PROPOSAL TYPE

Roundtable

SEEKING
  • Seeking Additional Presenters
  • Seeking General Feedback and Interest
RELATED TOPICS
  • Museums/Exhibits
  • Place
  • Preservation
  • Reflections on the Field
  • Social Justice
ABSTRACT

We invite scholars, practitioners, and community members to join a session exploring the politics of memory and public history amid escalating culture wars, censorship, and reactionary policymaking. As the U.S. approaches its semiquincentennial under renewed “patriotic education” and nationalist agendas, we seek dialogue on how history, place, and heritage are being reshaped or suppressed by political forces. This session will critically examine how memory is constructed, contested, erased, and resisted in this shifting political moment and how we as scholars, practitioners, and community members, respond.

Co-organizer: Jacque Micieli-Voutsinas, Assistant Professor, School of Art + Art History/Museum Studies, University of Florida

DESCRIPTION

We are seeking scholars, practitioners, and community members whose work engages with the politics of memory and public history in the current political climate to participate in a session at the upcoming NCPH-AASLH meeting. We are considering either lightning round or roundtable formats, but open to suggestions as well.

As the United States enters a new phase of intensified culture wars, reactionary policymaking, and state-level censorship, geographers are uniquely positioned to interrogate how memory, history, and place are being reshaped (often aggressively) by political forces.

The resurgence of Trumpism and nationalist policies, now intensified under the banner of “patriotic education” and in anticipation of the nation’s approaching semiquincentennial, has direct implications for the scholars engaged in critical heritage work and the communities with whom we work. These include the rollback or resistance of place-renaming efforts tied to colonial and racist legacies; the withholding or redirection of public funding from projects that engage difficult or marginalized histories; legislative and rhetorical attacks on national parks, public lands, and historic sites deemed to portray America in a “negative light”; to the ongoing privatization, commodification, or weaponization of public memory in the name of “patriotism” and “national security.” Equally important are the impacts of such measures on community and cultural heritage organizations, whose ability to fulfill their missions and, in some cases, their very survival, has historically relied on grants and funding

We are looking to organize a session that critically examines how memory is constructed, contested, erased, and resisted in this shifting political moment—and how we, as scholars, practitioners, and community members, respond. Possible topics include (but are not limited to):
-Public memory and national mythmaking
-State-sanctioned repression and erasure of Black, queer, indigenous, and other marginalized histories
-Memory-work in the U.S. South and other “contested” regions
-Global responses to Trump-era policies on heritage
-Community resistance and grassroots storytelling
-Evolving methods of preserving or complicating memory


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:
Katrina Stack, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, [email protected]

All feedback and offers of assistance should be sent by  November 15, 2025. If you have general ideas or feedback to share, please feel free to use the comments feature below.

Discussion

4 comments
  1. Donna Graves says:

    This is obviously a critical issue for our field, and the subject of countless conversations, publications and gatherings. I would suggest that the roundtable will be aided by selecting a focus so that participants and audience can dive more deeply together. Any of the topics listed could easily fill a session (and more).

  2. Rebecca says:

    I agree with Donna. This is an important conversation to have but think focusing it a bit more on one or two specific topics would help not only the presenters, but the participants.

  3. Tracy Neumann says:

    I agree with Donna and Rebecca that this might be narrowed a bit—personally, I’d be especially interested in discussions of community resistance and grassroots storytelling, particularly where they have at least some degree of success and can offer hope and inspiration for other folks.

  4. Bethany Hawkins says:

    I would urge you to include panelists from “red states” in the discussion. The experience is very different depending on your state. How do you continue to do “good history” under pressure from governments and local communities who fund your work?

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.