Blame It All on TV

Nancy Raquel Mirabal's Public Historian article entitled, "Geographies of Displacement" provides me with the perfect way to clarify my position on public history and politics. I'm not advocating that we not admit to our own politics or hide the political reasons for what we're doing. I realize that politics dictate most of my daily choices, down to the foods I eat. This is just as true for any historic site; denying that there are political reasons for their existence is counterproductive. I object to the idea that public historians are not doing their jobs if they aren't constantly challenging the wrongs in society. To me, Cathy Stanton implied that public historians have no choice but to be crusaders for justice at all times. My objection lies in not being able to choose the battles one fights in the course of doing one's job for reasons that Mirabal briefly touches on in her article. Fighting for a cause takes a toll. Taking on an issue requires a lot of drive and energy, even when one believes wholeheartedly in that issue. Burnout is a very real possibility. For this reason, I'd like to be a historian first and a community activist second. A person spread too thin isn't able to do good for anyone. Fighting only for that in which one believes goes toward ensuring that one doesn't get worn out.

I think the Mirabal piece is an excellent example of combining political purposes with public history. I was fascinated to learn why gentrification was happening in San Francisco's Mission District. I also thought that Mirabal brings up uncomfortable, but excellent points. I've always thought of it as a good thing when neighborhoods "improve," when "nicer" shops come and things get cleaned up. But this is my white, middle-class perspective speaking. What is the true cost of these "improvements"? That's what Mirabal is asking us to consider and I think the answers might hit a little unpleasantly close to home.

As for Eric O'Keefe's "Auctioning the Old West to Help a City in the East," my only reaction was one of amazement. How unbelievable that Harrisburg's Mayor Stephen Reed spent $7.8 million in public funds without anyone noticing for so many years. I was surprised more details of the fallout weren't given in the article, but I suppose that wasn't the story's point and would've increased word count. However, Mayor Reed's encompassing vision of the items that create a comprehensive story of the Old West is impressive for a politician, excellent one he apparently was. He certainly seemed to cover all the bases.

Finally, Cary Carson's article for The Public Historian, "The End of History Museums: What's Plan B?" was compelling. Carson clearly knows of whence he speaks and his particular vision is also quite sweeping. How unfortunate that there are no national statistics on museum attendance, and that what there is, isn't standardized. I feel like in order to fix what's wrong, knowing attendance numbers would be useful. Also, it seems to me that someone should at least attempt to do the market research that Carson suggests at the top of page 12. Where are Rosenzweig and Thelen when you need them? Until we can figure out why people aren't enticed by history sites, it seems like we will be stuck in a cycle of finding alternative ways to fund their upkeep, such as the "jumble sales" to which Carson so objects. Clearly technology is the way of the future, but as Aaron Goldblatt pointed out when he visited our meeting, technology comes with it's own set of issues: high cost, upkeep and quick obsolescence are only a few. Carson seems to pinpoint the popularity of TV as the downfall of the "traditional" museum structure. Everyone needs to feel like he or she is important today, which is certainly unfortunate, but that's reality. Finding a way to incorporate technology and give people the feelings they want to have is the challenge we're facing now. Carson's visions may or may not solve the problem. I'm not sure that incorporating Second Life and YouTube is the long-term solution here. But I just keep thinking that the wave of retirements mentioned in the 2008 AAM report we read a while back might be the chance for a new generation of public historians to tackle some of these big issues facing museums today.