GDG- Another few cents on the New Museum...

[John M. Rudy]

Hello, GDG...  It's been a while...

De-semi-lurking for more discussion of the museum.

OK, I spent an intensive six hours in the museum exhibits today, giving 
the exhibit proper justice and watching both the films and the visitors 
interact with the space.  It was an interesting experience.

Before I begin this post proper, I need to place in a disclaimer: I do 
work for the NPS, but at a different park.  I would love to one day work 
at GNMP and this post is meant as nothing but constructive criticism to 
improve the quality of interpretation at GNMP.  I criticize so that we 
can all move toward a better history for the public.

So, on to the museum.  I saw the film Thursday night, and did enjoy it.  
I thought it made brilliant connections to the national significance of 
the site, without being too alienating of the Lost-Cause-ers that are 
certain to come through the exhibit.  It never explicitly, as far as I 
remember, said "North = Good, South = Evil," which was my greatest fear 
when the new museum was forced to tackle slavery as per Congressional 
directive.  In my opinion, the presentation of these points, both in 
film and the first media presentation of the exhibit, were relatively 
even handed.

I do tend, in some cases, to nitpick though.  There are some 
inaccuracies and oversight that I feel needs to at some point be 
corrected.  Margaret Palm's photo, instantly recognizable to many of us 
thanks to Pete Vermilyea's work on the black community of Gettysburg 
(http://www.gdg.org/Gettysburg%20Magazine/gburgafrican.html) appears 
twice in the exhibition, once in the case exhibiting a certificate of 
citizenship and once to the left of the pre-battle "voices" theatre.  
Neither time is she actually labeled as a citizen of Gettysburg, or even 
Margaret Palm.  This is one example of an epidemic in the entire exhibit 
that bugged me: well-known photos of identified personalities (i.e. 
Elmer Ellsworth) that go unidentified.  I don't think that they need 
Ellsworth's tale, as it's not Gettysburg specific.  But without a name 
even at the bottom of the image, he just becomes window-dressing.  One 
of the other GDG members mentioned that the new museum should excite you 
to visit the field.  I think it should also inspire you to do more 
research and learn on your own.  A simple name with all these photos 
means I can write it down and look up who they were later.  It also 
respects that dead human life, not as artwork for an exhibit but a real 
person with a name.

My second beef was with the object text.  In general, text has become 
more streamlined, which in one sense is good.  It means more people are 
apt to actually read the offerings as it requires less time and effort.  
BUT, this trimming of the text has removed some crucial bits of the 
tale.  One for instance: there is a shutter from a home in town with a 
bullet hole in it.  I remember this artifact well from the old museum, 
as when I was there a week or so ago, the shutter wasn't there so I was 
left just reading it's orphaned caption.  The caption identified the 
owner of the home the shutter hung on, and what that man did during the 
battle, if I remember correctly.  The new caption says something to the 
effect of "a shutter pierced by a bullet during the battle."  That 
object has lost all provenance.  There is no lineage of where it came 
from and who that bullet could have hit.  All emotional connection, for 
a visitor, is gone, and the artifact becomes just a bullet in wood.

Another example if you'll indulge me: the floor joists pierced by 
artillery during the battle.  They're one of those potent artifacts from 
the collection which, when I toured the unfinished exhibits with the 
GCWRT, I was happy to see were going into the museum.  However, today I 
saw that they lack ANY interpretive signage.  What's worse?  Neither I, 
nor any of the friends I ran into during the day, could remember what 
house they were from.  Can anyone refresh my memory?  This has been 
bugging me since this morning...

One last problem, then I'll rest for the evening.  In the gallery 
immediately preceding the "battle" segment, containing the cavalry 
trooper, there is a photo of Jack Hopkins, another of Pete's characters 
and a subject not only in his Gettysburg magazine article, but also a 
more recent article in the Adams County Historical Journal.  I don't 
have the journal in front of me right now, so I can't be 100% certain 
that Pete doesn't say this as well, but the exhibit claims that Hopkins 
helped spirit away dozens of fugitive slaves on the underground 
railroad.  This seems like it would be something that would stick out at 
me from my readings on Hopkins, and something I would have included in 
my college campus tour pamphlet.  Does anyone have a clue what the 
park's source might be on this claim?  I know of the one engraving of a 
wagon in the railroad cut that has a spurious inscription below it 
referencing Thaddeus Stevens, Hopkins and Quakers from the J. Howard 
Wert collection. Other than that one bit of possibly spurious evidence, 
I can't find any sign of a Hopkins/Underground RR connection, let alone 
enough evidence for a solid number like "dozens."  Anyone care to take a 
stab?

Overall, I did enjoy the exhibit.   It is a step toward the right 
direction, as the offerings will make far more emotional connections for 
the typical visitor.  The old museum, for all we loved it, was dry and 
fact-based: a walk in catalog of material culture, if you will.  This 
new offering does give emotional weight to most of the objects and 
images presented.  I just hope that weight can be carried into 
everything on display at some point soon.


Maybe I'm just like a magician, watching someone else's act and unable 
to enjoy it 'cause I know how it's all done and I want desperately to 
not see that strings.  Of course, maybe next time I'm there I won't be 
nearly as critical.  Here's to hoping.

-John Rudy