PROPOSAL TYPE
Roundtable
SEEKING
- Seeking General Feedback and Interest
- Seeking Additional Presenters
RELATED TOPICS
- Memory
- Museums/Exhibits
- Social Justice
ABSTRACT
As historians work towards a more complete narrative of the past we are seeing greater efforts to center and uplift populations society once rejected. In museums, heritage sites, and on the monumental landscape, previously marinized groups and individuals are being reclaimed by communities of the present. However, these reclamations are not always purely altruistic. Modern recognitions of past wrongdoing often come with strings attached in the form of potential monetary benefit or simply mending damaged reputations.
This roundtable welcomes practitioners from various backgrounds who are interested in the way institutions and communities reclaim marginalized peoples of the past and reintegrate them into their programing.
DESCRIPTION
For generations, the dominant society of the United States has silenced populations it found to be less desirable. African American, Indigenous, and Queer people, along with those in religiously marginalized communities, other non-elites and “social deviants” have been excluded from narratives about the past. Alongside these silences there have also been misrepresentations of these populations’ roles in our national past both inside and outside the academy.
Since the 1970s, public historians and historically minded communities have been working to right the wrongs of the past by reclaiming space to recognize previously underrepresented groups in the larger narrative of United States history. These reclamations have come from exhibits and monuments, the renaming of prominent attractions, and have occurred in various other public history venues at local and national levels. When public historians use shared authority to conduct these projects, the reintegration of these stories can provide a sense of healing or empowerment to the descendants of those formerly neglected communities.
Unfortunately, though, that is not always the case. There can also be an element of insult in the practice of reclaiming, especially when institutions do so primarily for monetary benefit or to mend a marred reputation. Restorative work that benefits those in power more than those whose stories have long been silenced can have a negative impact on communities past and present, as well as the field as a whole. Reclaiming once rejected people and groups requires serious and ethical considerations at the outset of and throughout a project.
With the submission of this topic proposal, I am primarily seeking participants to join in this roundtable. Public history practitioners and researchers from all backgrounds who engage in research or projects that center on reclaiming the memory of a previously marginalized community or individual are welcomed to join. I am also looking for feedback on the overall proposal as well as suggested changes to be made before the final submission in July. The goal of this roundtable is to provide space for an open and intellectually rigorous discussion around what the process of reclaiming means as well as its potential to do both good and harm to the subjects being represented. Hopefully, practitioners and researchers will come away with more clarity on how we can pursue ethical representations of previously rejected groups and individuals.
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: Alaina Scapicchio, University of South Florida, [email protected]
ALL FEEDBACK AND OFFERS OF ASSISTANCE SHOULD BE SUBMITTED BY JULY 7, 2022. If you have general ideas or feedback to share, please feel free to use the comments feature below.
Hello! I’m an independent scholar who researches Japanese American mixed race and disability history, and especially with the latter, there is very little, if any, included in museums, books, etc, even when discussing Japanese American military history, the World War II incarceration camps, ADA, and other historical events. Even organizations that should be discussing disability, such as GoForBroke, other military history organizations and institutions, and Japanese American historical sites do not and despite enthusiasm for my work, never follow up. It is frustrating that continued calls to “broaden” Japanese American history continue to go unanswered.
Hi Alaina, I find your proposal very interesting and I am very happy it is very inclusive, that you do not try to limit it to only certain marginalized groups. Perhaps, it would be good to provide some guiding questions, highlight some topics of potential exchange, so that the panel will not turn into just a series of grievances. Maybe some successful examples of inclusion can also be presented/discussed? Or a definition of “successful inclusion” formulated? Or a list of postulates, features of good practices addressed?
Alaina, I agree with Joanna’s assessment, and would also add maybe it would be great to have an institution who course corrected after perhaps starting that path of self-serving storytelling to genuine partnership with rejected communities. I would hope that they can shed light on lessons learned and how they regained trust in communities.