its context where history seeks to tease out the complexities between the two. The polarity of secular and sacred speaks highly to type of ownership and intense reactions people have to the stories discussed in the rest of the book.

Horton’s piece raised an interesting question to me, especially in light of my fond reaction to the previous piece we read on dialogic history. I think dialogue-minded site interpretation is a venerable task, working to inspire action as a result of visiting a site of conscience. Horton’s piece raises the question of what a nationwide dialogue on these difficult subjects might look like, and if it is even possible. Time and time again the book mentioned the overarching uncomfortableness of visitors, both black and white, to antebellum sites that introduced the interpretation of slavery. Much of this was tied to context, such as the taboo discussion of slavery inside a plantation home of a powerful or historically important figure, but the ready attention of visitors to the culture of the enslaved in an area equated with servitude or separate quarters. I think a big barrier to productive national dialogue is the astonishing lack of knowledge of the American public of contentious history, or in some cases very basic history. I was in disbelief at the public history education statistics and ignorance of slavery in curriculums, though perhaps this shouldn’t be surprising considering similar treatment of Japanese incarceration, a much more recent historical blemish. Public historians are tasked then, not to dive right in to these juicy thought-provoking dialogic interpretations, but first with the responsibility of basic education of the bare facts. I have a hard time reconciling the idea that a costumed Williamsburg interpreter can still be barraged with anachronistic ideas and insults that they are trying to educate the public away from with one author’s cautioning against underestimating the public’s ability to discuss complex and sensitive issues in the appropriate context. I guess a main takeaway from this book then, is a survey of the current national landscape for public historians. We are tasked with a complicated goal of confronting difficult history and the equally difficult current issues that are legacies of these histories, in a way that both educates the public on the basic facts and teases out complex and layered interpretations.

I highly enjoyed the piece on Philadelphia’s Independence NHS, perhaps because it was a lesson in how not to act as an NPS interpretive planner: in support of the grand narrative of American exceptionalism, in ignorance of academic history, and without collaboration with experts on the subject or in the local arena. It made me ponder on Kaci’s objections that academic and public historians have the same goals – I think that broadly they do have the same goals, but their missions are made complex considering audience and context. This piece was inspiring in the public’s desire to receive the entire history, blemishes and all, at a place so susceptible to ignoring the painful past to glorify an honored national myth. The international dialogue that the Library of Congress incident sparked was surprising, as I wondered how Mining the Museum received such a contrasting reaction, as both could be viewed as an insulting version history to any of the institution’s workers. Perhaps it is entirely dependent on which set of workers is insulted and what is viewed as politically correct. I loved the combined interactivity and dialogic nature of the feedback comments in the MLK Library’s exhibition, and again the public outpouring of support to confront a difficult history. An interesting idea in these examples is the role of dissonance in aiding historical understanding, and the role of the site to serve as a forum for this confrontation. It seems like something public historians would generally try to avoid, when in fact it seems to signify a sort of point of no return for visitors, who have no choice but to confront their understanding of a difficult history and question the motives behind its past interpretations and its current relevance.

I thought the discussions of Rhode Island’s examples of confronting slavery in cultural institutions could also prove to be instructional to our class. It seems the letter-writing and collaborative campaigns to introduce more critical, informed interpretations of historic sites really are effective, and I was reminded of the possibility of our doing something similar to improve the state of historic interpretation of state history here in Idaho…

Slavery and Public History

“American history cannot be understood without slavery” (Ira Berlin, 2).

In “Coming to terms with Slavery,” Ira Berlin shows how slavery became associated with black or dark skin, and how that dark skin accrued all the negative associations of slavery. From there, justifications were manufactured or found to justify keeping a person as property through racial theories of congenital inferiority ascribed to Africans by elites who had an economic and institutional stake in maintaining a system of human bondage. And as Berlin illustrates, these elites were the ones who created, interpreted and molded a system of government to ensure their privilege and liberty while denying it to others.

Because slavery is an unpleasant story, an accusatory story, a shameful story, it is a difficult historical conversation for both black and white people to have. Most white people refuse to acknowledge the accrued benefits of slavery to the nation’s development. Nor do we wish to see “white privilege” in society, another legacy of slavery that associated color with a dehumanized being, because it is unsettling, an unnerving dissonance inducing state of mind that demands an apology, a plea for forgiveness and atonement. Many Americans want to believe that slavery’s affects ended on a certain date, 1863, or 1964 or 2008 for sure. They believe it is ridiculous, deceptive, even race-hustling and excuse-mongering to insist that slavery casts a shadow over the US today.

Some of us who claim European origins can declaim the injustices, including ones that predate African slavery in the Americas, bitterly attributing the misery of our ancestors to a particular people, or country, that we still hold liable today for that suffering. That “ancient history” is still alive, still influences us, still informs our worldview yet we cannot accept that slavery still has an impact today. We look at our immigrant ancestors, attributing their and subsequent generations success to their (undoubted) hard work without admitting that by not being African they automatically had an advantage over people of color. As David Blight writes in “If You Don’t Tell it Like it Was,” modern nation states have “built or imagined” a past designed to strengthen and promote the nation by emphasizing commonalties through disinheriting inconvenient truths (24-5). He goes on to say that you cannot build a better, more just world, by forgetting the past.

I found it interesting to discover that many African-Americans are more reluctant to talk about slavery than white people. I assumed, as a white person, that it is easier for black people because the wrong was patently done to them. The moral high ground belongs to those who were enslaved and their descendants. Perhaps because slavery is such an intense, emotional, disturbing and painful concept for African-Americans many avoid it. I tried to imagine how I would feel if my grandfather’s grandfather had been owned. Would I be angry at white people or my ancestors or both, feel inferior or maybe superior to others, would I want to disassociate myself from my ancestors embarrassed by their servility, shamed and saddened by their condition? Or would I recognize their tenacious struggle to survive and create vibrant communities where they exercised as much agency as the situation allowed. In all, I found my thoughts complex, conflicted and even incoherent.   I can only imagine that many African-Americans must experience the gamut of emotions and thoughts about slavery.

In “The Last Great Taboo Subject,” John Michael Vlach’s experience with the Library of Congress illustrates the complexity of an exhibit about slavery. Some African-American staff complained that the display seemed to “celebrate” slavery while other’s projected their own disenchantment with their working conditions onto the images of white overseers driving slaves (62). The Library’s decision to cancel the exhibit also attests to the tensions between institutions of state and their problematic relationship to African-Americans. Perhaps the Library’s administration should have informed staff about the exhibit, and its author’s intentions to highlight the resilience of black people in the face of the evils of slavery, so they understood the exhibit’s objectives.

The crack in the Liberty Bell symbolizes the fault line between the American promise and what many people actually encounter. Maybe the crack is eponymous to what you must ingest in order to write “All men are created equal” while concurrently owning people. I learned in high school that Washington freed his slaves after his death. I didn’t hear about his efforts to chase down runaway slaves, which of course as a slave-owner you would do because of their value, it makes sense in a system where people are property. When visiting Washington’s Mount Vernon home I don’t remember hearing much about slavery just as Joanne Melish tells us was the case at My Old Kentucky Home historical site. Guides were told to refer to ‘servants’ and when a courageous guide lobbied to include information on the lives of slaves, his boss told him not to present an entirely negative view, but to say “something ‘positive’ about slavery” (117). For Melish this represents a “containment strategy,” a form of “denial,’ where slavery is ignored and divorced from sites where it was a central factor of history (115).

In “Southern Comfort Levels,” Marie Tyler-McGraw presents the impediments encountered when the history of marginalized groups clashes with the false narrative of the “Mint Julep” historians who rewrote the history of slavery and the Civil War. Likewise, Dwight Pitcaithley talks about the difficulties of interpretation on Civil War battlefields. How do you give slavery its place at these sites when generations of white Southerners, maybe all Americans, have been raised on lies? And why are some so opposed to even listening to a different version of events? Oral historian Anthony Buckley provides this explanation: “to dispel the ‘myths’ of history is to “attack the people who gain comfort and self-worth from these narratives.” As long as the truth about slavery, and its part in making the nation is denied or ignored there will always be generations of Americans who subscribe to the theory that slavery was a peculiar institution of the past, with no effects in the present.

The examples in the text show that if public historians are honest enough, and in many cases courageous enough, to engage the topic of slavery and discrimination in public spaces, that previously ignored people can find a voice for their story. It also makes the history of such places a more accurate depiction of what occurred and how we got to where we are today.