Scholarly Review: “Public History as a Social Form of Knowledge” by Hilda Keane

 

“Public History as a Social Form of Knowledge” by Hilda Keane,

from The Oxford Handbook of Public History

by Paula Hamilton (ed.), James B. Gardner (ed.)

As a practice, History has traditionally been carried out by scholars and researchers from numerous institutions. Methods utilized to conduct historical research and produce presentations have shifted over the years, largely because of the variety in research content and forms with the evolution of subfields and microhistories. The emergence of public history has significantly influenced the opinions and methods of traditional historians conducting research. Chapter 22,” Public History as a Social Form of Knowledge” by Hilda Keane in The Oxford Handbook of Public History, focuses on the process of artifacts and other materials being integrated into the presentation of public histories. This work uses examples of public collections, specifically in the Museum of London, along with other collections utilizing different modes, such as family heirlooms with historical value to consider public history as a social form of knowledge.

When exploring and presenting the construction of historical collections and exhibits, historians should consider an interdisciplinary approach that could expand the narrative and appeal to those interacting with the study. Traditionally, the process of procuring collections has been unknown to those engaging with exhibits, monuments, or historical texts. Because of this, historical collections have been viewed as products of professional historians. However, the contemporary assembly of public histories shifts the discussion away from a limited focus on the work of professional historians. Although this approach has been criticized by academic historians who argue that it presents a narrow view of history making, it’s presentation create spaces to which visitors bring their own knowledge and experience. The author suggests, “The genre in which the past is presented creates different meaning. Sometimes it is the form itself rather than the content that is remembered in a museum visit.” (page 405-406) This approach includes the acknowledgement of personal and group histoires collected, in spite of the deviation from traditional design and construction of research.

An example highlighted in this chapter is of the Museum of London, that previously maintained an exhibit on the Great Fire of London which displayed flickering red lights against a backdrop of black buildings. When the museum was under renovation, staff members fought to ensure that this display was retained because they understood visitor engagement is not necessarily about learning, but emotional association. “Whether these are experiences of a museum visit as such, or of childhood, or of a past that is no more but of which only traces remain is not possible to disentangle. However, they are examples of the ways in which, even in conventional public history settings, people bring their own emotions to a visit.” (page 406)

Public exhibitions have changed the way historians understand those who engage with their work outside of the academic community. It has encouraged some to place more emphasis on the value of experience in collections. This approach is different from the traditional path adopted by historians because it recognizes the relationship between a historian and research material. Museums, memorials and other public history collections shift the emphasis from the researcher’s process and engagement to the materials being studied, highlighting the intersection of historical research and the practice of archiving. In the case of the suffrage movement in England, the exhibit highlights a collection of histories in which women were defined as protagonists of political change. Each of these collections illustrate a perception of change deemed to be of historical importance. In many cases, this contribution would be overlooked if the presenters did not create their own histories, which include material outside conventional written archives such as family heirlooms and local landmarks.

Public history has also influenced an interdisciplinary approach to research by using not only traditional methods of historical research but also factoring in social and emotional factors in the presentation of the collection. It has also been influenced by those who had expert knowledge of a subject or situation not previously considered by historians. The texts suggest, “Family heritage objects act as vital constituents of family identity, creating the private time and space to distinguish that identity from that of the surrounding public and making possible its sense of uniqueness. However, we can also engage with such meanings because of their cultural context outside a particular family” (page 411)

The accessibility of information related to historical events has complicated perceptions surrounding historical research due to the question of accuracy and legitimacy of the sources. The internet has made it possible to present data to a global audience, and there is no concrete process of vetting what is presented by individuals. However, there could be no more validity to a personal story than one who lived it. This applies to genealogical research and the compilation of family histories, as well. Additionally, free access to collections online containing historical artifacts, recorded firsthand accounts, pictures of old buildings, and other similar resources can influence new discussions and lead to discoveries surrounding historic collections.