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.
No comments:
Post a Comment