Project Update #4

After the previous post, Zac and I met with the panel to discuss the progress we had made regarding the Lone Sailor project.  At that point, as previously discussed we had created two mock panels for the Lone Sailor project which included an introductory panel as well as a panel on graduation from the Naval Academy. The two representatives that met with us and Dr Gannon were interested in what Zac and I had put together. They discussed with us that they had hired a graphic artist; but were concerned that their committee was putting too much effort into appearance as opposed to substance. They liked the mock panels that we had come with and liked the font that we had decided to use. They made clear that they would definitely like to use our panels as one of several options that they would be choosing from for their final result. They then asked if we would like to come up with more examples of panels from the remainder of the information. There is a new PowerPoint that they are supposed to be sending us with more updated information.

I also took the time to discuss with them what information I found regarding sound technology for their project. The team was interested in having a component for the Lone Sailor project that provided audio information that can be accessed by pressing a button. Most of the information I researched encouraged this technology for indoor exhibits and I could not find any examples on this being used outdoors due to the technology that would have to be present outdoors. What I did give them was information on a low cost system currently being used in an indoor low budget museum in the UK. I was able to tell them how to install and how to purchase these materials as well as tell them what it might cost. Dr. Gannon suggested they look into including audio information or a digital component that can be accessed with a QR code. We are still not entirely sure where they stand on using audio technology with their exhibit and that will be a major factor in determining how much text we should be including on our panels.

This week we will be having another meeting with Dr Gannon to discuss what new information she has received from the panel. Their graphic artist has returned some material to them and they are concerned with what it looks like and are concerned that are several problems with what they received. Zac, Dr Gannon and I are going to look at that today and discuss what we think needs to be altered and what errors and issues we find as far as what was received from their graphic designer.

When we met with the panel they assured us they would be in touch with Zac and I personally (taking our emails) to provide us with updated information. I have yet to receive anything other than what we are going to be discussing with Dr Gannon today.

Zac and I also plan to create a digital component (e.g. timeline) with the information that we have been given. 

Digital History

In The Pasts and Futures of Digital History written by Edward Ayers (1999), he states that history more so than most other academic subjects is seen as something that is old and far away from a world of technological innovation.  In Computing and the Historical Imagination written by William Thomas, III in 2004, he mentions how historians as early as the 1960s and 70s were looking into a future with digital tools. Despite the fact that that notion did have its critics (as it does today) the new burgeoning field of social history was looking more and more into how to utilize these tools for the abundance of statistics they were using as part of their work. Thomas states “political historians examined the influences at play in voting, not just the rhetoric of a few leaders; social historians found patterns to describe the world of average people; and economic historians developed models to account for multiple variables of causation.”  When Ayers was writing his article in 1999, he was optimistic of a world where digital tools would be integrated into looking at and creating archives, displays and altering educational techniques. Of course, a lot has changed since 1999. The JAH Interchange from 2009 describes digital history as an “approach to examining and representing the past that works with the new communication technologies…an open arena of scholarly productions and communication, encompassing the development of new course materials and scholarly date collections….framed by the hyper -textual power of these technologies to make, define, query and annotate associations in the human record of the past.”

In Ayers’ Valley of the Shadow Project, he was able to exemplify ways in which digital tools would be an effective future for historians. “The general public understood it as a set of Civil War letters, records and other accounts. Students and teachers praised it for opening up the past to them and allowing them to ‘be their own historian.’” While digital projects like Ayers opened up new opportunities for learning it did create some issues. “All of the connectivity and digitization has opened up history and historical sources in unprecedented ways, yet the technology has not come without tensions, costs, and unexpected sets of alliances and demands for historians, educators, administrators, and the public.” Unlike the “traditional” practice of history, there a lot more new components that come along with it. Sometimes these new components can offer both positive and negative aspects. Digital history projects allow for collaboration on a level not thought possible before with people from different aspects of academic. Technological experts and librarians and students and historians from various backgrounds can come together to work on a digital project.

When Ayers was writing his initial article in 1999, he wasn’t able to imagine the tools which we are able to use now and possibly in the future that will make digital scholarship an even more effective tool for historians. “We have entered a new stage of digital history in which we can put an emphasis on active learning, collaboration and enhanced interaction.” We have the ability to use Wiki blogs, mashups, tags, and social networking. In the future, as Seefeldt and Thomas mention in What is Digital History?  Historians’ sources will be almost entirely digital with the use of instant messages, emails, doc files, videos, databases, etc. The JAH interface sees a future in which we and look into 3D reality environments such as Lisa M. Snyder’s reconstruction of the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago. Unfortunately, for scholars who are more hesitant to embrace digital scholarship, this future environment might challenge their more traditional method and perhaps make it obsolete.

Digital history has the ability to make a good partnership with public history. Nothing is more available to the public than some of the digital tools which can be accessed online. Public institutions such as museums and libraries have the ability to use these tools part of an online exhibition or an archive; however, they can use the tools for more than that.  Some of the digital projects that I accessed via the University of Richmond’s Digital Scholarship Lab, have shown how easily accessible information is for students in an academic setting or how some of the research that would mean nothing on paper can become visualized and take on a whole new meaning. I browsed through a few of these projects; but the one I spent the most time with was the map of Foreign Born Population in the US from 1850-2010. Normally, looking at these stats wouldn’t mean much to anyone; but with the utilization of this visualization the essential question being asked (which seems to be “How has the foreign born population changed in past 150 years?)

In his most recent article, Does Digital Scholarship Have a Future?, William Ayers uses the term “generative scholarship” which he deems is scholarship that builds ongoing digital environments framed by significant academic questions. It invites collaborators from all facets and it advances scholarship in a way which cannot be done in print. Digital history fits this definition of generative scholarship because it has constantly changing and inviting scholars from realms outside of the traditional world of historians to participate.

Project Update #3

Zac and I have been continuing our weekly meetings with Dr Gannon about the status of the "Lone Sailor" project at Blue Jacket Park.

This Tuesday we will actually be meeting with the committee in which we will bring some examples of panels as well as some questions we have prepared to ask the committee about where they see the direction of the project going.

Zac and I decided that we are going to use Google Slides to create some examples of panels that the committee can use to convey its information. We are going to use the dimensions 36 x 48 to try and create as much as possible of the actual slide as we can.

For this week, Dr Gannon has asked us to create both an introductory panel as well as an informational or "meat" panel. We have decided to do our informational panel on "Training" procedures.

We do not know for sure if the committee is going to go ahead with the audio component of their exhibit; but we have prepared questions for that as well.

For our introductory panel, we are creating "History of the Lone Sailor" which will include the following pieces of information:

• The Lone Soldier Memorial was created by Stanley Bleifeld, a WWII Naval Veteran and the Navy's official Sculptor. 

• • This is the 14th Lone Sailor Navy Memorial in the United States
  
  
  • The Sailor looks directly into the “grinder”, the spot where recruits marched, trained, and eventually graduated. 
  
  
  • He also looks at the site where the famous wooden training ship, USS Blue Jacket, stood for many years.

  
  

We are considering adding some information on education to the panels but we are going to talk to Dr Gannon more today.

So far I have created a few examples of those mock panels and Zac is working on some questions we can ask the committee on Tuesday. After Tuesday, we will get more of an idea of what the committee wants and where they think they're going to go from there.

As far as presenting the project, we more than likely are going to show the panels that we have created for the committee as well as some of the questions (and answers) we record from our meeting on Tuesday.

As far as difficulties we have experienced, the committee has not been very clear on what exactly they wanted but that should become more clear tomorrow.

Digital History

The main argument is that digital technology can enhance the way we teach and learn about history. Digital history gives people access to rare materials that would not usually be available to them and it allows the historian to present his or her research in a way that can enhance it a step further with visualization. Authors Cohen and Rosenzweig believe that in addition to the many pros that the field provides, that there must be a significant amount of planning that goes into these projects and it is not always as easy as expected. First of all, these projects can sometimes be a lot more costly due to the fact that the historian needs to collaborate with professionals that previously they would not have needed to work with; such as experts in technology and web design.  The historian also has to figure out who they want their audience to be. Is the intended target someone who has easy access to the historian’s digital project? If the audience target is elderly or residing in a country where internet technology is not readily available to them, will they be able to access the research at all? Will they even want to go through the effort? Is this something that people can benefit from? Students are a large group that will want to utilize this information easily available to them.  Another issue that the authors present is how do we make sure that our projects are known. The most beautiful digital project will not reach its full potential if no one knows where/how to find it or if they are unaware it even exists. Historians also have to heed how aesthetically pleasing their project is. If it is hard to maneuver and understand, will people be able to or even want to use it as a resource. Also, what do we do about intellectual rights? If a historian’s work is just out there on the internet and available for anyone to see, how do we keep them from taking advantage of it? The authors conclude by trying to figure out how historians can make their digital projects durable. How can we keep it from being riddled with broken links and available to use for many years.

The authors also introduce us to what they refer to us as the “techno-skeptics” like Harper’s Sven Birkerts who, in 1994, “implored readers to ‘refuse’ the lure of ‘the electronic hive.’ The new media, he warned, pose a dire threat to the search for ‘wisdom’ and ‘depth’ –‘the struggle for which has for millennia been central to the very idea of culture.” Birkerts is not alone in his disdain for digital history. Some, like Gertrude Himmelfarb believe that making historical research digital will have a negative impact on the way in which we learn history.  The authors assure us that these “techno-skeptics” have been proved wrong.  Digital history has not affected the way we learn and it has not taken over the role of universities and libraries as some of these skeptics of the 90’s foretold. What it has done is made studying the past a little bit easier and more accessible for a larger group of people.

The reader must keep in mind that this book was written in 2005, which is in the world of technology, can almost be considered an ancient document. However, I do believe that the authors give us a good introduction to both the pros and cons of studying the past using a digital platform; the ‘pitfalls’ that they list for their readers is very similar to what one might expect them to be today. Having completed a digital project myself last semester, I can attest to the fact that a lot of the pros and cons listed in this book proved to be true. Zac and I experience a lot of technical difficulties that had to with publishing our work online and making sure it was visually the way we needed it be for viewers and researchers. We spent a lot of extra time getting technical help that would not have been necessary in a non-digital project. The end result, I believe was very visually stimulating and user friendly. We were able to take our research and turn it into a visualization that would not have had the same effect in a non- digital project. 

1. What would we be unable to accomplish without digital history?
2. How has the utilization of these digital projects affected the accessibility of history?
3. Has the list of who can be considered a historian expanded with the use of digital tools and accessibility of research?

History and Future

The Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of African American History and Culture has suggested creating a new set of panels for an exhibition on the struggle for civil rights…in the future. Currently, the exhibition looks at the shift from 1863-1963. Would it be possible for historians to create a panel on 2063 in 2016? To try and determine if this will work, it is important to look at Dr David Staley’s argument in his book: History and Future.

First off, Dr Staley reminds us that as is, historians only study a very small portion of the historical field. Meaning there is so much more to discover than what “history buffs” enjoy reading about (meaning major, textbook historical events). To study the future, we must go outside the realm of what is typical and expected. During the course of the twentieth century, historians would finally begin looking into to these wider historical fields….can one of these include delving into future events?

Societies, as Staley reminds us have different ways of looking at time. Some look at time as something that cyclical. It goes around and around repeating itself and making it easy to try and predict; however this does not mean that that follow this mind set believe they can do anything to change the future. Other societies look at time as something that is linear. Predetermined, but never destined to repeat itself. Considering this, the question we must ask ourselves is: “Can we predict what is going to happen in the future by looking at patterns or is the future something that will remain a mystery until it happens?”

Historians are not the only ones who try to get a glimpse into the crystal ball. Many businesses try to use “visioning” to try and make accurate predictions for their company that will determine their motives and the way they conduct their business. As trying to look into the future became more necessary for historians and financiers, etc., the future began to adopt many scientific methods such as the ‘scenario method’ adopted by Herman Khan. Khan suggested that if one were to try and determine the future they should create a series of scenarios about what may possibly happen. According to Khan, “a scenario results from an attempt to describe in more or less detail some hypothetical sequence of events. Scenarios can emphasize different aspects of ‘future history.” (36) This is similar to the way we might try to determine the history of the future.

The problem with trying to determine what the future will be is that is doesn’t exist someplace else; therefore we cannot use technology or mathematical skills to try to answer our questions. That’s why historians are perfect for this role. The role of this historian is to ask questions and try to answer them using evidence and inferences. Sometimes historians can go and search for the answers to their questions in an archive; but, as Staley states, historians are capable of using literally anything for evidence—it all depends on how they interpret the evidence around them and how they have been trained to ask questions. Another way a historian is a good fit for the job of determining the future is that we are different from a logistician—we know we are never going to find a determined answer. Evidence of the past will always be incomplete—it would be impossible to have a perfect representation of past events; so why not use this method of thinking to try and understand the future by making historical inferences?

When dealing with trying to understand the future, the events depend on the context of the situation. In the case of this museum, the time and events which already took place and our interpretation of them. Staley says “rather than seeking the one true statement about the future, historians of the future should produce many such statements and then subject these statements to a ‘competition among hypotheses” (65) Meaning we are not making predictions about the future; but we will be able to make the attempt to make various arguments about what might happen. Staley uses an example of how this would work. He makes the argument that book will still exist in the future; but possible in the way of smart pages, etc. He uses the evidence that he has in present day that e-books are not in the highest demand and physical books still sell. He is able to make an argument about the future by using the historical method which “is the flow of events is context dependent and unique. A history of the future should be no different.” (62)

Because the past, like the future, does not exist to where we can visit it and be immersed in the events, we must try to recreate and envision; but never try and create our own truth. That is why study of future is not about making predictions or telling stories like a palm reader; but to build and reconstruct something that already has a sort of foundation.

To attempt to create panels for an exhibition on 2063, like Staley suggests I would look at the evidence that I have. How have the events progressed and altered from 1863 to 1963? How have they altered from 1963 to the present? What is currently happening which would have an effect on the future for African American civil rights. We have a lot going on currently that may determine where the fight for African American equality takes us in the next fifty years. Will it change with who is in control of Congress or the White House? It is necessary to look at all the scenarios that could possibly happen. What evidence do we have? Violence toward African Americans is prevalent in the media. We have Black Lives Matter movement making their voices heard on the political stage and in just about a week we will have elected a new president (both of our candidates having vastly different views and relationships to these issues which will cause to try and create a whole new series of scenarios).

Conclusively, these new panels should discuss as many scenarios as we can try and create using this evidence whatever the historians determine and interpret that evidence to be.

Power of place

Dolores Hayden's book The Power of Place  is more like an instructional manual than it is an actual narrative-like text. In her book, Hayden looks at how multiculturalism is conceived and how it helps historians study history by making the invisible visible and focusing on social history.
In section 2 (Los Angeles: Public Pasts in the Downtown Landscape) Hayden looks at the vast amounts of people that make up the city of Los Angeles. She points out that Los Angeles has a very diverse group of citizens with "the second largest Mexican, Armenian, Filipino, Salvadoran, and Guatemalan city in the world, the third largest Canadian city, and has the largest Japanese, Iranian, Cambodian and Gypsy communities in the United States." With the large amount of people it is apparent that they have been able to form their own communities within this giant city and have an individual history of their own and when all of these different cultures and languages blend together it makes for a unique community that is distinctly Californian. Hayden also mentions that because of the extreme diversity of this city, no one has been able to write a comprehensive social history on the urban landscape of Los Angeles. Hayden writes that "many influential writers have been unable to perceive the importance of the city's nonwhite population, unable to recognize that people of color occupy any significant part of the urban landscape. Such writers may go downtown but never or rarely to East LA and South Central. The focus of their landscape analysis becomes houses, swimming pools, cars, and pop culture." With a city that is almost 40% nonwhite the fact that the impact made from those that make up that population has gone largely ignored is evidence that the true nature of the city has not been analyzed. It would be difficult to understand an established culture anywhere without looking at the contributions of the people that live there. Places such as a Chinatown and areas with Mexican inspired architecture would not exist without the presence of the people that were there. Even more alarmingly is that these "nonwhites" who have gone largely unnoticed are the people that bear the largest responsibility for establishing and creating that city before nonwhites had the opportunity to come over.
Hayden has created several programs to make sure that these are being studied and looked at so we can establish a more realistic view of the history of the city. In her section on "The Invisible Angelenos", Hayden makes the attempt and the argument that we need to study these people that have remained invisible in the social history work completed on Los Angeles in order to get a more comprehensive view of the effects they have made on that city.

PH History Project

Zac Barnes and I have been working on the Lone Sailor project along with Dr Gannon for the past three weeks. Most of what we have been doing is researching information on the Navy in Orlando so will be better equipped to be consultants on this project. What the team funding this project want to include in their panels in information on boot camp, history of the navy in Orlando, and information on graduation.

Zac and I have been meeting with Dr Gannon every Monday and she has suggested looking at academic essays on museum walls as well as sending on powerpoints on what information we need to know in order to be better consultants. I know next to nothing about the role of the Navy in Orlando so that is something that I would have to look more into. I do not currently feel like I have done enough preparation to be an adequate consultant on this project. Mark Barnes has also sent Zac and I information on what he has already written on the "Lone Sailor" project. This will be beneficial to us when we are deciding what to include on these panels.

While I have been going through essays, Zac was able to make some changes by going through the PowerPoint sent by the Naval Memorial of Central Florida and Central Florida Navy League. I believe he is trying to make the information flow better.

We also found from Dr Gannon that we need to try and incorporate a new female statue in the future; so, we need to figure out how to make our panels work with these future changes. The new PowerPoint that we received is more helpful than the initial one; but there is not a lot of discussion on this new aspect.

Another aspect that we are having difficulty with is the organization wants information that can be accessed via audio button. This will be helpful in keeping the panels from being too wordy; but Zac and I will have to try and figure out who to have contribute to this audio and what exactly needs to be said. It is possible we will have to conduct some oral interviews. We plan on utilizing Lynn Abrams Oral History Theory  to help us with this.

Being that we do not know much in the way of informative walls, I have been researching public history documents.

Hopefully, by next week we should be able to solidify the information we would like to have included on these walls.

·

Disney's Bicentennial Celebration

 I have decided to look at the way in which the Walt Disney Company celebrated America’s bicentennial. As anyone Native of central Florida knows, Disney World plays a large role in what goes on here in Orlando and Kissimmee and you better believe they played a central role in celebrating America's bicentennial!
Dr Crepeau has some items in his collection such as a pair of Mickey Mouse/Paul Revere socks. The significance of looking at Disney’s relationship with the bicentennial Is that if can speak to Florida’s participation AS WELL AS participation on a national and even GLOBAL level. Mickey Mouse is a recognizable image around the world so using that imagery, even with the patriotic overtones makes this something that can appeal to a wide array of audiences. Mickey Mouse, being an international symbol, would have had marketing appeal to people both domestic and international as well as to people of all ages. Disney, being a corporation, took the 1976 event to make money through marketing and various celebrations that took place throughout the park. Being that Disney World had only been in Orlando five years at that point; the bicentennial celebrations served its purpose by bringing in an incredible amount of money to this brand new park and potentially more tourists to the Orlando area.

From the summer of 1975 to a few weeks after July 4^th 1976,, Disney parks in both Orlando and Anaheim put together an elaborate parade titled: America on Parade. Included in this parade where all the nationalistic favorites Americans had been inundated with in 1976. Parade floats went beyond just the typical American Revolutionary period by including Christopher Columbus discovering America, Pilgrims celebrating Thanksgiving with the Native Americans, and settlers heading west on the Oregon Trail. Disney even pulled out song team Alan and Roger Sherman to write a song specifically for the bicentennial celebration. One of the interesting things about this parade was that it not focus a lot on the typical Disney imagery one would expect from a spectacle at a Disney park.

The beginning float of the parade shows the three Disney characters: Mickey, Goofy, and Donald in revolutionary regalia. A lot of this imagery will be included on the merchandise sold to commemorate the event as can be seen from the front of the park guide map that were regularly being distributed.

   

Also included are images from Dr Crepeau's collection:

   

This is example of one of several admission tickets from the Doctor's collection for guests to see "America on Parade". When the park first opened, a lot of attractions were experienced via tickets as opposed to the way guests experience the attractions today.

This is an example of a name tag that was worn by a Disney cast member. As you can see, the name tag was made specifically for the bicentennial celebration. This is an example of Disney trying to include their celebration in all of the minute details.

Here are some images included from the park’s parade. Fortunately, due to the touristic nature of the location, there are a lot of good images available.

This is Christopher Columbus on his ship “discovering” the New World

The First Thanksgiving complete with giant turkey, surrounded by American stereotypes of pilgrims and Native Americans getting ready to sit down and eat together.

Here is what appears to be George Washington’s continental army on parade. In front of them is Founding Father, Benjamin Franklin who is flying his kite. Not very visible in this picture is the key attached to the bottom of Franklin’s kite.

Betsy Ross sewing the very first American flag!

Disney had a large section in their parade dedicated to the new frontier in celebration of one of their themed lands, “Frontierland”. Here is a steamboat captain sailing his way through the park.

The float here depicts a group of Forty-Niners possibly on their way to California to pan for some gold. 

Fictional characters such as Tom Sawyer were depicted as well. Not pictured are the various other floats the followed including a group of varsity students, giant sandwiches to depict how much Americans love to eat, Thomas Edison inventing the light-bulb and a grand finale of Disney/American classics such as Snow White and her Seven Dwarfs followed Winnie the Pooh and Dumbo.

Below I have included a link to watch the entire parade on YouTube. Unfortunately, you are unable to hear the song written specifically for the event and I have been unable to find a good version of that. 

Here is a YouTube video of the entire parade: "America on Parade"

Oral History Theory

In her book, Oral History Theory,   Lynn Abrams describes the practice of oral history as a method of research that is distinct from other historical endeavors due to its collaborative approach in which the researcher must instigate and lead interviews and from these interactions, historical documents are created. In other words, oral history is unique in that it forces the historian to, in some cases; interact with their subject in a personal way which is beyond the level of other fields. Oral historians go out and look for interesting people as opposed to documents and analyze each person’s personal memory of the past. It is an effective approach to studying history because the interviewer has the ability to ask their subject any question they want and get an answer in return. With documents, the historian obviously has what is offered to them and cannot manipulate the information they receive in the same way. When I refer to this manipulation, I am referring to the fact that the historian can ask any questions they would like and phrase the questions in a way which will hopefully get them their full response.

According to Abrams, you can study a group or an individual and learn from their previous experiences they may not have been documented and each interview is the result of a dialogue. According to Abrams, the interviewer must keep in mind that “subjectivity and intersubjectivity are present in every interview.” Just like interpreting anything else, the interviewer must keep in mind of the subjectivity of their subjects and take what they learn with a grain of salt. Like everything else, each person you might interview will answer your questions and participate in the interview process with a touch of bias whether they do it on purpose or not. One of the things that will affect the content of the information you receive is whatever cultural background the content of information comes from. Abrams also reminds us that the oral history document is the result of a three way dialogue: “the respondent with him or herself, between the interviewer and the respondent and between the respondent and cultural discourses of the present and the past.”

In her book, Lynn Abrams introduces us to a multi-step interview process for conducting an oral history interview:

                -the original interview

                -recording of the interview

                -transcription and interpretation of the interview material

Abrams makes the argument that the interviewer will want to be as precise as possible when transcribing the interview. It is not beneficial to record the information as the historian receives it because everything is interpreted differently by different people. The speaker’s rhythms of speech, dialects and sentences are important in conveying their meaning. To back this up, Abrams says “unless the sheen of social science was added to the oral history practice, including the careful and accurate transcription of interviews and faithful representation of the spoken voice, then the method was depicted as literary and creative rather than as historical and reliable.” In summary, it is not the historian’s job to interpret what they heard but to record what they heard for other to interpret the meaning themselves.

                Abrams does not that sometimes there are exceptions to that rule. For example, when she was conducting an interview of people from Shetland Island, she noted that their vocabulary was almost incomprehensible to her and it was necessary to make some slight edits to the meaning wouldn’t have been completely lost. While speech patterns are incredibly important, if they hinder the historian from obtaining the full meaning, it is acceptable to make some edits which are in itself, not a simple task.    Another important part of the interview process is making a physical observation of the speaker. “In the interview itself some quite concrete signs are read by either side: dress, accent, demeanor and body language provide signals which are interpreted by both parties. Respondents may also communicate their attitude towards the interviewer and the interview process by the preparations they have made (or not).”  Additionally historians must approach their interview with “openness” and let those that they are interviewing ultimately determine the direction of the project.

                Ultimately the role of oral historians is to decode data and establish a connection between individuals and general narratives, personal and public experiences, and the past and present. Abrams mentions a study by Allesandro Portelli in which he privileges the names of the interviewees over the historian because the speakers are the ones that are creating the history while the historian is there to write it down and maintain it for the future.

Celebrating the Revolution with...socks?

 “For many years colonial pageantry was limited to a few cities…but 1976 has changed everything!” According to American Legion magazine “…10,000 or more Americans are ‘dressing colonial’ every weekend.” The bicentennial became the year that Americans would try to figure out what the Revolutionary generation and that event in history meant to them. For Robert and Vincent DeForrest of the Afro American Bicentennial Corporation, they “…had experienced the revolution in their own lives. Weknow is it is a continuing thing. And we believe much of the leadership for continuing the American Revolution in recent decades has come for Black Americans.” As opposed to America’s centennial, a lot more people had reason to celebrate being citizens of the United States of America. Since 1876, women had gained the right to vote and African Americans were in the midst of battling for their own civil rights. This appeared to be the perfect time to celebrate the birthday of this country. “…expressions of commemoration reflected a new cultural emphasis on the individual and his or her role in society and several recent changes in American society merged with an emphasis on the self to make historical commercialization newly acceptable.” (9) What is “historical commercialization”? What is the best way to “sell history”?
1976 marked the 200th anniversary celebration of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and what better way to have celebrated than paper towels, t-shirts, and Frisbees? Dr. Crepeau’s collection of Bicentennial Junk is a perfect example of what Tammy Gordon refers to in her book: “The Spirit of 1976: Commerce, Community, and Commemoration” as the effects of a ‘buycentennial sellabration” (6) that seemed to rage in the first half of the 1970’s. The Bicentennial celebration was a perfect time for consumers to “sell “history as “commercialism quickly became a central feature of the meaning of the celebration.” (54) This had been attempted a decade before during the centennial anniversary of the Civil War; however, Confederate flag images did not just have that certain appeal for most Americans. The American Revolution and the imagery that came along with was an excellent opportunity to make history “junk” appeal to the majority of Americans, “…marketers and retailers challenged the sanctity of American history…by putting founding myths and symbols on such ephemera as paper plates and grocery bags.” (3) It turned out that for many corporations and even the federal government that the American Revolution was about to have a major impact on the American economy once again. In order to make the effect and appeal to most Americans, images of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson (slave owners) were used to appeal to white consumers while images of Crispus Attucks (African American Revolutionary war figure) were used to appeal to black consumers. “The sellabration drew on longstanding ideas about the American Revolution but repackaged them for different consumer demographics.” (65)
For major companies such as the Franklin Mint, McDonald’s and Disney, “…the bicentennial was that….’an opportunity, not only for America to support the Revolutionary spirit abroad in the world, but to lead the way once again in the struggle of people against systems of exploitation and oppression.” (ABC 2).
It is at this point where I will talk about one of the items in Dr. Crepeau’s collection: the Mickey Mouse/Paul Revere socks. As someone who has been part of this corporation myself for around six years, I know that the Walt Disney Company will use every opportunity afforded them to make a profit via consumer goods and the one image that may sell even more than the Revolution in Mickey Mouse. This and other products released by Disney during this celebration was a perfect example of how marketers tried to make the American Revolution appeal to more than just white people or historically interested people. Including popular non historical figures ups the appeal and makes the product acceptable for people of all colors, backgrounds and ages. It is a product that any American could wear and show their support of the bicentennial even if they just bought it because of the cartoon character included on the socks. This would be a good product to include because it is relatable and it might be something that people still have. More than likely the burger wrappers and newspaper ads and soda cans will more than likely have found their way to the garbage by now; but these socks might still be available to most Americans and it is something that comes out of the Bicentennial celebration that Americans can still relate to.

The Presence of the Past

In their work, Presence of the Past: Popular Uses of History in American Life , authors Roy Rosenzweig and David Thelen make the argument that historians often find themselves in a separate group from those that do not study history professionally due to the “present public ignorance of our cultural heritage.” To try and prove or disprove that theory, the book by Thelen and Rosenzweig studies how the typical American views the past through a series of surveys. The end result of the surveys showed that the typical American does try and engage with the past as much as possible.
The results of their surveys were as follows:
- More than 4/5 of those surveyed had taken photos to preserve memories
- 3/5 had visited a historical site or museum
- -2/5 had worked on hobbies related to the past such as genealogy
To these “popular history makers” it was decided that family and personal past is what matters to the typical American the most. And this is something, I believe that is becoming more and more popularized with enterprises such as Ancestry.com or various TV shows dedicated to studying genealogy. I believe this trend will only continue to grow as more and more Americans are taking several hundred pictures a year of their families. That specific statistic isn’t stated in the book; however it is supported.  A majority of those that were surveyed take pictures to preserve memories and about ninety percent enjoy looking at old family photos.
In a separate survey, Thelen and Rosenzweig asked how connected to the past each person felt. It is true that less than a quarter of those surveyed felt like they had a special connection to United States history. The larger majority felt that they felt a connection with their personal past such as ethnic group.  This seems to be in direct correlation with those that expressed their connection with family past and their experiences going through family photos and studying genealogy. An example of this from the book is of a man with African American ancestry in the south who felt a connection upon meeting his future wife via their shared experiences in growing up in the south in the 1950’s.
In their third survey, the pair tries to discover what types of “past” average Americans find to be most important. Again, like in the previous two examples, people for the most part chose the past that affects them directly using pronouns such as “we” and “our”. It appeared that many of the non-white groups that were surveyed had a more direct appreciation of their particular past. One Native American woman mentioned that her past and identification as a Native American made up who she was and helps develop her culture. She stated: “If we lose our culture then we cease to be Indians.”
As a result of their endeavor, Rosenzweig and Thelen can claim that they were able to prove several things. First off, historians who believe that they were in a separate group from the average American was correct in some degree. Many Americans saw “historian history” as something focused on famous people and events and something that they focused on in school and didn’t feel the need to put much thought into. (Of course this wasn’t every  American). However, the assumption that the average American does not put much thought into the past is absolutely not true. Those Americans who identify with their culture, spend hours attempting to reconstruct their family history on Ancestry.com, and reminisce while cleaning out their grandma’s attic are taking a very personal look into the past which they can’t get from school or from historians.
It is of my personal opinion that as we are becoming more and more adept at capturing memories through photographs and find more convenience searching our family records through the digitization of those records the average Americans’ relationship with the past will only continue to grow.
Thelen and Rosenzweig also successfully prove the point that just because a memory does not include Robert E. Lee and the Battle of Gettysburg; doesn’t make it any less important or any less a part of history. As a teacher to students who weren’t born until 2002, my personal memories and recollections of what happened on September 11, 2001 are just as valid of a historical narrative as teaching them the names of the government officials who were there. My personal memories of September 11th and my grandma’s recollection of the JFK assassination or her father’s recollection of Pearl Harbor will not be found in any history book or recounted by any historian; but that doesn’t mean it is not reflective of the “presence of the past” for the average American.

Questions to Consider
1. Is it possible, from a public history standpoint, for our personal histories to have meaning for people outside our families or ethnic group?
2. What did the Native American woman mean when she said “if we lose our culture we cease to be Indians?”
3. How important is memory in maintaining the past?

Public History project

For my public history project this semester, Zach and I will be working with Dr. Gannon to create panels supporting the Lone Sailor Navy Memorial in Blue Jacket Park.  According to the website for the city of Orlando, the Lone Sailor “is meant to inspire today’s youth and honor sea service men and women and their families; past present and future. The memorial will help to convey our appreciation to the men and women in the US Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard and Merchant Marine who voluntarily put their lives in harm’s way.” The purpose of having the memorial in this specific location is because it used to serve as the Orlando Naval Training Center.

 Those that funding the project (The Navy League) need assistance in creating panels that demonstrate to viewers the training process that Navy men and women go through. Dr Gannon also mentioned to us that they are interested in including audio with this memorial. For example, they would like to include a button that you can press and hear a service-person give their testimony on the training process.  One of the UCF stakeholders that may be invested in this project would be RICHES and our community partners would be the Navy League and probably even the city of Orlando who support this project. We plan on using mostly primary sources for this project. I believe mid-October we will have the opportunity to interview several servicemen and women who served in Orlando while they are in town for a reunion. Dr Gannon also shared with us that the UCF has several tapes of recorded testimony. As far as secondary sources we are going to attempt to use the resources located in the UCF Library as well as the historical society to research the role that the Navy Recruitment Center played in Orlando.

I do not know if we will be able to accomplish the audio component of the memorial that the Navy League is interested in; but hopefully we will be able to complete the panels for the memorial in Blue Jacket Park. 

Understanding Jim Crow

Understanding Jim Crow

In his book, David Pilgrim discusses how his habit of collecting racist memorabilia has turned into something much more.

With his collection, Pilgrim helped establish a museum exhibit on the era of Jim Crow through paraphernalia from the age. Initially, Pilgrim refers to his hobby as collecting “racist garbage”, a hobby that he began as a teenager. As someone who is partially African American himself, he felt inclined toward these objects even though they made him feel uncomfortable enough that he was happy to eventually part with them and donate them to the museum. He acknowledges that it was an unusual feeling for a collector to have about his collection.

 When Pilgrim was starting his collection, acquiring these items was a lot easier to do than it would have been for someone today. Perhaps a reflection of the changing times? Or hopefully Americans are becoming more embarrassed by our history of “Mammy” salt and pepper shakers and cartoons of black children eating over-sized watermelons.

 In the first section of the book, Pilgrim tells us about his personal background and why he had the collection, what it meant to him and how he came to establish the exhibit at the university at which he worked. He notes that his teachers and professors have never failed to mention the achievements of men like Frederick Douglass or W.E.B. DuBois so it wasn’t as if African Americans had been completely passed by in history class; but he raises the question of why he never heard any of his professors discuss the average African American. Pilgrim also acknowledges that most Americans know that slavery was not good and that it happened and now it’s over and that the civil rights of movement of the 1960’s took place and it happened and now it’s over.  What doesn’t even seem to get acknowledged is the traumatic era in our history known as “Jim Crow” which took place in the hundred years between the end of the Civil War and the beginning of the Civil Rights movement. So if it’s not being discussed in our schools, how can we make it available to students and their parents and encourage people to have an open discussion about this dark period in our history where blacks were being kept from expressing their constitutional rights and being murdered in large numbers. That’s where Pilgrim’s racist collection comes in.

Pilgrim expresses that the purpose of his exhibit is to “continue the journey towards understanding and improving race relations,” despite the fact that many people are unwilling or even afraid to take a good long hard look at our racist past (and present due to the fact that Pilgrim is constantly updating his exhibits with memorabilia surrounding the Trayvon Martin case and the 2008 election of Barack Obama).  Pilgrim is essentially a scholar was has become an activist in his attempt to encourage average Americans to discuss race and prejudice towards African Americans. There is something inherently different about reading the statistics on lynchings in the South and staring at a photograph of a white man standing beside a black body; or how the white man’s view of African Americans was created not from personal experience but from cartoons and depictions that they saw of blacks in movies like Gone with the Wind or Aunt Jemima or even whites portraying oafish blacks in minstrel shows by painting their skin with pitch black grease paint. How could any white person take blacks seriously when all they knew of them was Mammy and the lazy black “coon” being portrayed in the minstrel shows around the country? Exhibits like Pilgrim's force people to come face to face with pas they may not have even known existed. It’s a lot easier to ignore text that it is to ignore the hood of a member of the KKK staring at you in the face or a recreation of an auction block used to sell slaves and destroy families.

I believe that the biggest difficulties for exhibits like this and the new museum on African American history and culture opening as part of the Smithsonian later this month is getting a non-black clientele to come and experience what the exhibits have to offer. In regards to the Smithsonian,  it was built for all Americans to come in and experience African American history as a core part of American history; however, as Pilgrims mentions several times in his book it is difficult to get people to want to talk about or acknowledge their roles or the roles of their ancestors in these atrocities. People are more willing to go and visit the National Holocaust museum because they can distance themselves from the perpetrators of those atrocities and say how terrible the Germans behaved while also turning a blind of the United States’ treatment of both Japanese and African Americans in their own country during the same period.

Hopefully more and more of these exhibits will appear across the country as we try to become more comfortable with talking about our own issues with race and we will be able to confront a replica of an auction block in the Smithsonian or racist “trash” in the Jim Crow Museum the same way we and have an open discussion about it and feel comfortable with addressing ours sins and educating ourselves and other generations about the darker parts in our history.

Questions to consider:

1.       How can memorabilia be interpreted as truth?

2.       Can racist memorabilia effective serve a non-racist purpose?

3.       Can relics from the past help us discuss the issues of today?

Private History in Public

In Tammy Gordon’s book, Private History in Public, she emphasizes the importance of museum exhibitions both large and small all around the country. She organizes the various museum exhibits into several different categories:

            Academic: sponsored by government or corporate donors where the exhibit is highly managed to determine how the public will see it. An example of this would be almost any exhibit at the Smithsonian. As an example, I included a link to the Smithsonian Museum of American History’s exhibit on the American presidency.  http://americanhistory.si.edu/exhibitions/american-presidency This exhibit is sponsored by the US government with donations from government officials, etc. and the purpose is to tell a story of a uniquely American role that was filled by great men who were also average Americans. You can look at some of the items in the collection online; but when you go and see the exhibit in person, there are no negatives spins on any individual represented to be found anywhere. This fits in with the character of an academic exhibit which as Gordon reminds us “regularly stress traditional historical subjects like the affairs of nation states and change over time.” (20)

            Corporate these exhibits are sponsored by a corporation (as can be seen by the name) to market a particular interest. The average museum goer usually would not think of a museum exhibit as attempting to make them purchase anything or do much other than inform them of the history of their company organization. However, the best example that I can think of (which Gordon discusses briefly in the book) would be the World of Coca Cola in Atlanta, Georgia. The reason I decided to use this example is because I have been to this exhibit and I can attest to the success of the corporate goal of getting museum consumers to purchase and support this company’s product. After three floors of this museum which include the history of their company through pop art, artifacts, etc I found myself very eager to purchase a coke by the time I had seen everything. https://www.worldofcoca-cola.com/explore/explore-inside/explore-milestones-refreshment/

            Community exhibits are the type which come in the most varieties and are usually produced by people who have close ties to the subject matter being presented. The curators of these exhibitions usually tend to promote their local heritage. This type of exhibit is one that Gordon discusses very extensively in her book because it is the type that is looked over the most often by the general public. Gordon defines this exhibition as one which is often “motivated by people who have been historically ‘othered’, people whose histories are told by those outside the community… [it is] one way to claim local control over heritage resources and to assert sovereignty.” (40) My own personal example of one of these would be the heritage museum in Hendersonville, NC http://www.hendersoncountymuseum.com/ which tell the story of North Carolinian’s involvement in every war from the American Revolution on and contain artifacts that were donated by members of the community

            Entrepreneurial exhibits “merge trade history with personal history” (25)  as well as “reflect the traditional role of small business as well as the role of the small business person as one who is committed to and reflective of the community.” (60) One of the examples. Gordon included was Chicago’s International Museum of Surgical Science which features several exhibitions not only on surgery but also with subject matter that attempts to go outside the role of a traditional academic exhibit on the history of surgery. The museum differs from corporate and academic museums by presenting its theme in a “endearingly rustic, almost crude, in a cobbled-together way..” which includes items such as Laura Splan’s drawings in her own blood (63)

            Vernacular are even more difficult to pinpoint than community exhibits because they are usually integrated in non-museum settings which require neither the “curator nor the visitor [to] break from the activities of daily life in order to experience the display.” (77) Since these are usually hard to come by, I decided to include a personal example. The town that I used to live (Hendersonville, North Carolina) has a turn of the century pharmacy turned café in its downtown district. For purposes of brevity, I have included the link so the reader could learn more about the history of the establishment themselves. http://mikesonmain.com/about However, what I enjoyed most about the restaurant is their walls still contain artifacts from when the building was used as a pharmacy in 1900 as well as when the store front was used as a soda fountain around the 1950’s (the first of its kind and the only one still operating in Hendersonville.) Below I have featured images from the restaurant. I wasn’t able to find the small exhibition they have with the turn of the century medicinal supplies, however.

. I believe Dr Crepau’s exhibit on the bicentennial would fit in with his category nicely. I was considering it a part of the entrepreneurial exhibit; but settled on this own to be the more appropriate example due of a community exhibit due to the fact that it presents a representation of everyday American life in 1975. It doesn’t really represent a group of others but it tells a story of the American people and how they celebrated the country’s bicentennial. Because there is no government or corporate sponsor that story is being told by Dr Crepeau and the members of the UCF community. However, Dr Crepau’s artifacts which will be encompassed in the  Art in Odd Places event puts the exhibit into the vernacular category due to the fact that it will be presented outside of the traditional museum space and will not force any viewer to break from daily life in order to view it. 

Questions to Consider:
1. Is it possible for a museum exhibition to fit in more than one of the categories introduced by Tammy Gordon?
2. Can a museum exhibit still be considered vernacular if a spectator goes out of their way to view it?
3. Do all of these examples of exhibits still try to sway the view of a spectator?

The Living Archive

So, what is an archive exactly? How can you define something so diverse?

Archives are a “site of knowledge production’, they are the “arbiter[s] of truth” and can be used as a “mechanism for shaping the narratives of history.” (2) Some historians even believe that almost “everything” can constitute as an archive from documents to memory, to oral histories, to music. It is also important to remember that an archive is not the unbiased selection of facts that everyone might assume them to be.

The title of the work, Archive Stories, might be a good place to look to understand what archives are.

Who knew that an archive had a story to tell? Archives are “figured” and their relationships with the past will usually be linked to the archivist or the institution that is given the task of deciding what is important enough to include and what can be left out. In the section written by Craig Robertson, he notes that archives can go through a process of historicization (71) which simply means that each archive has its own story to tell. Archivists use their power to exclude and include to write whatever story it is that they would like to tell which is why “scholars who use archives need to critically analyze not only documents but also the institutions which house them.” (77) Such as is stated in the selection on Mr. Peal’s archive: “Our archival stories should not only recount our work with certain bodies of evidence in particular spaces, but should also record our own political concerns and intellectual preoccupations at the specific moments in which we read, transcribe, paraphrase, and ponder source material.” It is important to keep in mind that an archive will not provide the researcher with everything that they need, it is merely tool to use on a very long journey of creating history. As Ann Curthoys reminds us: “The historian’s proper role is to step into the shoes of the past, to explain what people thought they were doing…” (357)

One archive tool that I enjoy utilizing myself is the digital archive. Now that more and more archives are becoming accessible to the public after becoming digitized, it is more important than ever that the researcher keeps in mind what story they are being told and whether or not that fits in with their own version of history. According to Renee M. Sentilles, the digital archives are making it easier for the historian to determine where their information is coming from because the digital archives “raises the demands on historians to read, analyze, and incorporate vast quantities of documents and information…” (145)  More and more historians should be tempted to take advantage of the wealth of opportunities afforded to them online. Right now, anyone who wants to can access JStor and browse through hundreds of periodicals and well organized pieces of data without leaving their home.  “History is about how the past is alive and active in the present, and never is that more clearly illustrated than on the Web.” (147) So-called “amateur historians” can use this is a great opportunity as well. How many amateur historians and genealogists sit at home instead of the library pursuing Ancestry.com? For those who have not used Ancestry before, it is a great tool full of digitized records. My favorite is the accessibility of the records, the key words that I can use to search, and the transcription that comes with many of the documents. You offered a wealth of information through this digital archive that prior any researcher would have had to travel from library to library looking through physical archives. I personally enjoy using the census collections available to find a wealth of information about whomever I am conducting research on. You can access name, date of birth, occupation, family, language, etc. It is also perfect for studying a community over time. Most of the work I can do from computer and it’ll record everything I need for me. Digital archives are incredibly beneficial for the user. However, just because the digital archives offer ease, it doesn’t mean that we should focus primarily on this; but they are a perfect place to “begin and end the research journey.” (155)

Questions to Consider:

1.       How can a researcher decide what is reliable information? How can they make themselves aware of what is being omitted?

2.       What is the importance of understanding the “biography” of an object?

3.       What traits can an individual have that make them a living archive? 

What IS Public History?

The National Council on Public History describes the field as a vast assortment of various individuals working together to tell a story outside of the classroom. Public historians can range from museum curators to reenactors to film producers and they call from a wide variety of backgrounds. Public history is there for those people who weren’t able to connect with history in their high school or college experiences and connect more with hands on history such as national parks, museums, etc. In his essay, Carl Schulz examines the common themes of public history: “the insistence that the primary sources for understanding the past are not limited to the written word but encompass buildings, sites, landscapes, artifacts, orally transmitted memories, visual materials, and most recently, electronic recordings…” which should “provide meaning to the specific details of the historical problems which public historians are charges with solving…” (Schulz 32-33).  

In the Schulz essay he compares and contrasts the academic historian to the public historian. Academics can mostly be found in university settings and almost always consider themselves historians, taking the same track as each other, etc. The public historian however can come from a variety of places. More so now than ever before, public historians are coming out of universities. The irony of this is pointed out in Schulz’s essay where public historians are getting their education from academics. Why is this ironic?  Public historians can come from a wider variety of places and not all public historians may consider themselves historians. Some may have experience in library science while others may have a background in media or the visual arts or even the performing arts and decide to tell a story and present it for a public audience. In fact one of the main differences between a historian and a public historian is that public historians are more collaborative. They are not just collaborating with other professionals in their fields, sometimes they are working alongside members of their community, artists, filmmakers, etc to try and make history as accessible for the general public as possible. As the study of public history and the movement for this academic study becomes more popular, the two disciplinary tracks are becoming increasingly similar as both change with the times. In the more recent past, more and more public historians are coming from graduate training programs in universities with more programs being established for training purposes. The public history movement was begun at the University of California in Santa Barbara by Robert Kelley in 1978 and a few years later the National Council on Public History was established. “From its earliest years, NCPH has played a role in defining for history departments the training and education necessary to transform history graduate students into public historians.” (Schulz 31). In 1986, the NCPH published its first comprehensive list of graduate programs being offered for future public historians. These public history programs which vary from the traditional graduate history program are purported to supply their students with the opportunity to learn traditional skills such as research, interpretation and writing. This is just one example of how academic history and public history can sometimes merge.

Carl Becker in his essay, “Every Man His Own Historian” reminds us that the study of history is more or less a collective agreement about what may have happened. History is malleable. No one can argue that particular events did occur; but what is always changing is our perception of them. History is alive because it is always changing and it never ceases to exist. Becker throughout his essay compares academic history to the everyday common place or “Everyman” historian. Everyone knows that certain things happen and even if they don’t or just don’t remember correctly, nothing will really change and everyone will continue on with their own personal recollection of a historical event whether it’s about the signing of the Declaration of Independence or their own person history. The academic is not that much different from the common man because historians can also fashion history with “fact” as well as “interpretation.”  Katherine Corbett and Howard Miller describe this collaboration as ‘shared inquiry”. Their definition of shared inquiry is collaboration between historians to answer historical questions. They point out that all historians must collaborate; but it is the specific job of the public historian to “collaborate, to respond, to share both inquiry and authority…” (Corbett, Miller 15). According to the National Council on Public History, more so now than ever before has public history and academic history experienced this shared inquiry as the study of history itself has become more and more interdisciplinary.