Defining Memory

This week’s reading centered around the American local history museum. As an anthology, Defining Memory: Local Museums and the Construction of History in America’s Changing Communities edited by Amy K. Levin (2007), the work discusses how local history, or “nearby history,” is practiced across the country. While some of Levin’s own contributions discusses methodology other authors focus their work on specific museums and how public history professionals make the most (or least) of their exhibits and engage (or ignore) the public.
One section, “The Rebirth of the Nation,” studies how some museums are changing their scripts in order to attempt to meet the needs of audience expectations in light of social history. While the section on Colonial Williamsburg by Eric Gable and Richard Handler says little beyond their book on the subject, the section on the Old State Capitol Museum in Baton Rouge is very interesting. While Colonial Williamsburg and the House of the Seven Gables have both shifted their tours to emphasize African American contributions to history, the Old State Capitol Museum is emphasizing their gombo history. The curators in Baton Rouge choose to focus on a melting pot mentality that many visitors might expect to find in a New York City immigrant history museum, not a Southern plantation-era museum. Another notable difference regarding the Old State Capitol Museum is its focus on children as important museum guests. Their exhibit on the electoral and voting process is innovative and should be repeated at other institutions. By forcing children to take part in mock elections and state budget meetings the curators teach kids that the political process must involve all individuals in order to work properly and that all political actions have consequences. The Old State Capitol Museum also has exhibits on Native American, African American, French, and Spanish historical contributions but their emphasis on the importance of voting is noteworthy and most appropriate in a capitol building. This museum is using social history trends to not only do the expected- emphasize the contributions of women and minorities- but argue that history is made by every individual that participates and therefore belongs to everyone as well.
The many museums sponsored by the Daughters of Utah Pioneers (DUP) teach valuable lessons as well. Their museums began as shrines to women’s unique experiences in nineteenth-century Utah. However, the future of the museums looks bleaks; an example is that of the hundreds of quilts donated to the DUP. The DUP exhibits depend on voluntary contributions and women have been generous. The DUP now houses dozens of quilts which the museums feel both proud and obligated to display. While this does pay tribute to the families who gave their quilts, to guests the sheer number of coverlets in no apparent order can be onerous. In order not to offend anyone the DUP has become a slave to their local public. Their exhibit suffers because the Daughters of Utah Pioneers want to display everything rather than design a truly creative museum that would require selectivity and elimination of many artifacts. That is their choice. However, their choices are making them undesirable to much of the public.
Defining Memory is an important work for anyone involved in public history. It allows readers to understand from those that have experience in the field as to what works and what does not. Local history is important because the public seems to find it the most accessible, interesting, and a point of regional pride. It is also necessary for young public historians to learn about local history museums because that is where the most jobs are thus potential employment rests in understanding the power of public local history.