Amy Tyson’s The Wages
of History: Emotional Labor on Public History’s Front Lines provides an
in-depth look at the world of costumed historical interpreters. Employed in numerous historic sites across
the country, costumed interpreters are rarely considered in the way the Tyson
considers them in her book: as laborers occupying a precarious position in a
customer-centric service industry. Tyson
provides a scathing indictment of a system of non-profit cultural institutions
that exploits the skilled interpreters whose work on the “front lines”
ultimately makes those institutions meaningful for the people who visit them.
Tyson examines this phenomenon of exploited “emotional”
labor in the environment of Minnesota’s Historic Fort Snelling, an 1820s U.S.
Army fort managed by the Minnesota Historical Society. Her study combines archival research on the
history and development of the interpretive program at Fort Snelling with
ethnography of the interpreters she worked with at the fort in the late-1990s
to the mid-2000s. Fundamental to the
nature of interpretive work at Fort Snelling is that it is carried on only on a
seasonal basis. For most of its history
as a tourist attraction (since the 1960s) Fort Snelling’s interpreters have had
to reapply for jobs each season. While
working at the fort interpreters earned a meager wage with no benefits and were
accorded little respect or consideration by the historical institution that
employed them. Nevertheless, Fort
Snelling most interpreters became deeply invested in their work, going out of
their way to enhance their knowledge and tailor their interpretations to the
emotional needs of visitors. Many
interpreters reported feeling deep satisfaction from their interactions with
visitors despite the otherwise poor conditions under which they labored. For Tyson, the exploitation of interpreters
hinges on the poor pay they receive despite their devotion and expertise.
Tyson raises important questions about how cultural and
historical work is carried out in the United States, if not the world. Among these is the question of whether there
is a meaningful difference between non-profit and for-profit corporations with
regard to how they view and treat their non-managerial workforce in the post-industrial, neo-liberal order
that has emerged over the last half-century.
Regrettably, she spends little time discussing the parent institution of
Historic Fort Snelling, giving the impression that the Minnesota Historical
Society is a cold, faceless bureaucracy (although it is conceivable that that
is the point). However, one would expect
that the MHS is staffed by individuals whose background is similar to that of
the interpreters on the ground (college or higher education, grounded in the
humanities). If this is the case, then
what accounts for the apparent lack of sympathy of employer for employee?
Of course, as with any ethnographic work one must ask of Tyson’s Wages of History just how particular are
the experiences she describes to the milieu in which they occurred. Tyson repeatedly compares interpreters with
waitresses, graduate students, and temporary workers, in other words, with
other workers who are perceived as not having “real jobs.” However, she does not entertain the
possibility that even more generally valued jobs can also exact a sizable
emotional toll. That of physician
immediately comes to mind. To get a
sense of the ways in which even workers at the top of the capitalist food chain
are exploited in similar ways, Tyson’s Wages
of History could be profitably read in tandem with Karen Ho’s Liquidated: An Ethnography of Wall Street. Forty years ago, when the modern service
economy was only beginning to come in to view, Daniel Bell observed that in
contrast to earlier eras in which humans battled against nature and against the
physical limitations of their technology, “the post-industrial society is essentially
a game between persons,” (The Coming of
Post-Industrial Society, p. 488). Tyson’s study of historical laborers in a
consumer-centric environment helps us envision what such a game looks like, and
what effect it has on its participants.
No comments:
Post a Comment