Tuesday, September 10, 2013

The Significance and the Presentation of the Past: Rosenzweig, Thelen, and Kitch


The readings I am commenting on this week provide an insight in to the significance of the past for ordinary Americans, and the ways in which the past is presented for public consumption.  The two books on the docket for today are The Presence of the Past: Popular Uses of History in American Life by Roy Rosenzweig and David Thelen, and Pennsylvania in Public Memory: Reclaiming the Industrial Past by Carolyn Kitch.
           
Rosenzweig and Thelen’s The Presence of the Past is the product of a remarkable survey conducted during the mid-1990s.  The authors and their team of students phoned a cross-section of the American population and asked them a series of questions about their uses of interest in the (broadly conceived) past.  Thus activities as disparate as looking at family photos and visiting museums were both counted as past centered activities.  The survey participants were asked to rate the quality of their engagement in a variety of these past-centered activities and also to provide qualitative assessments of their experiences.  The bulk of the book is devoted to sifting through the mass of data produced by the survey, but two important points are stressed throughout. 

First, people are most engaged with the past when it is most personal, with around a third of respondents involved in researching their family’s past (Rosenzweig, 25).  Family members are among the most trusted sources people turn to for information about the past.  Many Americans are extremely interested in the past of their own family, often viewing the family past as deeply important to their sense of themselves.

Second, among the least trusted of sources for information about the past are school classrooms.  It would appear that schools do a terrible job of communicating history to students in a way that makes it seem relevant and interesting. Many respondents felt that schools provided a packaged narrative of national development that was “too neat and rosy.” (Rosenzweig, 111) A good teacher could sometimes redeem the experience by becoming surrogate family members and relating their “firsthand experience” to students. (Rosenzweig, 109) 

Third, and related to both respondents’ positive view of family and negative opinion of schools, was their marked preference for unmediated experiences.  Thus, museums were regarded with a high degree of trust for their ability to provide an intimate, unmediated experience.

The unmediated contact with the past provided by museums is a major focus of the other book for this week, Pennsylvania in Public Memory by Carolyn Kitch.  Kitch’s book documents the presentation of “heritage culture,” a phenomenon that is visible nationwide, but particularly prominent in the Keystone State with its wealth of dormant industrial relics.  Kitch’s methodology was simply to venture out and experience for herself the wide range of heritage sites on offer in Pennsylvania.

As Kitch informs us in Chapter 2, Pennsylvania’s heritage industry developed over the course of the twentieth century with is most recent iteration developing in the “postindustrial” period as plant closings and downsizing left a landscape dotted with former hubs of activity desperately in search of ways to revitalize their economies.

However, while ostensibly devoted to preserving the memory of industrial culture, the heritage industry does much more.  Rather than concentrate on one thing, “heritage” in Pennsylvania often means a generalized, chronologically fuzzy, and nostalgia tinged “jumble” which conflates the seemingly irreconcilable.  Thus wilderness and factory production, pioneers and Indians, captains of industry and laborers, and “ethnic” foods and Civil War re-enactors are often presented together in such a way that elides the ahistorical and problematic nature of the pairings.  In this manner “heritage” becomes the common possession of us all and our “ancestors” are reduced to humble folks who made sacrifices wholly on our behalf.

Kitch is a professor of journalism and as such tries to present heritage tourism in an impartial light.  Thus the book largely lacks an argumentative dimension that might have sharpened its focus.  Its greatest value lies in its highlighting of the sometimes strange juxtapositions that arise when historic sites and heritage venues must compete for the public’s attention and money.  At all heritage sites tourism, history, commerce, local identity, and the personal lives of volunteers and visitors swirl together.  Having finished reading Kitch we must ask if a history department seminar room is really the appropriate vantage point from which to adjudicate between these disparate, yet worthy, goals.

No comments:

Post a Comment