In The Other Suburbanites, Wiese's focuses on the insurgence of blacks living in neighborhood residences specifically during the years following World War II using Chagrin Falls Park in Cleveland as his focus. In what is clearly an exhaustive study, he blends oral history with research and portrays both about equally. From first hand accounts, it is learned, for example, that building a home was particularly rough for black families and required a lot of help from the community in what Wiese refers to as an "ethic of neighborly aid" (p 1506). Since those who lived in the residences struggled with poverty, their "rustic" landscape had to make more use of rudimentary services than in upper class divisions. This in turn served to perpetuate white racism. Still, settling in Chagrin Falls Park gave many blacks their first chance at buying and building their own property to avoid renting. This was clearly an important stepping stone towards acculturation and overcoming racial barriers.
The use of oral history in Wiese's study truly helps to get an understanding of the individuals who lived there. It is one thing to read a study strictly written by someone who is articulate and adept at theses with several years of college under his/her belt and a couple of degrees. It evokes much different emotions, however, when significant oral history is interspersed throughout and especially if it is riddled with grammatical incorrectness. Observing such statements as "wasn't nobody could buy in the city" (p 1514) and "haven't got any money" (p 1506) induces similar feelings as if watching a documentary with interviewees giving testimony. The responses are raw and unedited and thus show true character.
To me, that shows a bit of irony within historiographic writings. As student historians we write term papers, theses, and dissertations and then toil tirelessly over every marginal inch, sentence structure, and punctuation mark. We double check to make sure that page numbers are in the upper left hand corner for this professor, but in the lower right hand corner for that professor. We face humility and embarrassment by having our peers read over our rough drafts only made possible by weeks without sunlight and countless ounces of caffeine, only to have them rip it to shreds with red ink so that we can then turn around and rinse and repeat until we get it right. All of this to make sure that the story, research, and study we are presenting is done cleanly, correctly, flawlessly, and professionally with the hope that our readers will be captivated and mesmerized. Meanwhile, Wiese's oral history project and many others like it take raw, unedited statements from living witnesses and paste them into their written work in its most archaic and rudimentary format and evoke that same dazzlement.
Interesting.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Can You Do Serious History on the Web? Review
Consider the source...
In his article Can You Do Serious History on the Web?, Carl Smith provides his own perspective on using the Internet as a medium for history, particularly in reflection to his own experiences as curator for an exhibit on the Great Chicago Fire. More notably he questions, "Has the unregulated culture of the Internet made cyberspace a bloated refuge for work of questionable value that otherwise couldn't--and shouldn't--see the light of day? (par 2)" Smith clearly embraces the potential use of the Internet for posting historical content, boasting that the Internet's advantages outweigh its disadvantages but errs on the side of caution in regard to whether or not it is serious history in the traditional sense. The obvious traditional mediums for serious history, of course, are books and articles. Smith contends for his readers to consider that constructing an online exhibit of this magnitude was no small feat and that it required just as much research, work, and financial and institutional backing as any other exhibit. He also states that the exhibit he pieced was not done to replace or displace a current exhibit elsewhere. All worthy considerations while trying to answer the topic's question.
The web is littered with historical junk, especially in the age of Wikipedia and less-than-scholarly Google search results. By that same token, library's are laden with occasional literary muck, as well. There are entire volumes addressing the myth of Hitler's single testicle or arguing that Lincoln was a homosexual. These are examples, but it is testimony to the fact that just because there is a published historical document on a bookshelf, it does not denote it as "serious history." Granted, it is much more difficult to publish a book than to post something historically inaccurate on the web, but clearly the questionable material transits all mediums regardless.
When regarding serious history, the medium should not be as much of a factor as the supporting sources. This may go without saying to an audience of student historians, but it is an important point not to be overlooked. If the mindset eventually slips into the categorizing of serious history into a column of strictly books and articles and bunk history into a column of strictly websites without any regard for a particular study's sources, then there are much bigger problems.
In his article Can You Do Serious History on the Web?, Carl Smith provides his own perspective on using the Internet as a medium for history, particularly in reflection to his own experiences as curator for an exhibit on the Great Chicago Fire. More notably he questions, "Has the unregulated culture of the Internet made cyberspace a bloated refuge for work of questionable value that otherwise couldn't--and shouldn't--see the light of day? (par 2)" Smith clearly embraces the potential use of the Internet for posting historical content, boasting that the Internet's advantages outweigh its disadvantages but errs on the side of caution in regard to whether or not it is serious history in the traditional sense. The obvious traditional mediums for serious history, of course, are books and articles. Smith contends for his readers to consider that constructing an online exhibit of this magnitude was no small feat and that it required just as much research, work, and financial and institutional backing as any other exhibit. He also states that the exhibit he pieced was not done to replace or displace a current exhibit elsewhere. All worthy considerations while trying to answer the topic's question.
The web is littered with historical junk, especially in the age of Wikipedia and less-than-scholarly Google search results. By that same token, library's are laden with occasional literary muck, as well. There are entire volumes addressing the myth of Hitler's single testicle or arguing that Lincoln was a homosexual. These are examples, but it is testimony to the fact that just because there is a published historical document on a bookshelf, it does not denote it as "serious history." Granted, it is much more difficult to publish a book than to post something historically inaccurate on the web, but clearly the questionable material transits all mediums regardless.
When regarding serious history, the medium should not be as much of a factor as the supporting sources. This may go without saying to an audience of student historians, but it is an important point not to be overlooked. If the mindset eventually slips into the categorizing of serious history into a column of strictly books and articles and bunk history into a column of strictly websites without any regard for a particular study's sources, then there are much bigger problems.
Wallace's The Virtual Past: Media and History Museums Review
The Wave of the Future
In Wallace's essay The Virtual Past: Media and History Museums, he approaches the topic of technology and its incorporation into museums. He seems particularly wary of virtual reality and the Internet and how it just might prevent individuals from visiting museums altogether. Indeed, they just might become "couch-potato museum-goers. (p 107)" Now, some leeway is allowed given that the article was written in 1993, however, Wallace's approach borderlines either propagandaesque fear-mongering or just downright ignorance, I'm not sure which. Anyone who grew up in the 90s knew about the potential of virtual reality, but it was a given that it would never be something which most people would use as much as they use phones, as Wallace suggests on page 93. He also fears that museum visiting will once again become a hobby of the elite as the Internet will become privatized and thus inaccessible to the less affluent.
The benefit of retrospect allows us to see that much of what Wallace fears is not really the case. Putting a museum on the Internet can never possibly replace the real thing, just as seeing a theme park on the web cannot replace going and riding the rides. It is not as if seeing what is in museums in another format--a book, for example--is a novel concept. While researching Holocaust resistance, I came across a book which photographed a myriad of death camps being preserved in Europe. This hardly hindered my desire to visit Auschwitz. Ultimately, the Internet just makes this type of information more accessible in an informative and summarized format. It is far from a replacement.
As a final, rather superficial observation--and I implore you to take this with a grain of salt--I also believe there is the factor of just saying you did or saw something not done everyday. It is not worth much of an experience to simply say, "I went online last night and saw pictures of the Kitty Hawk at the NASM." However, it is far different to say, "Last summer I went to the NASM and stood 3 feet away from the Enola Gay, one of the most famous planes in history."
In Wallace's essay The Virtual Past: Media and History Museums, he approaches the topic of technology and its incorporation into museums. He seems particularly wary of virtual reality and the Internet and how it just might prevent individuals from visiting museums altogether. Indeed, they just might become "couch-potato museum-goers. (p 107)" Now, some leeway is allowed given that the article was written in 1993, however, Wallace's approach borderlines either propagandaesque fear-mongering or just downright ignorance, I'm not sure which. Anyone who grew up in the 90s knew about the potential of virtual reality, but it was a given that it would never be something which most people would use as much as they use phones, as Wallace suggests on page 93. He also fears that museum visiting will once again become a hobby of the elite as the Internet will become privatized and thus inaccessible to the less affluent.
The benefit of retrospect allows us to see that much of what Wallace fears is not really the case. Putting a museum on the Internet can never possibly replace the real thing, just as seeing a theme park on the web cannot replace going and riding the rides. It is not as if seeing what is in museums in another format--a book, for example--is a novel concept. While researching Holocaust resistance, I came across a book which photographed a myriad of death camps being preserved in Europe. This hardly hindered my desire to visit Auschwitz. Ultimately, the Internet just makes this type of information more accessible in an informative and summarized format. It is far from a replacement.
As a final, rather superficial observation--and I implore you to take this with a grain of salt--I also believe there is the factor of just saying you did or saw something not done everyday. It is not worth much of an experience to simply say, "I went online last night and saw pictures of the Kitty Hawk at the NASM." However, it is far different to say, "Last summer I went to the NASM and stood 3 feet away from the Enola Gay, one of the most famous planes in history."
Monday, October 22, 2007
Preserving Nature in the National Parks Review
In Preserving Nature in the National Parks, Sellars explains the history of the National Park Service from its inception to present times. Over time, the NPS' focus graduated from tourism to conservation. The struggle between the two objectives rages on, however. One argument is to preserve a park so as to appeal to tourists, thus allowing visitors to come and enjoy nature which was the original idea behind Yellowstone National Park. On the other had, it is argued that national parks should be kept in their natural state. It remains a question whether or not a happy medium can be attained here between the two arguments.
The ultimate issue is that enough scientific and ecological research was not incorporated while trying to keep the national parks tourist-friendly and so certain species were either over-killed or over-produced. The last thirty years has seen a transformation in that, however, and now what stands is a rift among the park service. The traditionalists want to adhere to the NPS' original objectives and attract tourists while the other side wishes to incorporate this newfound research.
While studying the issues Sellars provides, it is easy to understand the predicament the NPS finds itself in. With so few areas remaining that are untouched, it is reasonable to want to have land preserved in its natural state. Still, it is just as important to provide safe and enjoyable outdoor areas for individuals to visit. Seemingly, the jury is still out on this one.
The ultimate issue is that enough scientific and ecological research was not incorporated while trying to keep the national parks tourist-friendly and so certain species were either over-killed or over-produced. The last thirty years has seen a transformation in that, however, and now what stands is a rift among the park service. The traditionalists want to adhere to the NPS' original objectives and attract tourists while the other side wishes to incorporate this newfound research.
While studying the issues Sellars provides, it is easy to understand the predicament the NPS finds itself in. With so few areas remaining that are untouched, it is reasonable to want to have land preserved in its natural state. Still, it is just as important to provide safe and enjoyable outdoor areas for individuals to visit. Seemingly, the jury is still out on this one.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Landmarks & Legacy Tour Review
Rookie Mistakes...
This Saturday's tour was certainly an eye-opener into corners of Tallahassee I had admittedly turned a blind eye to. As I looked at the map for the Riley House location, I had to do a bit of a double-take. Here, located literally in the center of downtown Tallahassee is this historic trinket standing as a testament to one man's victory over slavery and adversity in deep south Florida. Maybe if I had done more research on Riley before the tour, I would not have been as dumbfounded by the fact that this slave-turned-millionaire had the epitome of humble beginnings.
As we rode around what is and what used to be Frenchtown, it was increasingly interesting to hear various trivia about the town I'd called home for so many years. Where a large Civic Center now stands was once a free trade market for blacks. When Gus began his tour with the statement that many blacks found desegregation to do more harm than good, I was taken aback slightly. But as we drove through the rundown areas of what used to be a booming and vibrant district, it was easier to understand how this might be so. Still, attempts are clearly being made to "revitalize" the area and with great success. Certainly, some of the housing being constructed is far out of the price range of those currently residing there, but there are also affordable and attractive apartments standing in the same place of what used to be projects. Still, the message derived from Gus' claim on desegregation became clear. It is easy to look down one's nose and blame individuals for their plight, but to stop and think on how the downward spiral may have started presents a much different opinion. Another stop at the Old City cemetery and as Gus said, it was again a classic example of just how segregated whites and blacks were as it was literally taken to the grave. It seemed a bit poetic that two dozen black Civil War Union soldiers are buried there.
If the Riley house was a modest introduction, the Goodwood Museum was its grandiose conclusion, standing in stark contrast to the humble house of the successful ex-slave nestled among a maze of one-way streets, law offices and condominiums still under construction. At first, including the Goodwood Museum in this tour seemed out of place after a journey of Tallahassee History that spanned everywhere from Frenchtown slumps to the once-prominant Lincoln Academy. Upon reflection, though, what revealed itself to me was a duel of stories that shined light on the life of two very different ethnic backgrounds in the same city and era. In one corner, there is the freed African-American who owns the majority of downtown Tallahassee and has the ability to build a home that would make Goodwood look like a shack, but whose humble origins perhaps kept him modest. In the other corner, you have a legacy of families laden with backstabbing, avarice and widows on a plantation so large, its staff of servants would not even fit into the Riley House. From mirrors to paintings, fine China to cocktail dresses, the Goodwood plantation was anything but modest with etiquette that borderlines pretentiousness with a series of bathrooms, hallways and staircases that could only be entered into if a certain level of clothing was being donned. A hierarchy for underwear and other unmentionables? Why not, you don't have anything else to worry about.
As Valerie quoted, I admit a tour of this magnitude would be nothing short of spectacular in, say, Washington. But I had to reflect a bit on the deep and rich history laden in our own backyard which up to this point I had not even truly appreciated. I suppose my nose was so deep in my own books admiring and studying monuments and museums that I missed the area's history that is literally all around me. Granted, I cannot just go see the Lincoln Memorial or the White House whenever I wish. But we have our own monuments just yards away from where we study those which are hundreds of miles away. Indeed, statues of three black individuals who overcame similar adversity as Riley stand in the middle of our own campus. They aren't Civil War generals or former Presidents who led our nation in times of war, but they faced their own challenges all the same. Personally, some kid making a stand and carrying his books into a campus dominated by those who had oppressed people like him for so long makes him much more human than a man who crossed the Delaware.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to finish wiping this egg off my face.
This Saturday's tour was certainly an eye-opener into corners of Tallahassee I had admittedly turned a blind eye to. As I looked at the map for the Riley House location, I had to do a bit of a double-take. Here, located literally in the center of downtown Tallahassee is this historic trinket standing as a testament to one man's victory over slavery and adversity in deep south Florida. Maybe if I had done more research on Riley before the tour, I would not have been as dumbfounded by the fact that this slave-turned-millionaire had the epitome of humble beginnings.
As we rode around what is and what used to be Frenchtown, it was increasingly interesting to hear various trivia about the town I'd called home for so many years. Where a large Civic Center now stands was once a free trade market for blacks. When Gus began his tour with the statement that many blacks found desegregation to do more harm than good, I was taken aback slightly. But as we drove through the rundown areas of what used to be a booming and vibrant district, it was easier to understand how this might be so. Still, attempts are clearly being made to "revitalize" the area and with great success. Certainly, some of the housing being constructed is far out of the price range of those currently residing there, but there are also affordable and attractive apartments standing in the same place of what used to be projects. Still, the message derived from Gus' claim on desegregation became clear. It is easy to look down one's nose and blame individuals for their plight, but to stop and think on how the downward spiral may have started presents a much different opinion. Another stop at the Old City cemetery and as Gus said, it was again a classic example of just how segregated whites and blacks were as it was literally taken to the grave. It seemed a bit poetic that two dozen black Civil War Union soldiers are buried there.
If the Riley house was a modest introduction, the Goodwood Museum was its grandiose conclusion, standing in stark contrast to the humble house of the successful ex-slave nestled among a maze of one-way streets, law offices and condominiums still under construction. At first, including the Goodwood Museum in this tour seemed out of place after a journey of Tallahassee History that spanned everywhere from Frenchtown slumps to the once-prominant Lincoln Academy. Upon reflection, though, what revealed itself to me was a duel of stories that shined light on the life of two very different ethnic backgrounds in the same city and era. In one corner, there is the freed African-American who owns the majority of downtown Tallahassee and has the ability to build a home that would make Goodwood look like a shack, but whose humble origins perhaps kept him modest. In the other corner, you have a legacy of families laden with backstabbing, avarice and widows on a plantation so large, its staff of servants would not even fit into the Riley House. From mirrors to paintings, fine China to cocktail dresses, the Goodwood plantation was anything but modest with etiquette that borderlines pretentiousness with a series of bathrooms, hallways and staircases that could only be entered into if a certain level of clothing was being donned. A hierarchy for underwear and other unmentionables? Why not, you don't have anything else to worry about.
As Valerie quoted, I admit a tour of this magnitude would be nothing short of spectacular in, say, Washington. But I had to reflect a bit on the deep and rich history laden in our own backyard which up to this point I had not even truly appreciated. I suppose my nose was so deep in my own books admiring and studying monuments and museums that I missed the area's history that is literally all around me. Granted, I cannot just go see the Lincoln Memorial or the White House whenever I wish. But we have our own monuments just yards away from where we study those which are hundreds of miles away. Indeed, statues of three black individuals who overcame similar adversity as Riley stand in the middle of our own campus. They aren't Civil War generals or former Presidents who led our nation in times of war, but they faced their own challenges all the same. Personally, some kid making a stand and carrying his books into a campus dominated by those who had oppressed people like him for so long makes him much more human than a man who crossed the Delaware.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to finish wiping this egg off my face.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Road Trips through History Review
Don't forget...
Dwight Young's Road Trips through History offer a clever, often humorous, but always candid look at historic preservation. While his views sometimes borderline sensationalism, most, if not all, of his essays seem to perpetuate the idea that something is going horribly wrong with preserving our past. From second-hand books to the Slow Food movement, Young's collection takes the reader on a journey of often nostalgic moments, embellishing on drive-in movie theaters of old and looking forward with worry towards the architectural future of "glass boxes" (p 33).
But there are victories. Five-hundred drive-ins still remain, for example. The glorious churches in Kizhi, Russia still reach toward the sky. New Mexico legislature passed, with surprising success, the Night Sky Protection Act to prevent glaring lights from dominating the sky and thus drowning out the stars above. There is Polk County with its "deserved" Court House and some random home on a country rode with a sign proudly proclaiming "God Bless America" in reaction to September 11.
Still, what is perhaps more important is the more trying times. Washington's President Monroe faded into obscurity. So to did one of its musical landmarks as the "wrecking-ball silence[d] the melody" (p 11). The cruise ship Ile de France become a destroyed movie prop. And of course, Europe is being reconstructed in Las Vegas.
Young's attachment to historic preservation is clearly emotional and heartfelt. He reminisces over a Civil War battlefield the same way he does over a lost sock. With an eclectic array of subject matter, it becomes obvious that Young simply tries to remind his readers to soak in one's surroundings. Indeed, in a world that moves at breakneck speed, it is easy to forget why this building is important or why that battlefield shouldn't be converted into a theme park. Therein lies the importance of historic preservation. Indeed, a historian's job is nothing else if not to help the world to slow down and just remember.
Dwight Young's Road Trips through History offer a clever, often humorous, but always candid look at historic preservation. While his views sometimes borderline sensationalism, most, if not all, of his essays seem to perpetuate the idea that something is going horribly wrong with preserving our past. From second-hand books to the Slow Food movement, Young's collection takes the reader on a journey of often nostalgic moments, embellishing on drive-in movie theaters of old and looking forward with worry towards the architectural future of "glass boxes" (p 33).
But there are victories. Five-hundred drive-ins still remain, for example. The glorious churches in Kizhi, Russia still reach toward the sky. New Mexico legislature passed, with surprising success, the Night Sky Protection Act to prevent glaring lights from dominating the sky and thus drowning out the stars above. There is Polk County with its "deserved" Court House and some random home on a country rode with a sign proudly proclaiming "God Bless America" in reaction to September 11.
Still, what is perhaps more important is the more trying times. Washington's President Monroe faded into obscurity. So to did one of its musical landmarks as the "wrecking-ball silence[d] the melody" (p 11). The cruise ship Ile de France become a destroyed movie prop. And of course, Europe is being reconstructed in Las Vegas.
Young's attachment to historic preservation is clearly emotional and heartfelt. He reminisces over a Civil War battlefield the same way he does over a lost sock. With an eclectic array of subject matter, it becomes obvious that Young simply tries to remind his readers to soak in one's surroundings. Indeed, in a world that moves at breakneck speed, it is easy to forget why this building is important or why that battlefield shouldn't be converted into a theme park. Therein lies the importance of historic preservation. Indeed, a historian's job is nothing else if not to help the world to slow down and just remember.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Mickey Mouse History, Section III Review
Historic preservation is the new black.
As we have already seen in past readings, historic preservation took the back seat following the American Revolution. This was soon remedied however as the subject would eventually become a hobby of the elite or affluent and the 1880s saw the first real advance in preservation as individuals who felt personal ties to their historic structures wanted to maintain them. Wallace lists four groups of Preservation Pioneers who spearheaded this historic movement into the 20th century. 1906 witnessed the first real intervention by Congress into historic preservation as the Antiquities Act was signed into law. But the past of historic preservation is littered with ups and downs and the Roaring Twenties indeed saw it being put on the back burner to new and exciting contemporary attitudes. Preservation bounced back again with the Historic Sites Act of 1935 and again in the 1960s with individuals protesting the bulldozing of historic buildings and neighborhoods. What Wallace calls "adaptive reuse" finds its place in the 1960s as well with corporations now using historic developments for commercial use. However, Wallace's view of historic preservation's sworn enemy (Reagan, of course) would come to power in the 1980s and the budget to preservation concerns were cut. As a result, the National Trust sought to coalesce with the real estate market which, as Wallace notes, is a mistake. Instead, Wallace feels the best bet would be to join up with other proactive groups like civil rights groups and environmentalists.
While I could see how this may prove beneficial, I feel that to ally too far to the right or too far to the left will isolate your cause and appeal to just one group. Since not everyone is really concerned with environmental, civil rights, or public housing issues, the message may be lost on many. Wallace seems intent on bringing issues of class struggle in on every essay. He criticizes programs that saved developments at the expense of converting them into housing which became too expensive for minorities and the poor. In the same breath, he complains of bulldozing which "rammed" roads through historic districts as the "growth coalition seemed to revel in leveling the past" (p. 186). Pick your battles, Wallace.
As we have already seen in past readings, historic preservation took the back seat following the American Revolution. This was soon remedied however as the subject would eventually become a hobby of the elite or affluent and the 1880s saw the first real advance in preservation as individuals who felt personal ties to their historic structures wanted to maintain them. Wallace lists four groups of Preservation Pioneers who spearheaded this historic movement into the 20th century. 1906 witnessed the first real intervention by Congress into historic preservation as the Antiquities Act was signed into law. But the past of historic preservation is littered with ups and downs and the Roaring Twenties indeed saw it being put on the back burner to new and exciting contemporary attitudes. Preservation bounced back again with the Historic Sites Act of 1935 and again in the 1960s with individuals protesting the bulldozing of historic buildings and neighborhoods. What Wallace calls "adaptive reuse" finds its place in the 1960s as well with corporations now using historic developments for commercial use. However, Wallace's view of historic preservation's sworn enemy (Reagan, of course) would come to power in the 1980s and the budget to preservation concerns were cut. As a result, the National Trust sought to coalesce with the real estate market which, as Wallace notes, is a mistake. Instead, Wallace feels the best bet would be to join up with other proactive groups like civil rights groups and environmentalists.
While I could see how this may prove beneficial, I feel that to ally too far to the right or too far to the left will isolate your cause and appeal to just one group. Since not everyone is really concerned with environmental, civil rights, or public housing issues, the message may be lost on many. Wallace seems intent on bringing issues of class struggle in on every essay. He criticizes programs that saved developments at the expense of converting them into housing which became too expensive for minorities and the poor. In the same breath, he complains of bulldozing which "rammed" roads through historic districts as the "growth coalition seemed to revel in leveling the past" (p. 186). Pick your battles, Wallace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)