Category: Uncategorized

This week’s readings were simultaneously filled with hope and depression. On the brighter side, there are many more positions available to students of history than I had thought. Far beyond the Professor/Researcher dichotomy, there are dozens of different kinds of work that can be done with a Master’s Degree or better. On the depressing side, according to the BLS search results, these occupations are growing at far below the average 7%/year (with the exception of archivists) and competition for what positions do get created is high. I suppose I’ll take that as motivation to look harder for a good PhD program, though even that degree isn’t a one-way ticket to being employed.

Part of this depression in job growth is due to the overall lack of emphasis on the importance of the Liberal Arts in general and History in particular that our nation has developed in the last fifty years. While it is true that the STEM fields are incredibly important, without a proper understanding of history those programs of study lose a valuable part of their context and a good deal of the most interesting stories surrounding them. It’s a pity that rather than emphasizing education of all sorts, this nation has all but declared fully half the human experience as worthless.

 

Regardless of the realities of the job market for historians in academia, I know that I’m stubborn. I want to get a PhD, I want to teach at the college level, I want to research, and I want to write. But I can definitely appreciate the wealth of “back-up plans” that are available when the inevitable happens and I don’t get the job that I want.

I’m intrigued by the idea of exhibit design. A hundred years ago, I wanted to go to art school, and the idea of combining multiple personal passions into a job is… while still seemingly unrealistic… a tempting one. The folks at West Office have put together some really cool looking spaces.

I’ve learned in the last year that I have absolutely no idea what I’m good at, and what I’m suited to do for the rest of my life. Reading about these different careers keep me hopeful that if it turns out that I totally suck at the whole academia thing, I might have a plan B,C, D… X…Y… oh  look, I’ve depressed myself again.

I just wonder how prepared history majors might be for the outside world when they realize that being a historian isn’t a black and white gig. Once you get deep into the major, as a junior and senior undergrad, it’s difficult to get a glimpse of the outside world again before you graduate. Ages ago, I had a conversation with Shiann about how history majors should be required to take a statistics class. I also wonder now if we should be required to take a business class or two, as it might better prepare those who wish to pursue careers outside of the ivory tower.

 

I have to come to see that historians play an incredibly important role in both the field of history as well as in the world of business. After reading the online source, “Historians as Consultants and Contractors” by the American Historical Association (AHA) on the website www.historians.org, I can imagine the idea that historians can serve our country best as consultants or even contractors in the ever-growing community of business and trade.  Expertise in navigating the bidding process and the requirements of Section 106 are essential for professional contractors.  Few individuals in business such as corporate executives or Chief Executive Officers have knowledge of the field of history, and I believe that those who conduct big business can benefit from people who have spent their lives studying past events and historic figures, and that knowledge can aid individuals in the modern age, such as the business deeds of the tycoons who lived during the Gilded Age. Historians even find their services needed in movies, such as documentaries, dramas, and even programs like edutainment; entertainment media designed for educating the viewers, with the digital age becoming a huge resource for research and project development.

I found Tyler Rudd Putman’s article in http://chronicle.com to be quite entertaining honest and informative about the challenges of finding work post-Master’s.  Putman’s story about how he spent ten years of his life making clothes for museums and other historical institutions while looking for other work showed his resourcefulness and dedication.  Putman is a true academic in that despite his education and experience continues to study and learn. I can appreciate his challenge in finding a “real job” that left him in a situation of falling “back on what [he] knew,” which was sewing historical garments for museums and reeenactors. That passage sent a message about how difficult it is for historians to find work and is an excellent example of how we need to be creative. Putman said that today most specialists in the fields of professional work are mostly “self-taught.” I feel that should be applauded as an inspiration for the next generation of experts in all fields, including history. Putman took to heart what he did for a living while looking for a position in the field of history, and became a tailor, in which he could hand sew a garment to look like it came from a certain historical period. In my opinion, I would say that Putman’s activities as a historical tailor can provide an experience to the public about history, about perseverance and about utilizing the research and education skills of historians.

TAG Historical Research is a company I explored as they do historical research for several clients such as cities and other government entities, historical preservation committees, as well as individuals.  Their background in historic research and work is impressive and their expertise in Section 106 documentation has been very beneficial for their clients.  TAG Research has completed a “National of Register of Historic Places nominations for individual buildings and historic districts.” Their staff is predominantly women and they have been in business since 1993.  One of the interesting services that TAG Research provides is the development and implementation of tours.  Another interesting service is researching and providing the historical information for particular homeowners. With Boise having so many well-preserved homes dating back to the 1800’s, as well as historic commercial buildings such as the Central Fire Station, there is a wealth of history in Boise.

I like the fact that these articles give a historian a better idea of what to look forward to after education. The fact that you can do consulting work in a field that you are looking at getting a job in is a good alternative that I never initially thought about prior to the readings. It seems that when searching for jobs on USAA.jobs website that Park Ranger or interpreter comes up frequently, which I knew it would, I have two friends I know who went that route do to military retirement and veterans preference. They love their job for the National Park Service. These articles also left me thinking what career or position I want after school? I thought Archival work or eve Park Ranger but know I don’t really know? I am happy I have more options then I initially thought.

I think that Historians can gain a lot of experience by doing consulting and contracting work. The experience gained can help a historian’s CV and get them more of a network to where when the time comes to apply for a job they have lots of letters of recommendation to help get that job. All the history that is in the South getting a consulting job, whether long term or short term, is very doable from what I saw in Charleston during their major festival times. “Each client brings new questions and opportunities to explore different subjects and resources. While some assignments may be short term, such as preparing a short history for an organization’s or town’s centennial celebration, others may involve extensive research and travel, and perhaps even testifying as an expert witness.”[1]  This would open numerous doors in the History career field and get their feet wet in something they wanted to do as permeant work.

The “Crafting the New Historian” article showed that you can somehow find a different route into the history field then you initially thought while in school. I thought that there were only certain jobs in History and you had to certain things in education and internships just to get them. This article showed alternative ways to get involved and network in the field by using skills not normally attributed to the study of history. “But when my temporary Archeological position ended and no permeant work materialized in the cultural heritage field, I fell back on what I knew. I had taught myself to sew historical costumes as a hobby over the past decade, and soon I was taking orders for clothing from museums, historical interpreters, and living historians (re-enactors).”[2] This ended up helping the author to pursue their doctorate and still do the costume business as well.

The USAA Jobs website was helpful in that they have changed it since I last looked at it for the better. For a disabled vet with a 30% or higher disability rating it helps me fill out the paperwork for veteran’s preference job that they did not have on it before. This helps because I get a higher payed position with less a hassle in less time on the job.  The site is also easier to navigate finding an archival and historian positons was way easier than a couple of years ago, for a person who is willing to relocate there are quite a bit of options out there for both fields.

 

[1] Phillip I. Cantelon, and Christopher S. Clark. “Historians as Consultants and Contractors.” American Historical Association.

[2] Tyler Rudd Putnam. “Crafting a New Historian.” The Chronical of Higher Education.

Wow!…. Just wow! After reading the articles I had a completely different idea in my head of where the conversation would go about them. After reading some of the responses I was shocked to see that it turned to the prejudice (and yes as what I saw I believe was judgement of people that no one of us knows personally i said prejudice…) idea that these “older white males” were looking for a time when they were in charge. As a historian, I thought of the idea of reenacting as a way to keep history while also escaping one’s own grinding life as something both harmless and possibly exiting. I find it ridiculous that the practice happens to be more popular with a certain race, age range, and gender inherently makes it exclusionary, especially when both articles showed more inclusion on the part of the reenactors by far. I found the most important part of the article to be the idea that,”But what all institutions focused on the Civil War (era) all have in common is a belief that history matters… And in doing so, they believe that our lives and those of our communities are greatly enriched.”(“Why Doesn’t Anyone Think It’s Cool to Dress Up Like a Confederate Soldier Anymore?”) History is full of unfortunate things like racism, slavery, genocide, and general atrocities but that does not mean that people reenact certain times because they believe that these things are right but because they want to escape their own existence, which too has all of the aforementioned terrible things. Nor should it mean that we simply choose to forget the past. This video shows how even a single claim that a Civil War reenactment by Middle schoolers could be canceled by a single claim of racism or sexism. ( http://www.kiro7.com/news/local/parents-complain-schools-civil-war-reenactment-racist-sexist/266085812 )Are their racists and misogynists among reenactors? Probably, but that is in line with the fact that there are racists in the world today.

With the Wikipedia articles I felt quite different. It was made clear that people’s ideas were being suppressed because of their views, ideas or gender. Therefore I think that Wikipedia needs to reevaluate their process and goals. (Of course I do not really care for Wikipedia anyway nor ever have due to the idea that I have known people that think they know a lot more than what they do because someone told them so…)The only other thing I can say is somewhat of a repeat of what I stated above which is, the world was not and is not a perfect place. In opening Pandora’s Box of equality there is always a blow back of sorts from those that were/ are privileged.“It is ironic,” he said, “because I like these things — freedom, openness, egalitarian ideas — but I think to some extent they are compounding and hiding problems you might find in the real world.”(Define Gender Gap? Look Up Wikipedia’s Contributor List) Lastly I would say that I understand the idea that Mrs. Gardner said it best in the idea that all people should be encouraged to put their voice forward when she said, “Gender is a huge hot-button issue for lots of people who feel strongly about it,” she said. “I am not interested in triggering those strong feelings.”(Define Gender Gap? Look Up Wikipedia’s Contributor List)

The webpages that I read suggested a few good points about how history should be getting preserved, and how it should be taught to the public. The first of the web pages to discuss would be Kowalczyk’s “Embedded wth the reenactors,” in which the author Nick Kowalczyk, describes the details of the reenactment of the French and Indian War’s battle from July 6, 1759. Kowalczyk, a professor at Ithaca College and a journalist, provides us with a tremendously insightful view of the reenactment held 250 years later in Fort Niagara State Park. The reenactment itself is “the largest event of its kind in the world.” (Kowalcyzk, Embedded with the reenactors).  His description of the people involved and the detail and planning that goes into such an event is very interesting.  Nick writes, “its not every 4th of July you get to be around nearly 3,000 people inhabiting an amalgam of time, especially in a place as lovely as Fort Niagara State Park.” Kowalczyk then shifts the discussion from reenacting famous battles to discussing the Sovereignty Day of Iraq, and the state of our government as President Obama worked to stabilize the American economy and work toward nationwide affordable health insurance.  One of the participants summed up the significance of the Siege of Fort Niagara from the French and Indian War by saying, “This battle here is the reason today we ain’t speaking French.”

Ann Little’s “The limited (and queer?), vision of American historical reenacting” examines much of the substance of Kowalczyk’s piece and questions the reenactors’ desire to reenact the battles of the North American past. Little describes Kowalczyk’s article as “noteworthy” primarily due to the fact that “they’re not Civil War reenactors, they’re reenactors of the Seven Years’ War (1756-63) . . .” Little also questions why people would want to reenact wars from centuries ago when there are currently wars going on in present day.  Little describes in her own words, “the reenactors seem a little strange, even almost ‘queer’ for their love of reliving the past and their feelings of always being out of time in the present.” Little is trying to determine whether it is normal or sane to relive the lives and times of the people and events that have played out in the form of war and despair.  She also discusses the fact that most reenactors are middle aged, white guys and questions this heavy male-gender activity.  She has apparently attended many reenactments from civil war to Boston and is impressed with the amount of research and expertise that the reenactors have accumulated.

Kevin M. Levin’s web page in the Atlantic further bridges more information on how reenactors of the battles of American history, and public engagement in history is linked. Levin discusses how the Sons of Confederate Veterans, which marches around and yells phrases like, “Kill Yankees,” may be alienating many people from younger generations. Levine states the Sons of Confederate Veterans may have a “preferred view of history flies in the face of the last 40 years of serious scholarship . . .”  (Levine, Why Doesn’t Anyone Think it’s Cool to Dress Up Like a Confederate Soldier Anymore?)

Noam Cohen also addressed gender in his article “Define Gender Gap? Look Up Wikipedia’s Contributor List” web article on the New York Times. Cohen says, “less than 15 percent of its hundreds of thousands of contributors are women.” It is very important for Wikipedia to have more female contributors to effect balance and perspective.

Timothy Messer-Kruse’s article, “The ‘Undue Weight’ of Truth” on Wikipedia details his in-depth expertise on the Haymarket Riot and Trial of 1886, in particular. Messer-Kruse discusses the “undue weight” policy, which states that “articles should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views.” Even though his information is correct, it is the “minority” view” as Wikipedia goes along with the views of the majority.  In response to Messer-Kruse’s criticism of Wikipedia, Famiglietti actually argues against Messer-Kruse’s contention that “Wikipedia [has a] lack of respect for scholars,” and contends that Wikipedia is, instead, “holds a deep respect for a collaborative scholarly process . . . “.  Famiglietti believes that such collaboration is more “capable of producing ‘truth’ than any individual scholar.”  Wikipedia is also guarding against vandals or incorrect editing.

 

By the time I finished reading Kowalczyk’s “Embedded with Reenactors,” I was fired up and ready to rant about it. And then, I found that Historiann did it for me. And, in a way, so did The Atlantic. As I began, Kowalczyk’s article ignited a couple of important questions for me: Is there a particular reason why the majority of these reenactors are middle-aged white dudes? Also, does the popularity of reenactment rise and fall based on the political and social realities of present time?

Don’t even get me started on the masculinity angle of these articles. You’ll get a blog post in the form of a dissertation.

Historiann’s article (by far my favorite piece this week) said it best: “Romanticizing the past, like reenacting, is a White thing.” And I think this is where I get hung up most on the idea of it all. Going back and romanticizing a time in which everything sucked for everyone but you is not something I could ever get behind. How many Civil War reenactors go out to the battlefield fired up to pretend to fight to free the slaves? (Okay, yes, I know, how many actually did in 1862, either…) I think that’s why I love Hamilton, the musical – sorry, Joe – it’s thoughtful reenactment: perhaps not accurate, but it gets as close to romanticization as possible, while using a cast made up of persons of color to highlight exactly why romanticizing history is problematic.

The Atlantic’s “Why doesn’t anyone think it’s cool to dress up like a Confederate soldier anymore?” touched on my question about addressing the present a little bit. In order to allow reenactments to survive into later generations, the reasons for it have to stay relevant. The obsession with the Civil War in the 1960s wasn’t just because it was 100 years – it was because the country was once again divided. In a different Atlantic article linked from the first, the same author, Kevin Levin, talks about how many bastions of southern (cough, white) pride once again felt threatened by the state of racial affairs in the United States, in the 60s. To celebrate the Civil War was to celebrate a heroic lost cause, and to perhaps even prepare to finish the job for good this time. The next generation of, um, prideful celebrants of heritage, are a little more bold in their remembrances than just wearing old military costumes and playing pretend. They are, terrifyingly, playing the game for real. I would be interested to know if any of them have fathers or grandfathers who are reenactors.

This also falls to the fact that Confederate memorials are being taken down, public places are being renamed, and “heroes” are remembered for what/who they really were. The reality is that social views are changing, and the volume of mainstream dialogue about how harmful celebrating things like, you know, racist murderers, is not so cool, is getting louder.

As for the Wikipedia gender gap… pffft.. shocker, there. People tell us that you can use Wiki to get a leg up on your research, as long as you scroll down to the bottom and look at/use the sources. I’ve spent months researching one particular person and just the other day decided to take a look at what wikipedia has to say about her: paragraphs of narrative with no sources. Cool. So how to professionals get in there, with the hope of presenting real, quality research to the public, and are denied? Sigh. This is why I don’t even take a glance: not just to avoid finding inaccurate information, but to also avoid going into a blind rage at the way that the site itself is run.

This was a long one. My bad.

I think historical re-enactment serves a purpose to attract crowds to historical places to put them, if only for a few moments, into the era they are learning and exploring. I remember watching a civil war union soldier demonstrate the different positions and instructions in rank and file movements at Fort Pulaski and other civil war forts around the south. Castile de San Marcos did a Spanish canon firing demonstration at the Castile every hour all in Spanish. These presentations were done by Park Service Interpretive Rangers, which had knowledge and history of the areas. Do I think that regular people who decide to do re-enactments are not qualified to do them? No. I think some of them really believe that it gives them a purpose in life and they take it to the next level by actually living the life style as authentically as possible. Re-enactment to me is no different than people who go to comic con dressing up to be their favorite super hero. I do think there is some differences in dressing up and re-enacting a historical event over a dressing up and being a super hero. But in the end, you are dressing up and pretending to be something you’re not, which allows people to escape their boring day jobs and do something they feel passionate about. Nick Kowalczyk article about being embedded with re-enactors says it best: “Like drag shows, re-enactments hinge on sartorial panache. If a man’s otherwise period-correct outfit includes modern-day buttons or eyeglasses, it might as well have come from K-mart.”[1] I feel that re-enactment is a worthy sub culture that does serve a purpose in some regards as long as it is historically correct.

The Historiann article did bring up good points on Nick’s article in regards to if as a United States citizen, you want to get the full idea of battle and war why not join in the battles in Iraq and Afghanistan? This article also brings a good point on race that white people seem to want to relive the past more than other races. “Perhaps this is what makes me uncomfortable about reenactors—their interest in reenacting violent events (warfare, principally) which from the first Anglo-Indian wars of the seventeenth century through our modern wars, were either explicitly racialized wars (most Anglo-Indian wars, he Mexican War, and the wars waged by the Frontier Army against Native Americans) or wars that mobilized ethnic difference and white racism in the war effort (as in World War II and the war with Japan, the Vietnam War, and Iraq and Afghanistan).” [2] I have never thought about this perspective before but it does make sense when it comes to reenactments that it is mostly a white thing.

The Wikipedia articles made me think and ponder why women would be more hesitant to contribute to an online forum their opinions? I know and have been influenced, even had my views changed, by many talented and intelligent women in my life. Then I thought back to the conversations we all have had in this class and things I have read and heard on National Public Radio (NPR). Women get harassed online and in society by men who for reason or another can’t allow women to share their opinions and knowledge through different online resources. To see first-hand how women are treated in other countries I have been to, then to come home and see that through the internet and social media this is happening in the United States angers me.

[1] Kowalczyk, Nick. “Embedded with the reenactors.” Salon. Sunday, Jan. 8, 2012.

[2] “The Limited (and queer?) vision of American historical reenacting.” Historiann. January 9, 2012.

I began this blog by thinking of reenactors as people unable to cope with modern-day realities. Then I have an “aha!” moment where I came to see reenactors in the context of those who believe that old buildings are better and more important than new buildings. For me, saving old buildings of historical significance makes sense, but not reenacting. Why? I’m dodging the answer for lack of space, but it is worth exploring.

Reenactors seem to long for a world where their white-male privilege remains intact and where they can equate themselves to people they believe are tougher and untainted by modernity. Kowalczyk and Historiann reinforce this idea when they say reenacting is, “more widespread among white men…Romanticizing the past is a White thing.” While Kowalczyk’s Old Hickory and Captain Titus may be the most extreme examples, they are separated from most reenactors only by degrees.  In the few examples given of women participating, their roles seem to reinforce this image of white-male dominance.

Dominant white-males appear to be central to Levin’s article about the Sons of Confederate Veterans. The article also highlights the ambivalence to these re-enactments as fewer reenactors and spectators seem to indicate a backlash against this view of history. Levin notes this may be true, if for no other reason than, “What we do know is that the SCV has done everything in its power over the past few years to alienate reasonable people.” It seems clear that these folks want a whitewashed history so as to maintain their sense of superiority and purity. Dillon Ruth is a reflection of their problem.

I was both disturbed and encouraged by the efforts to make Wikipedia more accurate. The efforts to curate articles were encouraging, but the weighting of articles seems to slow down updating articles with the latest scholarship, as noted in Messer-Kruse’s piece. However, I do feel that Famiglietti made a good case for the current system, which constantly reviews ways to improve. The lack of diversity among content and content-authors is depressing. In this community, I thought there would be more acceptance of women and female-centered content. It would be interesting to know, is this a gender issue or is minority-related content and minority generate content also under-represented? If yes, all of us have work to do.