A Difficult Topic to Be Sure

I am rather fortunate, in that aside from a few trips back east and to the south, I have never been forced to confront slavery head on. Academically I’ve considered it, particularly when studying the Civil War and the rise of its romanticism in the south. I’ve read through databases of shipping manifests from Trans-Atlantic slaving companies and looked at plantation agriculture from an environmental perspective. However, living in the west for my entire life, I’ve been rather sheltered from the ever-present knowledge that this country that so loves its freedoms (or claims to, anyway) was built on the backs of those who had every freedom stripped from them. This series of essays was eye-opening to me, as I had never had to consider what difficulties interpretive sites in formerly slave-holding areas would have to confront in telling the story not just of our soldiers or presidents but of the people they owned as well.

This made me rethink the last trip I took, which was not to a place where slavery was legal for a time, but to the battlefield at Little Bighorn. It was quite a few years ago, but I seem to remember that it had surprisingly little information on Native Americans for a site commemorating a cavalry unit that was ambushed by them. I have a more difficult time remembering the Civil War sites I visited (that trip was nearly 15 years ago), but I don’t recall seeing much on slavery at any of them, either in the North or the South. I certainly have a new appreciation for the difficulty the National Park Service has in attempting to present a factual and uncontroversial site. Unfortunately, it is clear from these essays that some controversy is going to be unavoidable, whether you choose to only present the positive or appealing history of a place, or attempt to include all of it, and I agree that we should be working toward a more inclusive and accurate depiction of our own history.

Irony of freedom

I must say that one of the most intriguing ideals of this book is the irony of a country “pining for freedom” yet so quick to take it from those they can. Slavery is still such an issue today because, well because it really always was. Personally I do not encourage anyone to live a life filled with guilt and regret about something that they themselves did not take part in, but… I do feel it is important to see why African-Americans see the deck as always stacked against them. It kind of always was. Having been to multiple places throughout my life where racism is not only prevalent but unfortunately it winds up really being the only thing to do for many people on a Saturday night,  I find the shock of Caucasians that African-Americans are still not “over it” appalling. The largest problem that I see is that we, as historians, are constantly  trying to battle against a group that has a firmly held belief with logic. To me this is no different than trying to argue with a fundamentalist Christian that God doesn’t exist. Although I agree with the Ira Berlin completely when he states, “All of which is to say that what is needed are not only new debates about slavery and race but also a new education— a short course in the historical meaning of chattel bondage and its many legacies.”(5) The problem I see is that education does not always change people’s minds.

Although Berlin is clearly an expert on the subject of slavery, I was disappointed that his description of slavery as, “the story of the power of liberty, of a people victimized and brutalized,” seems to just outright stop at the end of the Civil War until the last paragraph of the essay. (13th,14th and 15th amendments)In may ways, sharecropping was just as brutal and victimizing as slavery was. Sure African-Americans were now “free” but really what does that mean if many are in no better condition than they were before? This too, I believe, adds to the “deck is stacked against us” attitude that one can see in many African-Americans even today. Even when their freedom was realized, the face of oppression simply changed. This being said, I found at least some solace in the essay by James Oliver Horton. He addressed the idea that slavery had a long lasting reputation (at minimum) well into the 20th century( by looking at Bill Clinton and J.F.K.) and by so doing explains in some ways why it is still a conversation. The only thing that I can add to this is the idea that slavery and its legacy reached well into the 20th century and the idea that we as a nation should just forget about it makes me cringe…

slavery

Slavery and Public History

The book Slavery and Public History, describes the events and individuals involved in slavery, and how these events transpire and helps how we, as historians, interpret today. The history begins with how African slaves were used as a cheap labor force to help grow cash crops such as sugar, tobacco, and cotton.  Kidnapped Africans were mistreated poorly for the benefit of the white man’s wallet. In order to decipher these racist patterns, editors James and Lois Horton categorize the slaves into different human generations to discuss how their fates as indentured servants and freedmen came to be: Charter, Plantation, Revolution, Migration, and Freedom. These stages of African American status in society detailed their rise from indentured servitude upon arriving in the colonies, to the rebellions and abolitionist causes after the American Revolution, and eventual free status after the defeat of the Confederates in the Civil War. Poetry about the tragedies of slavery is one way for people today to understand how slavery caused such miserable suffering to African Americans and their future descendants, such as the poem Middle Passage written by the poet Robert Hayden.  His poem describes how African Americans were ripped from their native homeland, put in chains, sailed across a perilous sea by European traders, and then forced to work on plantations for the rest of their lives.  The conditions from their cruel abduction to the hard labor of plantation work was under horrible conditions.  If someone got sick on the journey to America and died, their bodies were simply thrown overboard.  It is something in history that will never be forgotten as it was both the reason for Atlantic colonial stability with free labor and unimaginable human cruelty to African Americans.

Even before the end of the Revolutionary War, the issue of slaves being free men was being considered the American Congress.  American Quakers even attempted to put to a vote to ban their members who were current owners of indentured servants during the American Revolution, and many of the British, along with the Quakers, began putting together a society that would become the first in abolitionism and that was the beginning of the abolitionist movement that would take years and thousands of committed people and a civil war to realize success.  Slavery provided both political and philosophical topics to the discussion of race relations, even after the American Civil War. However, it was rarely discussed in schools throughout the United States, certainly not taught in school textbooks. In the south, it was a taboo subject.  Novels such as Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin brought to light the true nature of the institution of slavery and exposed its true ugly nature, detailing how awful the slaves in the south were mistreated. Along with public education, private organizations have also put together information now being used by schools today that could help in educating young people and amend bridges between blacks and whites amongst many years of hostilities.

I have read many intriguing facts in Slavery and Public Life, but the life of John Brown was the most influential about learning of the slave trade in America. John Brown was known for being a pro-slaver, having sailed slave voyages, and was put on trial by his Quaker brother for illegally giving arms to slave traders in American ports. The Rhode Island Historical Society eventually claimed ownership of the Brown House in the 1940s, in order to detail one of America’s patriot families, despite their checkered past in abolitionism and slave trading.

Slavery and Public History

Slavery has been a questionable history when it is brought up in the public spectrum do to its uncomfortable and conflicting history. When I say conflicting it’s due to the individual you are talking to. If a you talk to most white southerners, as I have, while livening in the south, you get conflicting answers to the race question. John Vlach states “when discussing the history of racial slavery in the United States can be traced, suggests James W. Loewen, to the inadequate textbooks that they are compelled to read while in High School.”[1] I agree that the true reason we still have racial inequalities in the nation is due to the inaccurate history. In order to find a common ground of tolerance education is needed through the eyes of the oppressed in order for some kind of change to happen. All I see happening from the past during the civil rights movement to today is young white and black youths have a common misconception of the past that is conflicting the future. “When students are fitted with intellectual blinders, they are likely to become citizen’s incapable of understanding why we remain a divided nation.”[2]

The constant struggle to try adapt to the struggle race causes issues. As a white male, I cannot begin to assume or perceive how that life was even as a descendant of Irish immigrants. In order to become a more unified country we as all people need to find common ground and respect the pasts of oppressed nationalities. The constant adaptation of racial segregating laws or ideals will be the down fall of our union.

[1] James Oliver Horton, and Lois E. Horton, eds. Slavery and public history: The tough stuff of American memory. New Press, The, 2006.Pg. 57.

 

[2] James Oliver Horton, and Lois E. Horton, eds. Slavery and public history: The tough stuff of American memory. New Press, The, 2006.Pg. 57.

Uncomfortable National Dialogue Is Healthy!

Uncomfortable national dialogue is so important. I think bringing up history that is hard to talk about is one of the most important jobs a historian can have. Our academic training puts us in a great position to be able to talk about issues that are swept under the rug or skirted around in general. Slavery is one of these hot button issues that in my opinion, shouldn’t be a hot button issue.

Through all of these essays in Slavery and Public History a general theme kept popping up in my head. This theme was that it is okay to critique America and admit that our country has committed atrocious acts of violence. By admitting this through public conversations, museums and exhibits, classroom settings in college and throughout k-12 education. As John Hope Franklin said, “we should never forget slavery. We should talk about it every morning and every day of the year to remind this country that there’s an enormous gap between its practices and its professions.” (pg. 37)

As long as public history displays and reenactments are done in a matter that is accepted and approved by the people it is about, I think painful reenactments can be useful. Public history efforts that are meant for audiences to be made uncomfortable can start conversations and affect people on a personal level. Exhibits, displays, and reenactments shouldn’t exist just for shock value exclusively. They should exist to change perceptions, popular belief, and deep-seeded personal prejudices. By displaying or teaching about the painful truth in historical homes and adding historical black figures to the history of places and objects like the Liberty Bell and the first White House, all spark important conversations about race relations in America and bring forth an inclusive historical narrative. This inclusive historical narrative is the most important factor lacking in American culture. Historians shouldn’t just focus on making sure that people know who owned slaves and where they slept at night, but we should also be educating people on black excellence and the ways that they shaped America in general. Black history shouldn’t be contained to a month, it should be deeply ingrained in every aspect of American history.

This seems timely…

I am sure it is no accident that we are reading Slavery and Public History at the beginning of Black History Month. It has always perplexed me as to why the society we live in views rights and recognition as a zero sum game. The Nash article, describing the fight between local Park Service people, and historians highlights this point. It also, again not surprisingly, addresses some of the same issues highlighted in Letting Go? specifically the role of museums (but in this case, it’s a historic site) and whether it should be a shrine to past events, or whether it should be a forum to discuss those past events, and how they effect the present.

I had read “Southern Comfort Levels” previous to this, and it made me as mad then, as it did this time around. I understand the reasons for not punitively punishing the South after the war, but it is my humble opinion that it was the wrong decision. And things like “Monument Street” in Richmond is evidence of this point. No such monuments exist in London for Guido Fawkes, instead he is burnt in effigy every year. There are no statues of Cornwallis, Burgyone, or Benedict Arnold in New York City (which remained firmly in the British camp through the Revolution). Because they lost. For me it’s too close to those fascist $&@#%€£ who claim that everything is the Jews’ fault, or immigrants are a problem, or any of those other things that they say. These people/ideas need to be discussed, but in a way that shows them as they really are, not for what they pretend to be. (And I expect my own ideas and such to be put under the same scrutiny.)

Which brings me back to Black History Month, and the “zero sum game” theory. As historians we need to be willing to wade into these troublesome issues. But as Joanne Melish’s article about the John Brown house pointed out, we need to be able to do it expecting nuance and a more complex narrative.

BoiseSpeaks Inspired by StoryCorps Brought to you by the Public Library

I saw this advertised on the public library’s facebook page for anyone who is interested in participating.

Here is the description and link:

The Library! at Collister invites you to bring a friend or family member to interview you, or be interviewed by a library staff member about a story from your life. Interviews are recorded on the Storycorps app and may be shared on the storycorps.me website. All published stories are archived in the American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress. A staff member will sit in to make sure the recording runs smoothly. Enjoy this opportunity to document your experiences for future generations! What is your story?

http://www.boisepubliclibrary.org/classes-events/online-calendar/?trumbaEmbed=view%3Devent%26eventid%3D121108225

 

Letting Go? second half

In part two of Letting Go?, I learned important details about the African Americans of the U.S.A, and how they struggled with the challenges faced against racism. One example is the destruction of a prominent community known as Black Bottom, which was redeveloped during the 1950’s and 1960’s by white supremacists, whom did it all for ‘expansion’ of colleges, though I am sure there would have been another way to increase campus size of those universities. It is possible it was more likely college growth was just another excuse to enforce the separation of Caucasians and African Americans. I thought it was horrible that people, no matter their race, were treated with such disrespect, just for segregation to keep pushing both races farther apart. The Black Bottomers sought to insure that the story of their lives being destroyed before they were able to make a new life away from the tragedy. One way that I understood the Black Bottomers promoted awareness of what happened to their community was through theatrical production, most notably Black Bottom Sketches and Taking a Stand. These thought-provoking performances gave a brief description of what happened to the neighborhood of Black Bottom, and the former residents of Black Bottom acquired a sense of honor and pride for detailing their stories to future generations.

Besides African American life, the stories of Americans are recorded as well, such as the example of the company of StoryCorps. Storycorps is a company dedicated to the preservation of cultural history amongst varied Americans in the United States. Storycorps is depicted as a means for common Americans to tell their stories to the public; people who are not in the media such as radio show hosts or television reporters, just regular people who have their lives outside of the news. The main purpose of Storycorps would be to connect all people and events through historical content. This type of first person historical documentation is especially significant in capturing ordinary American life.

Another aspect of part two was Fred Wilson’s study in “Mining the Museum.” During his discussion with two history professionals, Wilson did an exemplary job of describing his work on studies of history and ethnography. For example, in Wilson’s own words, his main objective in archival study is to take notice of every detail, such as discussing with individual people and examining every artifact in museums. Basically, Wilson gathers as much knowledge he can by communication and study at museums, both within the U.S.A. and internationally, and puts it all into “research.” Wilson is questioned on what is left to do, and draws on the comparison of the checks and balances system of our government to say that there is an ongoing research, and there is always more to be explored.

 

Learning to Let Go

I adore StoryCorps and was thrilled to see that it was included in this book, though I did have to really sit down and think about its relevancy in this particular regard.  I spent my own weekend elbows-deep in diaries, letters, and really personal primary sources that would not exist if not for one person choosing to put their thoughts to paper and contribute to the historical narrative. Of course, for most of these people, contributing to history wasn’t their primary goal… but I couldn’t be more grateful for it today. I see StoryCorps and other user-generated historical content in the same way. One hundred, two hundred years from now, historians will, I think, feel the same way about programs like these that I feel about my sources right now. (That is, if our profession still exists…) But I think it’s here where we also have to heavily rely on trained historians, who can synthesize the material: the “facts” with the individual stories, and really look at the way that stories can be edited to tell a story, for better or (usually) for worse.

I too had a difficult time picking out the source of contention between art and history. I think if one is worried about losing relevancy, or keeping attendance numbers high, then art could be the very first place to look for new perspectives and to bring a new, more broad audience into the room. I mean, this is why we have art historians, right? Stories can be told in a multitude of ways, and all throughout history we have primary sources from artists who chose to make a statement about their own world, their own era, their own perspective…

By PICASSO, la exposición del Reina-Prado. Guernica is in the collection of Museo Reina Sofia, Madrid.Source page: http://www.picassotradicionyvanguardia.com/08R.php (archive.org)
By PICASSO, la exposición del Reina-Prado. Guernica is in the collection of Museo Reina Sofia, Madrid.Source page: http://www.picassotradicionyvanguardia.com/08R.php (archive.org)

 

I struggle a little more with contemporary artists’ work being used to seriously interpret the past, but I also know that I have more to learn about artists such as reenactors, and how they bring their knowledge into play. Good thing there’s a real pro in the room to help me understand 🙂

It appears museums will do anything to improve their numbers.

Is the primary mission of history museums providing visitors with the opportunity to learn or keeping the doors open? If learning history is the goal, I think few of the museums included here are achieving it.  If getting attendance, membership, and donations up is the goal, there is almost no evidence indicating success.

Letting Go?  provides interesting ideas in how to move museums from being presenters of content to facilitators of learning.  Public Curation, finally provides an approach to validate whether or not new approaches accomplish the learning incumbent on all history museums. The authors ask the right questions and suggest these issues be fully researched.

Embracing the Unexpected shows the art-history dialectic taken in a more useful direction, not a shared-authority alliance as much as it is a more tightly-bound collaboration between artists and historians. The American Philosophical Society approach shows what can occur when there is meaningful conversation between, and useful boundaries set, for both participants.

Fred Wilson’s Mining the Museum highlights the failure of the resident historians at the Maryland Historical Society. By juxtaposing various pieces found at the museum and utilizing various museum tropes, visitors confronted an uncomfortable reality regarding slavery and the relevance of that reality, today.  Why didn’t the museum curator think of a way to accomplish this?

The performance art pieces capturing the life and community of The Black Bottom and the individual stories of working class people captured by Story Corp and described in Listening Intently show where great ideas can take you. The materials collected in each effort may be invaluable to the historian, but both fall short in their own way. Chaotic pieces of performance art and personal stories with no context are of little use to historians.

Where would "Hamilton" fit in art versus history debate?
Where does “Hamilton” fit in art as history debate?

Where each succeed is in their ability to show the historian the “power of seeing history as stories.”[1]

For brevity’s sake The Fever Dream of the Amateur Historian, Sanford and Sun, and London Travelogue are lumped together as failures.  The The Fever Dream of the Amateur Historian wasn’t even a good idea and shows what can happen when an artist is given too much latitude. I have no idea why Sanford and Sun was included in this book and London Travelogue may be a wonderfully novel idea, but it would be one place I would avoid in London. There is no historical context to what I see and no one to provide it. Without context what is to be learned?

 

[1]Bill Adair, Benjamin Filene, and Laura Koloski, eds. Letting Go?: Sharing Historical Authority in a User-Generated World. Left Coast Press, 2011. Pg. 189