David strittmatter, ohio northern university
Proposal Type
Traditional Panel
Seeking
- Seeking Additional Presenters
Related Topics
- Memory
- Museums
- Oral History
Abstract
The Kent State shooting is perhaps the most defining episode of the Vietnam War era that occurred on American soil. Narratives surrounding the tragedy understandably focus on the student protesters. However, a voice curiously absent in the well-worn narrative is that of the National Guardsmen. Thus, my students and I are conducting interviews with former guardsmen. This presentation will describe the project as it developed and share recorded poignant excerpts from the interviews. This project was included in the May 6 NCPH Public History News Update under the “”Commemorating Kent State”” bullet point.
Description
I am proposing a traditional panel on “Difficult Histories” for the NCPH 2021 conference in Salt Lake City. My talk will detail the Kent State Guardsmen Oral History Project that began at Ohio Northern University during the 2019-20 academic year. Well-suited for the conference themes, the project seeks out underrepresented voices in a persistent story of the Vietnam War era. Thus, I am looking for others that might contribute to an interdisciplinary panel that explores historical narratives that are “difficult” to tell. “Difficult” can be envisioned in myriad and expansive ways. Are “difficult histories” hard to share because of shame or embarrassment, a lack of reliable sources, political correctness, or any number of other obstacles? In part, public historians are storytellers. This proposed panel seeks those that have encountered under-told histories that add to or challenge narratives. In total, this panel intends to illuminate complexities in often-told persistent stories.
If you have a direct offer of assistance, sensitive criticism, or wish to pass along someone’s contact information confidentially, please get in contact directly: David Strittmatter,
[email protected]
All feedback and offers of assistance should be submitted by July 6, 2020. If you have general ideas or feedback to share, please feel free to use the comments feature below.
Hi David, this sounds like a really fascinating panel. I love that you’re expanding the narrative, even as it likely complicates what we know about this incident. I’m curious why you’d frame this story as “difficult.” Is it because it involves tragedy and trauma, or because it brings in the voice of state-sanctioned authority (those whom many people would deem “the bad guys” of this narrative)? I would love to see a past-to-present connection with current debates around defunding the police. Are there oral history projects today happening with law enforcement officers? Very timely proposal.
Annie,
Thanks for your note. I use “difficult” expansively here. For my oral history project, it has been difficult to find former Guardsmen that will speak about Kent State. It’s also difficult because they were largely framed, as you stated, as the “bad guys.” Why would someone want to sit down and talk about the worst day in their young lives from a half century ago?
In a larger sense, “difficult” can mean lots of things. One potential panelist who works as an archivist reached out to me about his work with classified documents. From that perspective, history is difficult because of restricted access to primary sources.
This is timely and important. I, too, think it would be powerful to find a way to engage the current conversations about the police.
I agree with Annie and Keith that this is a timely topic and second Annie’s suggestion that you investigate what makes this “difficult” history. You may consider reaching out to other public history/museum professionals who interpret the military, police, or other organizations that have had, in Annie’s terms, “state-sanctioned authority.”
I also encourage you to think about the presentation as a structured conversation, as I believe that you and other presenters could bring out the tension between developing a trusted relationship with those who served in the National Guards, and interpreting their actions. I believe that many attendees would be interested in talking about this tension.
I listened to a podcast from the “Museum of Flight” which touched on the issue of interpreting aircraft and violence in the context of war that seems to complement the issues you raised–at least in terms of “difficult histories.” ( https://blog.museumofflight.org/flightdeck/youngest) At the very least, other public historians and museum professionals are engaging with the issues you raised.
This calls to mind how power and authority intersect with individual decisions and how the tools of oral history can make these intersections visible. I agree with previous posters that this is a timely topic. I also wonder about the framing of “difficult” histories and wonder if this panel might produce a discussion of the many ways that oral history work charts important official narratives (here I’m thinking about all the oral histories produced by federal agencies to document their own past) as well as surfacing unofficial narratives, often in the same interview. Oral history can help us to see how individuals navigate their own agency and roles in such events. Maybe that’s what is difficult? Fascinating.
You may also want to take a look at what is going on in Julia Rose’s book Interpreting Difficult History at Museums and Historic Sites. The book provides some framing for the idea of what makes interpretations difficult. There also might be opportunity to include her in the conversation.
http://interpretingdifficulthistory.com/