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

Tue Apr 15 04:53:19 CDT 2008

John,

>>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. <<

I think it's more the perils of knowing a lot in depth about a subject.  I found myself doing the same thing at the Atlanta Historical Society, which is wonderful, a couple of weekends ago. It's one of the reasons that most continuing professional education courses indicate the level of experience for which they are designed. I've also noticed that more than a few battlefield parks outside of the Pennsylvania/Maryland/Virginia nexus use photographs, particularly of battle dead, from Gettysburg and Antietam. I'm assuming they do that because the aftermath of those two battles were so intensely photographed as opposed to battles elsewhere.

I haven't yet had the opportunity to visit the new VC/Museum, but I was most impressed in the local television coverage at the reaction of the children.  My favorite was a little girl, who looked to be about 8, who, with great enthusiasm, informed the reporter, "There's a lot of cool stuff in there!"  The other thing I noticed was that lifting the knapsack appears to be a mandatory on screen activity for TV reporters.

Regards,

Margaret

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "John M. Rudy" <john.m.rudy at gmail.com> 

> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes: 
> 
> 
> 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 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------- 
> You may unsubscribe by going to 
> http://mailman.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg 
> 
> You can add yourself to the GDG map at: 
> http://www.frappr.com/gettysburgdiscussiongroup 
> 
> View archived posts from May 2004 - present at 
> http://mailman.arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg/ 