Bringing History to Life

Much of the history we know is acquired not in academic classrooms, but elsewhere.

In addition to learning about the past through movies, television documentaries, historical fiction and digital media, many of Americans’ most meaningful encounters with the past take place in history museums and at historic homes, historic battlefields and living history and pioneer museums.

Indeed, more Americans visit these sites than attend professional baseball or basketball games. Yet these venues seldom receive the respect they deserve, especially in comparison to art museums—even though there are many more history than art museums.

Most Popular Stories

Most Popular

At museums and historic sites, visitors can directly encounter historical artifacts, providing tangible connections to the past. Standing where history happened or seeing the actual objects used by people in the past can make history feel more real and immediate.

Engaging with history in a physical space can also foster empathy and a deeper understanding of the experiences of people in the past. This is particularly true at sites dedicated to remembering difficult aspects of history, such as battles, tragedies or injustices.

Yet these sites face many challenges in presenting a historically accurate understanding of history. What Warren Leon and Roy Rosenzweig observed 35 years ago in their edited collection History Museums in the United States: A Critical Assessment holds true today. Underfunding, a largely homogeneous audience, visitor expectations and political considerations distort the history that these sites present.

While many of these venues strive to offer a more diverse, inclusive and critical perspective on the American experience, commercial pressures force many of these sites to balance entertainment with education, while a fraught, polarized political climate encourages sanitized, whitewashed and upbeat portraits of the past.

A newer challenge grows out of well-intentioned government regulations and heightened public sensitivities designed to respect the rights, cultures and histories of indigenous and other communities. These measures aim to correct historical imbalances and injustices, ensuring that the portrayal of native and other previously marginalized histories and cultures is accurate, respectful and inclusive. However, they also introduce significant complexities in museum operations.

These government regulations necessitate detailed consultations with Native communities, which can be time-consuming and complex. Each community may have its own perspectives, preferences and protocols that museums must navigate. For many good reasons, other groups, too, expect a significant degree of deference to their perspectives. This process, while crucial for ethical collaboration, can slow down the development of new exhibits or the reinterpretation of existing ones.

There is also restricted access to artifacts that are considered sacred or sensitive and, therefore, not suitable for public display. While this respects the communities’ wishes and cultural practices, it can limit museums’ ability to provide a comprehensive overview of certain aspects of history or culture.

Let me be clear: the consultation and consent processes are fundamentally about respecting and honoring the rights and cultures of various peoples and encourage collaboration and co-creation of knowledge, leading to more accurate and respectful representations in museums. The process also fosters relationships between museums and Native communities, promoting mutual understanding and respect. While it may make some aspects of museum operations more difficult, it can ensure a more inclusive and accurate portrayal of history and culture.

However, in consequence of all of these factors, history museums and historic sites are incentivized to present a nostalgia-laden history that celebrates the past, entertains visitors even at the cost of distorting the past, avoids controversy and fails to connect past and present.

History museums face many of the same criticisms about decontextualization, representation and interpretation as art museums. That they:

• Privilege objects collected by elites and marginalize or omit voices and experiences of historically underrepresented or exploited groups.
• Strip objects from their original historical, cultural and social contexts and their meanings, functions and connections to past peoples, making it difficult for visitors to fully understand their significance beyond their physical appearance or aesthetic value.
• Simplify complex histories and provide a homogenized portrait of events, neglecting the nuances and complexities that characterize historical realities.
• Present nationalistic or celebratory or progressive narratives that overlook the contributions and experiences of indigenous peoples, minorities, women and other marginalized communities.
• Use language, imagery and framing that downplays conflict and contrasting perspectives.
• Often fail to engage with contemporary controversies or make clear the relevance of historical objects and narratives to present-day audiences.
• Use outdated presentation models with few opportunities for interaction, dialogue and reflection.

The biggest criticism of history museums and historic sites is that they fail to successfully translate academic scholarship to the public. That criticism, I think, is somewhat misguided. There are many ways that society connects to its past. In addition to academic history, there is collective memory, legends, myths and traditions, and these connections are as important in their own ways as academic facts and interpretations.

Legends, myths and traditions are forms of collective or cultural memory that transmit values, beliefs and identities across generations. They are not primarily concerned with historical accuracy or evidence but serve to:

• Forge identities, providing as foundational stories for communities, nations or cultural groups, helping to shape a collective identity.
• Convey values and morals; these stories carry moral lessons or exemplify core values of a society, serving as tools for socialization and moral guidance.
• Strengthen community bonds by providing shared experiences and a common past.

These traditions, myths and collective memories are vital for understanding how communities understand themselves, explain their place in the world and transmit cultural values across generations.

Rather than viewing academic history and other forms of historical connection as mutually exclusive, it’s more productive to see them as complementary. Academic history can provide critical context and challenge oversimplified or inaccurate narratives, while myths and traditions offer insight into a society’s values, fears, anxieties and aspirations.

There are ways to reconcile the differences between academic and nonacademic history. For example, by examining the origins, functions and impact of various myths, legends and traditions and helping the public better understand the difference between historical fact and cultural memory, as well as the significance of each.

Both academic history and the realms of memory, legends, myths and traditions are crucial for a full understanding of the past and its continuing influence on the present. Recognizing the value of each and exploring their intersections can enrich our understanding of human societies and the complex ways in which they relate to their histories.

Of all the courses that I teach, the one that has been the most consistently successful is a class on museums, past, present and future. It’s as much a course on the politics and economics of museums as about their history. It examines how museums’ mission and functions, architecture and layout, and curatorial and presentation policies have changed over time and asks how museums should address tough questions, like slavery and its legacies. Among the issues we will discuss are whether museums be required to return artifacts taken through war, colonial conquest or duress or whether museums should turn down offers of money that some consider tainted.

The course’s appeal lies partly in its interdisciplinary approach. The class intersects with a variety of fields—not just anthropology, art, biology and history but architecture, design and economics—and offers opportunities to explore both theoretical concepts and practical considerations, such as museum management, curation and public engagement. In addition, the course delves into how museums confront timely ethical debates involving colonialism, representation and cultural repatriation.

Also, thanks to rapid technological changes and shifting public expectations, the future of museums is a hot topic. Discussions on digital curation, virtual reality and new models of engagement can excite students about the possibilities of blending technology and culture.

One assignment asks the students to critically evaluate the ways that various museums and historical sites present slavery. These sites include:

• The African Meeting House and the Abiel Smith School in Boston, constructed in 1834 with funds from the estate of a white businessman, uses tours, lectures, exhibits and artistic performances to inform the public about the adversity that the free African American community of Boston faced and the culture that these people created.
• Freedom House Museum in Alexandria, Va., which served as a pen to hold enslaved men, women and children en route to the sugar and cotton plantations of the Deep South, uses artifacts, exhibits and digital first-person slave narrative interpretations to tell the stories of the slave trade, slave auctions, physical violence and family separation.
• The Levi Jordan Texas state archaeological and historical site, which displays artifacts unearthed through archaeological excavations and draws upon descendants’ stories to reconstruct the lives of the 134 slaves and sharecroppers who lived on this sugar and cotton plantation.
• Montpelier, the plantation of James and Dolley Madison, uses a combination of video, anecdotes, tours, found artifacts and written testimonials to uncover intimate details about everyday life for enslaved individuals in the 18th and 19th centuries.
• The New-York Historical Society’s “Slavery in New York” exhibition concluded with art works created by contemporary African American artists that reflect upon enslavement and its legacies.
• The Whitney Plantation in Wallace, La., featured in the 2012 film Django Unchained, dots the landscape with spaces where visitors can contemplate the tragedies that enslaved people endured.
• Colonial Williamsburg has used interpreters in costume to inform visitors about the realities of slavery and the experience of enslaved African Americans in the former Virginia capital.

In their analysis of these differing approaches, I ask my students, first, to reflect on the exhibits’ goals. Is it to educate the public to the history of slavery and its economic and political impact? To convey the realities of life in bondage and foster empathy and ethical reflection? To acknowledge the impact of slavery upon present-day society? Or something else?

I then ask them to evaluate the strategies that the sites have adopted.

• Using text, timelines and images to provide accurate, comprehensive information about the origins, development and abolition of slavery, including its economic, social and political dimensions.
• Using artifacts and personal narrative to tell stories about individuals who were enslaved and thereby humanize abstract facts.
• Celebrating the resistance, rebellions and everyday acts of defiance by enslaved individuals and communities.
• Revealing the contributions of enslaved individuals to American culture.
• Portraying those who were enslaved as individuals with agency, dignity and humanity, rather than as mere victims or statistics.
• Using contemporary artworks to reflect upon enslavement and examine slavery’s present-day legacies.

In their essays, the students are asked to evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and problems posed by the use of costumed interpreters, as well as the effectiveness of contemporary artworks to reflect on enslavement and examine slavery’s present-day legacies.

What many of my students have concluded is that the most effective exhibits are:

1. Site specific. Rather than offering a sweeping but often superficial overview of the history of slavery, the sites focus on actual individuals and the artifacts that document their lives.
2. Illustrate the process of recovering the past. Especially effective is the archaeological camp at the Levi Jordan plantation, where high school and college students receive training in surveying methods, excavation techniques, artifact handling and analysis, drawing site plans and keeping detailed field notes and situating archaeological research within a historical context using census and other records.
3. Tell stories. It is striking that history museums rarely deploy storytellers, like the West African griots who recite poems, sing and tell stories and who maintain traditions orally. Stories can humanize history and convey information in ways that are engaging, memorable and emotionally resonant and impactful and encourage visitor participation.

The late 20th century witnessed the rise of the new museology, which has sought to transform museums into more dynamic, inclusive and socially engaged institutions. It has changed the way museums conceive of themselves, display objects and interact with visitors, emphasizing museum’s role as a social institution that actively engages with contemporary issues and serves diverse communities. Museums are seen not just as repositories of objects but as spaces for dialogue, reflection and social change.

The new museology stresses the importance of inclusivity and diversity, aiming to represent a wide range of cultures, perspectives and voices. This includes reevaluating narratives, decolonizing collections and ensuring that exhibitions and programs are accessible and relevant to a broad audience. This approach emphasizes the museum’s educational and social responsibilities and encourages these institutions to be more reflexive and transparent about how they acquired and displayed and interpreted their collections in the past.

In addition, the new museology calls on these institutions to work in collaboration with communities to co-create exhibitions and programs in order to embrace more diverse perspectives and foster a sense of shared ownership and relevance.

What’s the takeaway from all this? In my opinion, there are no better ways to engage students in the humanities than to have them design and develop their own virtual museum exhibitions, or, better yet, to collaborate with campus or neighboring museums to create an educational website dealing with a particular exhibition.

Such projects can enhance student engagement and teach essential skills involving teamwork, project planning, coordination and execution and communicating complex ideas in accessible and compelling ways. They can also promote ethical awareness about representation and interpretation, provide practical experience that can enhance students’ resumes and portfolios and contribute to public knowledge.

Designing and developing a museum exhibition represents a profound shift in learning, moving from passive absorption of information to an active, immersive and authentic learning experience. Creating a museum exhibition requires students to engage actively with the material, including research, selection and interpretation of artifacts or themes. Designing an exhibition also involves problem-solving as students navigate logistical, spatial and narrative challenges, requiring innovative thinking and creativity.

Developing an exhibition typically involves teamwork, teaching students to collaborate effectively, share responsibilities, negotiate differences and work toward a common goal. It also helps students hone their communication skills, both in working with their peers and in designing exhibits that communicate effectively with a diverse audience. This includes not only textual communication but also visual and interactive storytelling techniques.

Creating an exhibition provides a real-world context for learning, as students produce work that will be seen and experienced by an actual audience. It requires them to understand the needs, interests and backgrounds of their potential audience and to become active participants in the broader mission of public education and cultural preservation. The authenticity of such projects increases the stakes of the educational experience and provides motivation and purpose.

The true purpose of a college education is not to ingest facts. It is to translate knowledge into meaningful outcomes. Don’t miss the opportunity to make learning more active and authentic.