Emotional Comfort: The Sequel

Amy Tyson’s article “Crafting Emotional Comfort” was a good lead in to this weeks reading of “Slavery and Public History.” One of the questions I was left with after Tyson’s article on Connor Prairie’s simulation of the Underground Railroad was whether it could successfully create an experience that does the historical record justice. By extension, what are successful ways to confront one of the uglier pockets of the history of the United States in and how much does ‘comfort’ come into play?

‘Slavery and Public History’ explores the challenge of presenting slavery and race in a variety of different venues and contexts. Each chapter selects case studies where bureaucracies, interpreters, politicians, historians clash over public space, memorials and exhibits dealing with slavery and race. Where the roadblocks exist and what was objected to was sometimes surprising. A particular standout was the chapter on the “Back of the Big House” exhibit. While I’d expect an exhibit on controversial subject matter might get muddled in institutional bureaucracy, the objections of employees of L.O.C. threw me for a loop.

What wasn’t quite as surprising were the controversies at the Liberty Bell and at Monticello. I agree with Paul’s blog post that an inadequacy in handling slavery and race in schools could be a large factor creating the ‘intellectual blinders’ that John Vlach also alluded to. I also believe much of the difficulty and conflict stems from having to retrofit presentations in spaces sacred to most Americans. Both Monticello and the Liberty Bell are used by the public to boost and celebrate our national identity. It’s easy to see how introductions of new narratives that challenge the sanctity of those spaces and the history presented in classrooms could create potential unease with the public and subsequently interpreters and administrators.

Although solutions weren't presented in a larger context, the necessity for a diverse range of voices in the process and the danger of letting public comfort and popularity dictate presentation entirely were inherent in each chapter. The case studies in the book reinforce those points and are a great start for discussion by public historians. The issues tackled at each of the sites are a tough but necessary pill for people to swallow.