This week's readings included the article Fred Wilson, PTSD, and Me:Reflections on the History Wars by Ken Yellis, and the book Private History in Public:Exhibition and the Settings of Everyday Life by Tammy S. Gordon. What both texts offered was a look at various museum exhibit techniques and settings.
Yellis focused his article on two exhibits, the Mining Museum an exhibit focusing on previously unused historical objects, and the Mixed Blessings: The Complex Social Life of Cliff Swallows an exhibit on the nature of cliff swallows. What Yellis determines about both exhibits is the attempt by the curators and exhibit creators to produce an exhibit that will leave their audience touched about the topic. The exhibit Mining Museum did have many reactions from its audience ranging from rage at seeing a KKK mask in a baby carriage to overwhelming emotion of sadness (Yellis 337). Although the creators of this exhibit were able to produce reactions from their audience, Yellis notes that many found the exhibit distasteful or anger provoking (338). In contrast the exhibit on the nature of cliff swallows, while very realistic and raw, did not provoke any real emotion from their audiences. Yellis ponders whether this lack of emotion from the audience stems from a desensitization to the natural world through popular media (339-340). Unlike in the earlier exhibit which seemed to open up hereditary wounds from past historical events within our history. What this ultimately shows is the need for public historians to understand the limitations that they can push with their audiences.
Gordon’s book Private History in Public: Exhibition and the Settings of Everyday Life focuses more on the creation of exhibits within community and entrepreneurial settings. Although community and entrepreneurial exhibits are not as accurate within the academic setting, Gordon makes the argument that these exhibits are just as important to the understanding of local history and heritage, as exhibits created within larger institutions (Gordon). Unlike in Yellis’s article, Gordon spends more time in describing how community created exhibitions can effect both local audiences and audiences of outsiders in positive ways.
This week’s reading give us food for thought about exhibits and the effects public historians hope to have on their audiences. Although we want to challenge common understandings of historical events and landmarks, we also need to be mindful about the adverse effects this may have on the reception of our exhibits.
