We live in an age of malcontent. Communities, dissatisfied with oppression, unwilling to continue accepting a fraught status quo, in increasing numbers are standing up and shining a bald light on pervasive and inexcusable injustices. But the road is long, and change is slow. As museum professionals, public historians, and stewards of public places, our internal community is often left as passionate observers. Lessons from the histories we preserve abound with wisdom to guide, caution, enrich, or perhaps simply complicate these current narratives. But what is the role of the museum professional in taking an active and participatory role in this discourse? What are the opportunities, and what are the limitations?

My experience in the world of public history and civic education is enriched by the four years I spent in an urban elementary school classroom before embarking on a career as an educator and public historian with the National Park Service. In the work of a teacher, advocacy for the best interests of students, for the needs of the communities you serve, and for the craft of teaching itself, is all integral to the job as a public educator. Knowing, engaging in, and fighting for the needs of your students – understanding which students lack safe or nurturing home environments and providing them additional support as needed; attending students’ extracurricular sports and arts events to demonstrate love and support; working with school administration and parent groups to revise curricula, teaching techniques, and facilities to meet evolving needs of diverse students – is all simply part of a day’s work. Revising a lesson to engage student interest in the Black Lives Matter movement, or even joining a group of students in an after school demonstration, would be the mark of a dedicated public educator; yet as a steward of public places through work in museums and at historic sites, this kind of participation is more likely to raise eyebrows.

There seems to be a sense that in public institutions, which often rely on unwavering and uncomplicated public support, it is their role to maintain rather than challenge the status quo, and to remain disengaged from “political discourse” or “controversy.” Yet to ignore rather than to use the resources we steward to enrich the important conversations playing out in public discourse threatens the relevancy of our institutions. This behavior risks positing museums and public lands as out of touch and conservators of the old, rather than as essential agents in an age of revolution.

It is essential that museums and public lands play a role not just to allow, but to participate, in this essential civic discourse. Dr. Asghar Zomorrodian, professor of public policy at Walden University, describes the three essential components of social justice as being awareness, empowerment, and action. He argues that it is not enough to have just one or two, but all three to bring about change – neither well-informed and empowered bystanders, nor poorly organized and poorly oriented actors are effective at shaping their worlds. Inspired by this model, I propose a three-tier approach for museums and public lands to engage in civic discourse:

1)       Start by understanding where we are: provide staff training exploring the issues which arise in public discourse today, with an emphasis on understanding the needs and perspectives of the communities we serve, and the communities who our institutions have historically neglected

2)       Build capacity for change: develop programs and opportunities to engage the public in this discourse and support the community as they expand their awareness of the issues, whether through direct programming or providing a venue for partnership programming

3)       Pick a cause and join the community: identify an issue that meets both community and institutional needs and use programming and other resources as vehicles advocating for this cause

To fully engage in civic discourse, museums and public history professionals must be willing to reassess what we prioritize and why, and to be unafraid to pick a cause and stand by it. Supporting, catalyzing, and participating in civic discourse must be seen as essential to and not simply complementary of the work that we do.

~ April Antonellis, National Park Service

Discussion

4 comments
  1. April, I love your straightforward planning approach and practical three point plan. I was writing just today about supposed objectivity in museums and how “objectivity” is often a code word for quietly supporting the status quo or simply not owning one’s own agency and position. Looking forward to meeting you in Baltimore!

  2. Laura B Schiavo says:

    Perhaps it is because I speak from the relatively safe space of the university, I am going to go out on a limb and assert that we have to stop being so concerned about raising eyebrows! I certainly understand the concern, especially from within the structure of the National Park Service. But I think that (at least non-governmental) museums that have gone out a limb, where there may have been fears about touching supposed third rails of race, immigration, etc., have found that the public appreciates the chance to engage in discussion (which, as you say, may not be enough!) and funders appreciate the good press. I am thinking in particular about conversations I had with staff at the Levine Museum of the New South about their success in engaging various community groups in their work and in conversation. It would be helpful, perhaps, to purposefully address the structures and limitations of variously situated institutions of public history to figure out the real risks involved in doing what you propose in your three step plan and trying to assess based on the experiences who have tried to do this work where the dangers actually are when they have engaged “political discourse” or “controversy.” I do hope that there is a future ahead for all of us where the advocacy you describe for the best interests of students can find its way to advocacy for a more just, engaged, and peaceful society.

  3. Lyra Monteiro says:

    Thanks for this great suggestion, April. It seems like an excellent way to go, but I wonder about the entrenched interests within institutions–those, who are often on the top, who are raising their eyebrows. How do we convince them that this is the way to go? Or do we simply work around them?

  4. Jennifer Scott says:

    April, I really connected to your comments that we are often left as “passionate observers” in the museums world and that cultural workers in public institutions often “maintain rather than challenge the status quo.” I also feel that we have a huge mass of people filled with this passion, but how can we break through and take advantage of all of the good will and intentions, so as to encourage people to become agents of change? I appreciate you setting out some practical steps.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.