"The cause was lost but the Lost Cause shouldn't be"

Tony Horwitz grew up in New Haven, Connecticut listening to stories read to him by his grandfather about the Civil War. When his grandfather died, his father continued to read to him and the seeds of the Civil War grew inside him. Twenty-five years later, after traveling and meeting his Australian born wife, Tony moved to Virginia near the Blue Ridge Mountains and his dormant interest in the Civil War began to resurface. Thus begins his Odyssey to visit the sites of the Civil War battles, the towns and hamlets surrounding the areas, and the monuments erected to honor the lost.

On his travels he records meetings with locals, including members of the United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Horwitz describes these people in great detail, warts and all, and yet despite conversations that might lead a great many people to point out the flaws in their arguments or simply up and leave, Horwitz lets them have their say. In some cases, what they have to say is not pretty but I think Horwitz allows their personalities to shine through and gives the reader a wider sense of why those opinions are held.

In many rural areas of the south, especially those with battlefields in their backyards, the war from 1861-1865 is a lot closer and more present than even World War II. The soldiers who fought were family and those family histories have been painstakingly researched. Many still describe the war as the 'War of Northern Aggression', or the War of Secession.' Manning Williams, from Charleston, described the North and South as 'two irreconcilable cultures'; the idealized agrarian South and the industrialists of the North. Viewed through an ethnographic lens, "Southerners lost the war because they were too Celtic and their opponents were too English." [p.69]

This same belief that the war was a fight between the states leads many Southern communities to bridle at the mention of slavery. Furthermore, to suggest that the battle flag of the Confederate soldiers should be retired elicits strong emotional reactions from many people. As one man cried, "We may have lost the War, but at least we should have this to look back on."

It's difficult to read some of the angry rhetoric that a few community members unleash. On the one hand we have several genteel ladies and gentlemen whose interest and passion for the war can at least be understood in terms of family history and who shy deftly away from the question of slavery. On the other hand we have 'Walt' who believes African Americans are barely human and shouldn't mix with whites at all. Clearly there are some ugly beliefs still hiding amongst polite society. Horwitz says, “I had to explore two pasts and two presents; one white, one black, separate and unreconcilable. The past has poisoned the present and the present, in turn, now poisoned remembrance of things past.” [p.208] I wonder, is it possible for southern blacks and southern whites to ever reconcile?

Paper dolls and Confederate coloring books: whose past is it anyway?

We've talked about whitewashing the past before - those historic homes you can visit in some parts of the South that attempt to display the past without admitting that it rested on brutality and enslavement. We've talked about the nature of the past; how it is mutable and shifting and how hard it can be to pin it to one place or one perspective. History is made by those who won the battles, by the people who left behind more than just sweat and tears. The poor have little to leave, the disenfranchised have little to say. The past is remembered in personal and public ways that very seldom intersect.

If those old southern plantation homes like to hide the fact that their fortunes were made with slave labor, the 'Sons of Confederate Veterans' seem to believe that shouting about everything but slavery will do just as good a job. I took a look at the website and their facebook page and could find only one small reference to enslaved African Americans during the Civil War. If you want to reenact a battle, learn about a Confederate relative or perhaps join your child in coloring a nice Confederate flag or pin you won't be disappointed but don't expect to see anything about non-white Civil War history; it doesn't appear to exist.

On the other hand, is Confederate history so shameful that we should never speak of it or the men and women who lived and fought for their cause? Should we tear down all the monuments and plaques that commemorate the soldiers and generals who lost the war? Isn't that just the same as pretending it never happened? It's a heated topic and one that continues to cause anger and frustration. In the Daily Beast's article, Removal of Confederate Monuments Compared to ISIS, the community members of Wallace, Louisiana were divided. “You do not see streets in Germany named for Hitler!" cried a young Lyrica Neville, reading her text from an I-phone. "It’s psychologically damaging to walk past these murderers,” Another town member shouted “This is a Pandora’s box you’re opening, Bienville owned slaves. Why stop there? This is not going to end! We’re a historic city, a living museum.”

A living museum is definitely a good way to describe Wallace and other places like it. It has a shared history even if there were two sides. So how do we connect the two sides instead of denying them? In this instance I think museums and archives can be that bridge. It is possible to show history with the full light of day shining on it. Blogger, Historiann, points out that openly discussing the 'shameful' parts of history not only engages those people whose pasts were hidden but can actually benefit the entire community both economically and socially. "Historic Stagville Plantation, north of Durham, has learned that. Visitors increased from 6,000 in 2007 to nearly 13,000 in 2008, said site manager Frachele Scott, who made slavery a key part of the tour when she arrived in 2007. Stagville, now owned by the state, was one of the South’s largest plantations, encompassing 30,000 acres and 900 slaves."

Digital History...Oh the Places You'll Go!

This week's readings delve into the pros and cons of Google Books and the many many research projects that have grown up within and around it. Dan Cohen, the Executive Director of the Digital Public Library of America, asked "Is Google good for history?" and answers with a resounding Yes! Without a doubt. Google Books has not only made available previously obscure print books but also enabled further historical research to grow from this online repository. In fact, not only has it enabled new research, it also sheds new light on previous research. The sentiment expressed in Dr. Cebula's blog post Bring Me the Head of Stephen Burroughs! regarding looking back on prior research with newly available material is reiterated by other historians. Cohen describes a similar moment, "Researching in the pre-Google Books era, my textual evidence was limited—I could only read a certain number of treatises. The vastness of Google Books for the first time presents the opportunity to do a more comprehensive scan of [the literature available]."

We also looked at the progression of digital information and its dissemination. To the left here is an example of an early computer, (here being used by the CDC,) but similar to those used within newsrooms in America. In 1981, KRON news channel reported on newspaper companies using this new technology to print and send articles 'online'. The telephone modum and length of time it took to send an entire copy was laughable but in hindsight there is irony in the newspaper team saying they didn't want to profit from it - little did they know that print newspapers would disappear along with vendors and printers just a couple of decades later.

History & Memory - Facts and Interpretation

The National Park Service (NPS) oversees, preserves and promotes historic sites, parks and other spaces all across the United States. In 2011, out of the twenty-two thousand employees within its service, only one hundred and eighty-two were formerly employed as historians. In that same year the NPS published its report Imperiled Promise: The State of History in the National Park Service which had been sent to fifteen hundred members, (both current and retired,) of the park service. Five hundred and forty-four of those surveyed responded and generated over eight hundred pages of discursive replies. Out of all that discussion there emerged a fairly common thread - the National Park Service was doing a pretty bad job of maintaining historic credibility. Many noted that its content was 'sporadic' - some sites were doing a great job but many others were doing a really poor one. One respondent accused them of "timid interpretation."

But is this fair? The NPS was originally charged with preserving the parks and markers without worrying too much about cultural interpretation or current education. It spent time and man-power on the upkeep of sites that were deemed historically significant and would be looked at by the American public as a part of their shared past. With so much money spent on simply preserving those sites, is it even possible to stay current with changes in historical memory? The report suggests yes. Obviously more money is needed and better training for all involved but the biggest change would be hiring additional historians and allowing them to do their job alongside other non-NPS historians.

One historic site the park service oversees is the Whitman Mission, originally known as Wailaptu in Walla Walla. The Whitman Mission, established by Narcissa and Marcus Whitman with the blessing of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, was set up in 1836. There were several other such missions in the region established around the same time including the Tshimakain Mission overseen by another famous couple, Mary and Elkanah Walker. The missionaries had all left the East coast to move west into a territory that was still fairly unknown. Fur traders used the trading routes from Canada into Washington and Oregon but this was one of the first times white men and women had set up homes in order to civilize and convert the Native tribes in that area.

The Whitman's spent ten years with the Cayuse Indians - their intent to convert not only their spiritual lives but their tribal customs also. They wanted the Cayuse to settle down and grow crops, to attend church and to seek salvation for their 'wickedness.' The tribes were initially curious and some of them did indeed convert to Christianity but their curiosity and patience wore thin when more missions continued to settle bringing disease. In 1847, after years of living reasonably peacefully with the Whitman's, a band of Indians descended upon the Mission and slaughtered twelve people including Narcissa and Marcus.

And that is often how the Whitman Mission is remembered. Two missionaries filled with zeal and a desire to teach and convert the Cayuse tribes were butchered for their efforts. Of course, there are always two sides to a story and it is how we remember and memorialize this site today that is interesting. Scholars have moved away from calling it the 'Whitman Massacre' and instead use terms such as 'conflict' or 'tragedy.' The Whitman's may have originally desired to do good works but they lacked any cultural understanding of the tribes they administered to and were impatient and often angry with them. The Cayuse were unimpressed. After their members began dying of diseases brought with other settlers they had had enough. It is thought that the Indians who killed the twelve people may have actually been from a neighboring tribe but the fact remains, twelve people lost their lives and around fifty-two were captured and held for ransom.

The NPS keeps most of the bloody details out of the public eye and only barely touches upon the underlying reasons for the killings. School children learn about the tribes as well as the mission but it's a pretty sanitized program. The Whitman College itself used to devote an annual celebration to the Mission and freshman students were required to visit the Mission. Today, the college and the town have tried to move past this part of their history.

Memories, Memorials and Missteps

Painting of the Sand Creek Massacre by Lindneaux

Ari Kelman’s A Misplaced Massacre: struggling over the memory of Sand Creek is not just a retelling of the massacre that occurred in Colorado in 1864. Instead, it is an examination of the memorialization process that took place over one hundred and fifty years later and how the past is never static. Although we learn what happened under the charge of Colonel John Chivington, via his own testimony, (as well as from Silas Soule, a soldier and George Bent, a survivor,) it is how the tribes and the community and the federal government in the present, understood and related to it that is of paramount importance.

But what did happen in November 1864? According to Chivington, he and his troop of soldiers heroically battled over five hundred Indian warriors who were planning an attack on the local population and possibly America itself. Because of his brave and victorious struggle against these murderous tribes, the women, children and citizens of Colorado and afar were now safe from harm. Silas Soule, a Captain leading company D in Colorado had a different story. According to a letter he sent to a friend, Colonel Chivington had butchered the Indians and lied about the battle to save his own reputation [p. 22.] The Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes mown down by Chivington’s soldiers had included women and children and even unborn babies. George Bent survived the massacre and though he was neither asked to testify nor volunteered any information at the time, he later recalled the events and published his account in 1905 and 1906 which corroborated Captain Soule’s account.

In 2007, with the historic site unveiled, the tribes were angry and suspicious and the community of Kiowa County, (where the marker would be placed,) were also upset and anxious. There were still unanswered questions about the events and in particular, where the event had actually taken place. The Kiowa county residents worried that the possible bad press connected with the site of the massacre, (committed by federal troops of the time,) would create a negative impact on the small community. The tribes wanted to be sure the site would be honored correctly and in order to honor their dead they needed to re-inter the remains in the correct location. The problem was, no one knew for certain where the exact location was.

The creek where the massacre took place had shifted over time and most of the remains and artifacts had been scattered or scavenged. It took several more years and the help of a former crime scene investigator to determine where the events had most likely taken place. Jeff Campbell treated the site and the surrounding area as though it were a modern day crime scene and used all his training to map out the events of the time using the eyewitness testimony of Soule and Bent. With the help of another researcher, they pieced together the most likely coordinates and presented their findings to the tribes and the National Park Service.

Though it had taken several more years and there was still a great deal of mistrust from those tribes, both sides were finally in agreement and the site of the Sand Creek massacre was properly commemorated.

Treasure! at the Northwest Museum of Arts & Culture Visited Sunday, February 7th 2016

It is February in Spokane and there aren’t too many tourists but the Northwest Museum of Arts and Culture, (or MAC as it is known locally,) is open year round and there were quite a few people visiting this Sunday. The MAC has undergone several changes within the last few years. There has been a shuffling of museum management with a messy firing and rehiring and a great deal of resentment and blame. The Inlander posted a few stories questioning the credentials of the most recent Executive Director and there were also public debates on next steps including online polls to both fire and re-hire him.

Despite this, the MAC is still very much part of the Spokane art and history scene with a Vision Statement reflecting this, “The Northwest Museum of Arts & Culture will be the preeminent cultural showplace in the Pacific Northwest for the arts, history, and lifelong learning.” It offers highly sought after internship opportunities with local universities and graduate students. Restoration efforts include the Charles Libby photograph collection as well as other previously hidden gems that are now available in the Digital Archives Collection. There is also a new effort to modernize the museum, letting go of typical attic artifacts and bringing in much more vibrant and interactive collections including local tribe collaborations.

For now the MAC appears to be focusing very much on rebuilding its community involvement with school participation and family visits. All perfectly reasonable. Unlike Seattle, Spokane has fewer out of town visitors year round and most attendees likely live in the area and have visited more than once. The focus on schools and family attendance can be seen in its most recent exhibits, Art with LEGO® bricks and Treasure!

I visited the Treasure exhibit with my six year old and she was not disappointed. On display were a small selection of artifacts including a canon that had been recovered from a ship during the American revolution. It had actually been used by both the British and the Americans since the ship itself had been captured and then reclaimed. Most of the exhibit however was an interactive and tactile assortment of activities which included an underwater robotic camera that kids could manipulate and a set of cannon games where children could fire cannonballs onto a video screen of pirate ships. There were also stations where children could create their own pirate flag, make a coin rubbing or sniff the contents of several ‘pirate’ treasure chests and guess the odor. This was cute although I had no idea ‘sea air’ smelled exactly like Old Spice!

We also had the opportunity to pan for gold or use a metal detector in another kid-friendly area. There wasn’t too much on offer for older children and this wouldn’t be of much interest to many adults but my first grader loved it.

Visitors to the main museum also have the opportunity to tour the Campbell House just across the way. Sadly the 3pm tour had been cancelled and the previous tour was full so I didn’t get to see it this time. I did however visit the Carriage House on the property of the Campbell House and, while there, visitors can use the touch screen information centers to view the interior of the house itself as well as related images.

The Carriage House is an addition to the main house and it doesn’t hold much more than the carriage and car it was designed for but there are a few other items on display and some photographs with a little history behind them.

Many of those photographs and information guides were written by graduate history students and they are both visually appealing and informative. I had a few minor quibbles such as the use of obviously fake plastic vegetables, (corn, cabbage etc.) set out in a basket to convey the idea of what the Campbells might be eating. It would be nice to see dried corn husks instead or simply better fake replicas? There were examples of real items behind glass such as tins of original foods, (seen here,) so it was a shame to see the plastic examples.

I was disappointed that I didn't get to see the Campbell House proper but as I mentioned before, this was a Sunday afternoon in February and there will be plenty of other opportunities. In fact, Saturday afternoons offer a free tour of the home, without the need to purchase a museum ticket. Updates to follow.

References

Mike Bookey, “MAC Shake-Up: The Northwest Museum of Arts and Culture suddenly fires its executive director” The Inlander, May 02, 2012. http://www.inlander.com/spokane/mac-shake-up/Content?oid=2138063

Daniel Walters, “Museum of Discontent: Rehiring Forrest Rodgers didn’t end chaos and frustration at the MAC” The Inlander, September 13, 2013. http://www.inlander.com/spokane/museum-of-discontent/Content?oid=2189834

The Digital Archives of the Northwest Museum of Arts and Culture. https://ferrisarchives.northwestmuseum.org/

Beyond Preservation - alligning the past with the future

Beyond Preservation: Using Public History to Revitalize Inner Cities, Andrew Hurley’s examination of preservation efforts across America, looks at several examples of historic, architectural, and economic preservation projects over the last one hundred years or so. He begins with those famous examples of historic preservation such as the Washington residence, Williamsburg etc. but then moves on to look at entire neighborhoods including Santa Fe, Georgetown, New Orleans, and Old North St. Louis.

Early examples of preserving neighborhoods highlight the many directions this can take. With Georgetown, for example, the narrow streets lined with rows of uniform townhouses formerly home to poor workers and a largely African American base, were reinvented to become ‘enclaves of affluent white people.’ Property values rose and those former diverse neighbors were pushed out. People loved the tall, narrow houses, brick-paved streets and businesses and artisans flocked to meet the demand.

Santa Fe used a different tactic and preserved the architectural design of the original Spanish settlers and Native Americans not by reclaiming older examples of those buildings but by asking property owners to use the adobe and stucco design in new buildings and storefronts. This allowed the city to have a distinct branding that gave a nod to the past while welcoming in new investment. And it worked. The city thrived.

One of the problems preservation societies and urban planning committees have is bringing together the needs of both in a way that will preserve history but also stimulate new growth. It’s impossible, (unless you have a very rich investor or benefactor,) to maintain a building or a neighborhood without the economic stimulus to continue those efforts. Hurley points out the early raze and rebuild process did revitalize some areas and neighborhoods but it created worse problems in its wake. Displaced communities and people created a burden on the larger area and saw an increase in crime and dependency. Hurley uses the term ‘urban surgery’ which describes its effects well - you can see the economic and community impact the freeway had, here in Spokane, on the East-Central neighborhood for example.

Another term Hurley uses is ‘adaptive reuse’ which describes the final outcome of the Jensen-Byrd building here in Spokane. Originally a warehouse built in 1909, it changed hands over time and was adapted but essentially remained a storage/warehouse property. When WSU bought it their original idea was to tear it down and build a modern college dorm as part of their expanding campus. Local people and preservation societies got involved, despite the fact that it wasn’t listed on a register. Eventually, after much lobbying and the fact that the construction company pulled out, WSU decided to repurpose or adaptively reuse the building instead. They plan to keep its basic structure and integrate it into their campus and the wider community.

And, that appears to be the way forward. People love old buildings with history and a sense of the past. Keeping that past while integrating it into the social and economic community allows everyone to win.

Review - The Presense of the Past

This week’s readings included a funny, (albeit sad for the historian,) reply to a letter sent from a university professor to a ‘house’ museum curator somewhere in the south and that we shall only know as the Baron Von Munchausen House. We also looked at Rosenzweig and Thelan’s The Presence of the Past: Popular Uses of History in American Life.

The book by Rosenzweig and Thelan looks at the many ways in which history comes alive for the average American. Their study was the result of several years of discussion, meetings with other historians and students, question preparation and revision, pre-testing and the final telephone survey conducted in 1994. It was five years after their original idea that the survey was granted funding and carried out by some enthusiastic graduate students.

Their careful planning and pre-testing allowed them to settle upon the phrase ‘the past’ as opposed to history or tradition or some other word referring to the past. They noticed the respondents gave much more detailed responses when referring to the past because it could refer to their own experience rather than a classroom or lecture hall. Of the several hundred respondents, the two authors began to notice some broad similarities but it was particularly interesting when they reviewed white American experiences against Black and Native American experience. “Talk of intimate pasts animated most of the conversations we had with Americans [but the] Americans we interviewed also talked about connecting with pasts outside their intimate worlds. They wanted to personalize the public past.” [p. 115]

The authors found that overwhelmingly, white Americans tended to view the past through the lens of personal and family connections and events but that both Black and Native Americans attached a wider social significance to the past. Whereas the former might have talked about family history, genealogy, collections of significance etc. the latter connected their lives to events such as antebellum slavery, the civil rights movement, Martin Luther King Jrs. speech etc. Both, however, talked about keeping their family history alive for the next generation. A New Jersey psychologist said “we are the carriers of history in my family. We come from now relatively small families, and we carry history along. Someone has to be the carrier of history in every family.” [ p. 16]

It’s a really great book - while some of the findings seemed fairly obvious, one of the reasons the authors wrote the book was to point some of those obvious findings back at classroom historians. By showing that Americans think about history in personal ways they were trying to get instructors, curators and other historians to remember that when teaching it.

Back to that letter to the Baron Von Munchausen House museum. The professor who wrote it had visited the museum and felt compelled to point out some fairly glaring mistakes presented by the docents. He was also quick to praise the museum for its general collection and assured the curator that he wasn’t trying to be offensive, merely hoping to make them aware of some myths they were unaware of. The reply was not so pleasant and actually added to the sense that history for this museum was not so much about presenting facts but more about hiding them. The curator was particularly disgruntled when talking about slavery and said she didn’t want to upset the many students who came through the museum. Also to not be so danged cynical and to essentially, leave them to their own business. Amusing stuff but it is time for people to own their past and make sure it tells the truth.

Speaking of Archives...Pub pictures saved from London skip displayed online

An "irreplaceable" archive of photographs of some of the country's most striking public houses that was nearly lost to posterity forever has been made available to the public.

Reaction paper: Archives – what they are and what they do.

What exactly is an archive and how is it different from a library? What does an archivist do that a records manager doesn’t? Do you have to be a historian to be an archivist? And perhaps most importantly, what does an archive, archive? These and other questions arose in this week’s readings and while many of the answers were as I expected, some were quite illuminating.

The Society of American Archivists provides a set of core values and a code of ethics for the archival profession and it is here that many of those answers can be found. Although some of these values and ethics pertain to many other jobs there are some that relate to archivists alone and I’ll discuss some of those in a moment. The first question of how does an archive differ from a library is quite interesting. Both can be public, private, governmental, historical, medical or religious for example, but an archive often contains only a narrow selection of documents and they are typically primary materials. Libraries might also have a narrow selection but for the most part those materials are not primary sources but books, journals (electronic or print,) and other tangible items that remain in the collection until they are either discarded, (weeded,) or replaced. An archive, after selecting which materials it will keep, continues to preserve and retain them because there are typically no other copies available. A public records archive, for example, has original birth, marriage and death certificates, court records, city, county, and state records and many other records that cannot be found elsewhere.

So what does an archivist do that a librarian or records manager doesn’t? Quite a lot actually. “Archivists exercise professional judgment in appraising, acquiring, and processing materials to ensure the preservation, authenticity, diversity, and lasting cultural and historical value of their collections.” A university archive might have the diaries and papers of a particular person or family but must adhere to the family’s wishes regarding what can be shared and with whom. In cases where the family has not given any direction, it might be a personal judgement call. Archivists also describe and catalog the collection in quite a different way than a library cataloger might. More important than subjects and MARC records are contents and description. Much of an archivist’s time is spent describing what is in a particular collection and creating a ‘finding aid’ to assist researchers. Other duties may include advocacy and outreach, conservation, and ongoing training.

So what about history? Does an archivist need to be a historian in order to be a caretaker of historic records? Not necessarily but it’s not a bad idea. Historians look at past events and facts and interpret them and connect them to a wider audience. An archivist, while trying to do the latter, makes sure never to interpret only to describe the collection and make it easy for the researcher to find what they need.

So I touched briefly on what an archive might contain and who it might serve but it’s worthwhile noting that archives can exist in many forms and serve many different communities. All try to preserve certain primary records for future consideration. This brings me to another important point – security of those preserved records. There will always be the possibility of damage whether from a flood or other disaster but another problem for archives is theft. Some archives contain extremely sensitive information, some contain records and documents of national security. One example is the National Archives and Records Administration in Washington, DC. In 2003, Sandy Berger, (a national security advisor,) stole several documents that contained classified information. He literally walked out of the building with those documents in his suit and pants pockets (see House Report, Sandy Berger’s Theft of Classified Documents: Unanswered Questions) How was this possible? Bad security and oversight on the part of the archive and its staff. Although Berger was eventually caught and returned two of the documents, three had been destroyed forever. If you are the caretaker of one-of-a-kind documents and materials, security should be one of your biggest concerns.

A final word on the subject – in a world where many documents and materials are ‘born digital’, (created online or digitally such as emails, web-pages and other non-physical items,) how can we preserve these materials when many are so ephemeral in nature? The answer is, we’re still working on it. Aside from the short-lived nature of some of these items, some may also be incompatible with current technology and many of these items would either take too long to preserve or take too much space. This is a problem for both libraries and archives but especially for archivists who truly are the caretakers of often one-of-a-kind documents – as the archivist at the Eastern Regional Branch in Washington said recently, “Once you’ve lost it…it’s gone forever.”

Shifting attitudes in Public History – from Ford's village to Disney's empire

The collection of essays Wallace gives us in A Mickey Mouse History spans several years of writing and consulting in museums and archives. Now in 2016, some of those papers are over twenty years old. Despite some obvious technological leaps and missteps, the overall message of the book still resonates. One clear and overarching message is that museums are for all the people they serve, not just those that created them. And that oftentimes, those very people can help an institution discover more relevant cultural significance than the dusty artifacts of times past.

The book describes two of the first instances of cultural record keeping in the form of the house museum and the 'village' museum. The most notable example of the former is Mount Vernon and probably the most famous example of the latter is Colonial Williamsburg, (though there are many other famous and worthy examples nationwide.) Wallace describes how both institutions began and how they have changed over the last few decades. Mount Vernon, for example, was an attempt to capture a moment of history and to illuminate it for future generations. In preserving it and making it a beacon, it would help guide new immigrants on their path to becoming a true American with all the values associated with that status.

Of course, as time passed and evidence emerged, the people of America saw that even those shining lights could be dimmed. With so much in common, in fact, both Mount Vernon and Williamsburg were subject to criticism about their portrayal and romanticism of the past. Each museum was guilty of depicting happy, healthy “servants” instead of the more accurate depiction of indentured slaves. Both have undergone significant cultural revision but both are the better for it.

As the title of the book suggests, Wallace also talks about the corporate creation of history including two famous examples; Henry Ford's 'Greenfield Village' and Walt Disney's various parks. Ford began assembling his haphazard museum in the early 1920s and decided to open a village museum to, as he said, “...help America take a step, even if it is a little one, toward the saner and sweeter idea of life that prevailed in pre-war days.” Disney's vision also tried to sanitize and soften the ugly truth surrounding historical events and often sought to 'strip away the accretions of time.' Historians balked and rightly so – history should never be handed over to anyone or anything that seeks to obscure the messier parts.

In addition to museums transforming as our society has changed, Wallace talks about the value of this transformation happening in the other direction. Museums and their curators have a unique opportunity to change the way we think or at least encourage discussion and debate over historic objects and events. He mentions several instances of this transformation: the civil rights movement, the influx of immigrant populations, LGBT activism etc. All have not only helped reshape our understanding of past events but in many cases are directly shaping our present and working together with our cultural institutions allows those voices and stories to be heard.

Lonnie Bunch, in an article discussing museum controversy, also talks about courting and using controversy to make museums more vital and useful. One example given is an exhibition on the first encounters Europeans had with the native peoples of America. The exhibition and the people involved received complaints from many native Americans that it didn't capture the true past. Bunch insists controversy is a wonderful tool saying, “rather than champion limits on controversy and debate in exhibits, museums and curators must have the courage and vision needed to embrace [it].”

Wallace, Bunch and many other public historians continue to chip away at historical bluff and subterfuge, whether through direct consultation or written criticism and it is a service that should continue to be encouraged.