Professional Public Pageantry, Parades, and Perception

     Everyone likes a parade.  Cities, and even the nation, recognized the appeal of these celebrations and took advantage of these shows of solidarity and patriotism, particularly during the 20^th century.  Through examples such as the Civil War Centennial, the Bicentennial of the Revolutionary War, and local celebrations like the Portola Festival in San Francisco, public historians can learn how these ephemeral displays of public sentiment incorporate their own interpretations of historical importance.

     The centennial and bicentennial celebrations provided opportunity for renewed patriotism in a time of social turmoil.  The Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, and urban conflict characterized this period, but the patriotic fervor of the anniversaries was a way to overshadow the controversies.  Attempts to bring the disparate parts of national identity together as one “people” manifested as celebrations of Grant and Lee, and George Washington.  Pageantry has a purpose in public life as a symbolic representation of the people, but the Portola Festival was missing a noticeable chunk of the population: the labor party.

     The Portola Festival was seemingly inclusive, and a celebration of the area’s founding, but Glassberg mentions the significant absence of the labor party in the representation of the community.  The city brought out multiple neighborhoods, even the Chinese, but the façade of complete participation covered up the fact that political and economic issues influenced the labor party’s decision to abstain.  The festival ended up draining the city’s coffers, so it did not survive because of its economic insolvency, but the value for public historians comes from the turn-of-the-century view of public history as a method for consolidating the community, particularly the powers of community organizations.

War Memorials and Community Memory

     Memorials, particularly war memorials, are not for the dead, but for the living.  Just as tombstones and cemeteries do not benefit the dead, memorials provide a location and something tangible for those still living to remember those who have passed.  They are also testaments to the shared memory of a war experience.  David Glassberg’s chapter on “Remembering a War” discusses not only the public interpretations of war in memory, but also the reactions of veterans when they returned home to a less-than-enthusiastic welcome.

     Glassberg focuses on the town of Orange, Massachusetts, and with how the residents in this town commemorated their war heroes.  They had an obelisk for the Civil War already when the question of erecting some type of memorial for the Great War came up in the community.  Ultimately, the town decided to build a memorial park and reserved space for a physical monument.  The veterans were upset with this decision, since it appeared that the community was using the memorial as an excuse to get a beautification project approved.  Understandably, the veterans felt like outsiders in this process since the town did not even celebrate Armistice Day the next year.  Veterans continued to make their own memorials and remembrances without impetus from the community.

     The differences in how the community remembered war, and how the veterans remembered war shows the multiple aspects that go into public memory and memorials.  Whether the monument has the names of fallen soldiers inscribed on its face, or the memorial consists of a local gym or park, these tools are how the public reconciles multiple war narratives into a cohesive and easily understood symbol of patriotism and community.  The challenge to public historians comes from the simplification of war memories, and potentially explosive confrontations when the monolithic view is questioned, as in the Enola Gay exhibit.

Preservation as Cultural Resource Management

     This week, the readings are concerned with creating and regulating “history” in public places.  Glassberg’s chapters on “Rethinking New England Town Character,” and “Making Places in California” both rely on evaluating the public’s conception of history and how to represent authenticity.  Waldbauer’s discussion of the 1906 Antiquities Act’s centennial gives a concise overview of the progression in protecting both historical and natural land/resources in America and how these laws have shaped our understanding of preservation.

     Glassberg’s comment on how modern efforts contribute more to the New England sense of historicity than the age of the homes themselves really speaks to this rise in preservation.  Echoing the trend of Williamsburg, the Deerfield example shows how community involvement determines historical value, and the extent to which a town will be rehabilitated.  Although public historians do assist in preservation projects, most of the responsibility is in the hands of private citizens and the larger community.

     The tourist value of preservation is clearly in use for Glassberg’s discussion of Californians reviving the history of the Gold Rush.  One thing I really enjoyed about Glassberg’s chapters were the pictures, posters, and maps.  These different types of media provides an interesting view of preservation and how certain pictures were taken to raise money for preservation.  These appeals to local history lovers, and tourists alike, invested communities in their nearby historic resources.

     Waldbauer is less based in narrative, but is incredibly informative about the development of laws that created the National Park Service and regulated natural and historical sites around America, such as Devil’s Tower and monuments.  Included in these legal transactions of natural resources were tangles with American Indian interests and tribal lands.  The complications of setting aside land for public consumption or protection (or both) dealt with tribal sovereignty, which also overlaps with some of the issues in Glassberg’s chapter on California where interests differed on presentation.

     Overall, these selections provide the reader with information on how Americans have understood preservation, and how to regulate historical and natural resources for the public.  Senses of historic community, or tourist-minded publicity are two expressions of public history.  Since the Antiquities Act of 1906 the government has taken steps to protect and regulate our nation’s history.  All three of these readings speak to this private preservation for public enjoyment under the control of the government, but ultimately the impetus for preservation lies with the people.