History/Public history
Question #1: The Intersection of Memory and History
Memory refers to different ways in which societies and individuals choose to remember or forget certain events and moments as far as their history is concerned. When the individual is involved, it is called individual memory and public or collective memory when the society is involved. Memory plays a very significant role in history since it gives history not only an emotional meaning but also flow as well as the knowledge that cannot just be found from most historical documents. Human beings have continuously witnessed enormous distractions resulting from natural disasters. An example of an individual and collective history is the Whitman Massacre, which entails the killing of Washington missionaries Marcus Whitman along with his wife and elven others in 1847 by Cayuse tribe members. They were accused of poisoning 200 Cayuse. These killings have been ascribed partially to the clash of cultures and somewhat the failure of Whitman, who was a doctor, to prevent the spread of measles among the Indian community.
According to David Plight, history tends to be what historians do. He argues that it is a reasoned construction of the past drawn from various pieces of evidence. Similarly, he states that man can’t untie himself from that evidence. In other words, reasoned construction does not necessarily have to be done in the world of academia (Blight, p.24). For instance, some good historians are not academicians. Conversely, memory is how people or groups of people (societies) not only process their past but also create narratives and stories of their history. Whether this is gotten from political rhetoric, from church, from family, from schooling, among others, memory is the complete stories and narratives that individuals and societies believe to be living in (p.25).
A public history is an approach or action that allows the public to have access to historical knowledge. For instance, many historians spend a lot of time carrying out research and generating information regarding the past. Public history plays a significant role in communicating these research findings as well as insights to the members of the public in not only an inspiring but also a meaningful manner. For instance, the Baltimore ’68 project allows the public to understand what happened in American history as far as the civil rights movement is concerned. This period was engulfed with civil unrest in 1968 in Baltimore after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in Memphis, Tennessee. The report documents that the assassination triggered the civil unrest in over 125 cities in the United States of America (Lyon et al., p. 33). Gathering of public history uses the third-person and second-person interpreters as the most commonly used interpretive techniques.
The dissonance between memory and history is a growing challenge that historians have to deal with. It leads to “time unconsciousness, the subjectivity of information, lack of openness to experienced events, as well as inter-subjectivity.” Therefore, historians are required to dig deeper, conduct multiple research, interview many people, and analyze various documents to present a valid and unbiased as well as reliable information to their audience as far as the past is concerned.
Question #2: Engaging Audiences at Museums and Historic Sites
Historical sites and public historians have used different strategies to attract audiences. For instance, since time immemorial, historical sites have attracted public audience by exhibits and information that evokes the public’s positive emotions. Some of the strategies that they have used include the appreciation of picturesque vista or fine art craftsmanship, invoking feelings of patriotism and pride, and providing moments of amusement. Public historians also use a strategy of exporting their audiences back in time so that they can understand not just the context of the moment or event but also the cause and effect relationship of the event as well as the significance of the historical moment to the present. For instance, they use various techniques of interpretation that keeps the audience inspired and captivated and also wanting to know more. They use “their ability to understand the content of the event and accuracy of the information when delivering the information to the audience in an attractive manner.” As a result, the audience who come as free-choice learners are attracted to their delivery method, and they become interested and ready to learn more.
Other public history site uses a first-person interpretation technique as one way of engaging their audiences. Some researchers have every bit of information on these sites that makes it attractive to the public audience. These researchers do not just know about a historical event but also “know the location of the bathroom.” The historical sites have employees who understand the historical pictures, artifacts, and other materials and can answer any question from the audience. These employees satisfy the curiosity and the taunting questions, especially of the young audience of the 21st century who not only ask questions but also use their phones to snap pictures. They also play the role of a historical figure from the past.
Sometimes it is challenging to apply these strategies, and there is a need for putting boundaries on some of these strategies of engagement. First, it is important to wait for the audience to engage before the public historian can engage it. For instance, “many people in the United States access information through social media.” As a consequence, the museums have adopted the use of technology as a strategy of attracting the audience. However, it is common to see the audience’s expectations falling short of the organizers as recalled by Simon concerning his visit to the Chicago museum. Secondly, public historians should place a boundary between the past and the present. For instance, they should not speak to their audience entirely as if they lived in different periods and not in the present as well. They should recognize that they only have information to share with their audience and should act that they lived there. They should also know when to use a first-person interpretation technique and living history where they have to go back on time. The latter is only popular with families and not every visitor. They should also when to use first-person and third-person interpretation to give their audience a chance of asking questions falling outside the present interactions. They should also not confine their engagement strategies to museums. They should try to engage their audiences in their places of work, families, streets, and wherever they are.