Week 10: Public Displays of History: Pageantry

Pageantry is all about the grand display of history; the presentation. There are many reasons for this type of display of history. From the readings I gathered that this form of display serves as a sense of pride residences of a local community and of the nation (speaking from the prospective of Bodnar). This sense of pride is provided through the sense of history. This type of display is the focus and argument for the week 10 readings.
Glassberg focuses on the celebration of the city. The most popular ways being local civic celebrations (festivals, parades, and city spaces included) and historical reenactments (plays included). “The public commemoration of events from local history projects a distinctive collective identity for people of different classes, ethnic backgrounds, and lengths of residence who happen to live in the same locale” (Glassberg, 2001, p. 61). Glassberg utilizes historical examples dating back to the eighteenth century with Plymouth, Massachusetts and the celebration the landing of Pilgrims. These traditions have always and will always be apart of the Americana. It is a way to be proud, remember, and respect the origins of the community while it continues to undergo various physical and demographic transformations (Glassberg, 2001). Glassberg also points out that the displays serve a different purpose at the citywide level. At this level it is more about the politics of “collective” historical representation, which include “the press for economic advantage, the expansion of municipal services, and the restructuring of urban government” (Glassberg, 2001, p 85). This proves that disorder does indeed play a role in the building or celebration of public displays of local history. At the citywide level, it primarily becomes a form of popular culture for commercial uses.
On the other hand, Bodnar focuses on celebrating national history. He focuses on the commemorations of the American Revolution and the Civil War. As discussed by Bodnar, the intent of these displays was to “reinforce citizen loyalty to a nation-state and diminish attachments individuals may have held toward a region, a locale, or a communal group” (Bodnar, 1991, p. 243). Where are Glassberg discussed celebration to remember the origins because of continuing transformation, Bodnar discuss the contemporary political goals to transform interpretations of the past of apparent rebellion against political authorities (Bodnar, 1991).
This week’s readings discussed public displays of history in the form of pageantry and their uses. There are various forms of pageantry. Parades and plays are common displays, if not the most common, for celebrating a city’s local history and even national history. These celebrations serve multiple purposes. I believe Glassberg (2001) summed it up the best with, “urban residents have been governed by not only their economic and administrative systems but also by public displays of history in celebrations that cultivate the powerful emotion of rooting for the home team” (p. 85). I found the readings helpful in explaining local and national pageantry for various historical events and their uses.

Reference
Bodnar, J. E. (1991). Remaking America: Public memory, commemoration, and patriotism in the
twentieth century. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.
Glassberg, D. (2001). Sense of history: The place of the past in American life. Amherst:
University of Massachusetts Press.

Week 9: Public Displays of History - Monuments

Public displays of history or monuments are powerful. Anything with power can too be a controversial issue. Monuments are no exception. This is the focus and argument of the week nine reading. Levinson and Glassberg both seek to present this argument in their writings.

Levinson discusses the controversy behind various monuments. These monuments provoke thought, which more than likely will lead to open discussion. He discusses various social and legal arguments concerning the monument, construction (including artist), and possible destruction of side monument. Reasons for possible deconstruction may include public uproar concerning accuracy, representation of figures and/or events on display, and/or use of public space. Levinson looks at the many factors that may affect public displays of history in the form of monuments.

Continuing with the topic of controversy around monuments and public space is reading 2. Glassberg focuses on war heroes of a small town in Massachusetts. Prior to being erected, an obelisk was questioned by the community. After an open discussion about the use of the public space, the community decided to reserve the space for a monument (viewed as a beautification project). This did not go without controversy. Great War veterans were upset, along with some community members. The veterans created and celebrated their own memory. This is not uncommon for a certain group to feel left out or underrepresented in public memorials. Memorials of figures and events in a monument form can and possibly will always be a controversy because of the diverse points of view.

Overall, the readings discuss the power behind monuments. Both Levinson and Glassberg utilize various examples of monuments that demonstrate power. The power provokes controversy in different ways, including thought provoking open discussion and even deconstruction. Monuments, whether agreed upon or not, relates the past to the present.

Week 7: Cultural Resources Management in the 20th Century

This week’s readings are a continuation of the historical preservation discussion. The readings present different approaches to historical preservation. Glassberg discuss a more private or local approach, whereas Waldbauer discuss a large governmental approach.

Glassberg argues for local historical preservations with case study examples. He deemed historical preservation to be driven by memory, which is a reoccurring theme throughout the book, Sense of History. For the Massachusetts case study, the residents prove Glassberg’s theory of history being driven by memory when discussing place of personal significance. Due to the fact that history is memory driven, the story can change from generation to generations and even from person to person. The case study on California was more about preserving the stories of miners and lands of elder family members. The residents validated their thoughts and memories through images of the past.

Waldbauer discusses the national approach used by federal government for lands, districts, etc of national significance, with a discussion of the federal preservation movement. This movement merges culture and nature preserving land of significance. After scientific validation, the land would be preserved. There are many different sites being preserved by the federal government. The article also focuses on Antiquities Act of 1906, which grants the US President “authority to protect areas of public land by designating national monuments” (Waldbauer and Hutt, 2006, p. 42). Unlike the local approach, the governmental approach is supported by laws.

The readings present persuasive arguments for ways to approach historical preservation; local versus national. In my opinion, both approaches are valid and very much need. Local museums and private historical societies can provide attention to local history. They are able to see what is important to their town and share that with residents and tourists. This grants local towns a sense of history and pride driven by memory. On the other hand, the larger form of historical preservation (federal government) is greatly needed. A country should know of historical grounds. This will provide a larger sense of history and pride driven more for remembrance.