Reflecting On Public History
What is Public History and the role of the Public Historian?
As Public Historians should we strive for objectivity and truth? Then again whose truth would we be telling? Perhaps what is more important than the facts is the act of interpretation and the critical thinking which must be employed when doing so.
Lynton says that, “ knowledge is not an inert commodity to be stored and/or dispensed to the privileged few. It is made fresh by its interaction with reality.” (Making the Case for Professional Service.Washington, D.C.: American Association for Higher Education,1995) For me, this is a large part of what public history is. It is the knowledge of the past being presented to an audience in new and exciting ways. It is taking the past and juxtaposing it with contemporary examples to create new ideas. Of course this may also require the application of serious critical thinking and problem-solving , but again these things are also in the realm of the public historian. The role of the public historian should be to provide knowledge of the past which elicits a response or reaction from the audience and the Public Historian uses inquiry, interpretation and critical thinking to do this.
In theory then, if each person brought to bear on the situation his or her own personal memory, experiences, and biases, we could end up with multiple interpretations of the truth.
I think this is where reflective practice comes in. If our job is to tell the story of the past so that it has contemporary implications( and I’m not totally sure that it is) we need to be able to change and morph our ideas based on new evidence and the values of our audience. Noel J Stowe writes, “Every new project, every engagement with new clients, every alliance with a new institution requires a re-examination of basic principles and issues.” At this point , Im not sure whether I completely agree with this statement, but the idea that the telling or presentation of the past is organic and can change and grow is exciting!
I started out by asking a question about objectivity and truth. Whose truth does the public historian tell? I’m not sure if I am quite ready to answer this question. I think that part of the job of the public historian should provide a basis for an individual, corporation, community to tell its own truth. Beyond that...I’ll have to do some more reflecting.
As Public Historians should we strive for objectivity and truth? Then again whose truth would we be telling? Perhaps what is more important than the facts is the act of interpretation and the critical thinking which must be employed when doing so.
Lynton says that, “ knowledge is not an inert commodity to be stored and/or dispensed to the privileged few. It is made fresh by its interaction with reality.” (Making the Case for Professional Service.Washington, D.C.: American Association for Higher Education,1995) For me, this is a large part of what public history is. It is the knowledge of the past being presented to an audience in new and exciting ways. It is taking the past and juxtaposing it with contemporary examples to create new ideas. Of course this may also require the application of serious critical thinking and problem-solving , but again these things are also in the realm of the public historian. The role of the public historian should be to provide knowledge of the past which elicits a response or reaction from the audience and the Public Historian uses inquiry, interpretation and critical thinking to do this.
In theory then, if each person brought to bear on the situation his or her own personal memory, experiences, and biases, we could end up with multiple interpretations of the truth.
I think this is where reflective practice comes in. If our job is to tell the story of the past so that it has contemporary implications( and I’m not totally sure that it is) we need to be able to change and morph our ideas based on new evidence and the values of our audience. Noel J Stowe writes, “Every new project, every engagement with new clients, every alliance with a new institution requires a re-examination of basic principles and issues.” At this point , Im not sure whether I completely agree with this statement, but the idea that the telling or presentation of the past is organic and can change and grow is exciting!
I started out by asking a question about objectivity and truth. Whose truth does the public historian tell? I’m not sure if I am quite ready to answer this question. I think that part of the job of the public historian should provide a basis for an individual, corporation, community to tell its own truth. Beyond that...I’ll have to do some more reflecting.
posted by Kelly Lewis | 1:17 PM
2 Comments:
Just wanted to share my new blog - I'm looking to gather together reviews of different museums and exhibits from folks who love museums as much as I do.
Just wanted to share my new blog - I'm looking to gather together reviews of different museums and exhibits from folks who love museums as much as I do.
MuseumLuvr
http://museumreviews.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment
<< Home