One of the great shifts going on in the history museum field is the way we think about, manage and present the interpretive technique known as "living history." This piece in the The Colorado Sun is an excellent and thoughtful look at how the tensions around representation, volunteerism, and historical accuracy are being experienced at one NPS site in Colorado. Institutional models are changing, and there's a new generation of independent interpreters who choose the times and places they want to present who are changing the focus and experience of living history. Scott Magelssen, whose scholarship on this has been so influential, makes some interesting comments in the piece about how these changes in museums are sitting within a broader cultural interest in immersive experience. I'm interested in more conversation about first-person techniques - when, how, and even whether to use them - and how they are evolving in a time of whole history - perhaps for a future issue of the Journal of Museum Education. Let me know of interesting trends, presentation styles, experiments, and challenges you're witnessing out there! #livinghistory #museums #publichistory #interpretation #performance #museumtheatre #immersiveexperience #volunteers Museum Education Roundtable (MER) @https://lnkd.in/eVERh6uc
Andrea K. Jones
10mo
One of the biggest issues - which the article just hinted at - is the treatment of non-white costumed interpreters by visitors who are coming to these sites. It's harder than ever to play roles of enslaved, indigenous etc because of the comments that some people are emboldened to make (thanks to the rise of MAGA). So, left with white interpretive staff, that leaves these sites telling half the story - which is just not ok. That said, there are interpreters of color who are using the medium on their own terms and getting lots of engagement (Cheyney McNight, Marvin Alonzo- Greer) - but context really matters. When Cheyney is on YouTube telling stories her way. She has control and people are coming to watch because of that. We really have to take a hard look at why visitors (who ARE actually coming) are coming. Are they looking for some kind of white-washed nostalgia? There need to be safeguards for interpreters of color. Care for mental health etc. Theatre is a wonderful medium. One Black interpreter I managed told me that scripting made her feel safer. Performing a monologue for audiences at the farm gave her the upper hand in controlling the narrative. It's complicated.
Andrew P. Volpe
9mo
Even as an "insider" in the reenacting/living history community, I've been seeing/overhearing similar problems among the "old guard" groups that have been around "since the Bicentennial" etc. and there has been some schisms and rifts wedged between the older, established groups and how they see interpretation, and the new groups or the younger members who are trying to change for the better with better, deeper, and more inclusive research and reconstruction. It can't all be about the Big Battles and Battlefield Reenactment, aka "burning powder", not everyone finds that interesting or "educational". Having been invited to a number of museums and historical sites, because of our dedication to research and accurate portrayals, has been a great honor and I an so very grateful to those institutions for wanting us to help bridge the gap between academia and reenacting as a hobby. It's OK if your group wants to make some compromises or concessions on your clothing and material culture because you're looking to "role play", but it demands a lot more effort and adherence to research and accuracy when you're representing a museum or institution. (Have to generalize b/c of limited space)
Amanda Gallagher
10mo
In the area I'm more familiar with (Toronto region in Canada), living history sites are going through a thorough investigation on how well they can interpret history. It is a fabulous medium for school visits to show young minds the differences and similarities of the past, though for the general public there isn't the same level of interest (I believe the article covers this concept well, that volunteers and employees are the most vocal about keeping hands-on activities but the public doesn't always care for them). Getting the same experience each time also hurts museums as there's no growth, no adaptation, and no repeat visitors.
Robin Noel P.
9mo
Living history is FUN, so be very careful not to ruin it! Living history museums may be nonprofits, but are still businesses and require healthy incomes to operate. Never, ever advise anything that will kill the appeal of the business! I have personally witnessed a living history museum that has managed to "academic" its way from a popular and well-attended site to a boring, poorly attended ghost town. This included requiring interpreters to become certified in an interpretation system, which only served as a barrier to hiring new talent / restraining muzzle on those who got certified. Interpreters also were required to do academic research, taking them away from the public; and those with specialized degrees were sought, limiting the talent pool. The public has spoken: donor funds are largely restricted, and ticket sales continue to drop. With funds drying up, the living-history aspect is withering. Now they are increasing emphasis on digital online programs, modern conferences and educational programs, and a more traditional exhibit-style museum experience. The museum may survive in some form but the immersive experience is already long gone and the living-history aspect on which it built its reputation is seriously ailing.
Lāth Carlson
10mo
It's nice to see a mostly balanced news report for a change! I'd be curious if living history performances are also going to struggle to find performers as the current crop ages out. Do younger people today have this interest? Does anyone know if general participation in reenactments is dropping?
Norman Burns
9mo
Michelle - I would enjoy working with you on how museums like Conner Prairie can change the way the world views and uses museums. While our CP interpretive toolbox still includes living history interpretation, it is one of many tools that we use to meet the guest where they want to be in crucial conversations about history.
Lili B.
10mo
As a whole I understand the controversy of reenactment, however I still strongly believe that first person immersive learning experiences provide incredible engagement opportunities, particularly for younger visitors. These experiences help art and objects and places come alive and have active relevance.
Elisabeth Nevins
10mo
Thanks for sharing. This is a topic we are exploring on the @AASLH edu/interp committee for a future program/summit. Much to talk about! Sally Meyer, Richard Cooper, Ed.D., Carla Mello, Michele Longo
Museum Educator, Interpretive Writer & Playwright
9moThis article has been running the circles with former colleagues I am still connected to on Facebook. I have been wading jumping in there but honestly a little scared to. This was a big point of contention between me and the old guard at my previous site. What I love about this article as the framing of it as a tool in the interpretive toolbox, rather than the whole experience. I think museum theatre paired with an educator facilitating discussion + source- based interpretation was the most moving and also fact-based experience I ever facilitated. I also think costumed 3rd person has a great place, when used in context with staff and not volunteers or outside stipended folks who come in for a day and go rogue.