Written from the point of view of a critic (though admittedly not a participant) in the field of public history, in particular museums, Mickey Mouse History is an interesting evaluation of different factors that affect museums. The first examines the different ways in which environment can affect how exhibits are decided on for a particular museum. The chapter on the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island, while discussing the different ways in which history can be ordered (as well, as commenting on the different ways in which the Statue of Liberty was funded), goes into a great amount of detail as to how the facilities on Ellis Island were constructed, both what he views as elements of good and bad design. Chapter Three seems to be able to be asking questions within the larger historical framework rather than simply questions relating to how museums should present them. This can be seen in the discussion of “pre” vs “post” in viewing industrialization. Chapter Four examines a relatively new concept of what constitutes a museum, such as one that places exhibits on the web.
This is one that interested me the most. Wallace seems to take the stance that much of the new technology, while helpful, may/should not replace the more conventional ways in which museums are constructed. His introduction to this chapter may belay some of his feelings in the somewhat bemused (sarcastic?) way he describes certain forms of electronic entertainment that was being developed at the time. While I understand the arguments he makes, particularly the ideas of appropriating electronic media for more innovative museum exhibits, I believe he overlooks some of the “democratic “ ways in which the internet can affect the museum world. One of his complaints is the fact that the use of technology will limit the online experience to the affluent. With the increase of computers in public spaces with online access, this might not be the obstacle it was when this book was first published.
Though Wallace points out many issues that one could have contention with in regards to Walt Disney’s historical presentations(as might be deduced from the title), he does have some interesting things to say about how techniques might be appropriated from them. For example, he does not condone many of the items that are presented, he does believe that many examples can be taken in the ways in which they are presented, especially for the use in presenting history to a larger public (page 96). Is this a deviation from some of the main points in his argument in conceding such an important point as presentation (thus perhaps causing one to question what he said previously)? Or is this an extension of his discussion on presentation, his outlook on the need for museums to upgrade the ways in which museums need to find new techniques in presentation?
One more question on this point. Is this suggestion of using Disney tactics for public history presentations a helpful tip or a slight aside as to how Wallace views public history?
1 comment:
I agree with your statement that technology, especially the internet, can positively effect the museum world. It is almost as if Wallace does not know entirely what to think of this new communication tool. One cannot say how it will be utilized in the future by museums and curators, but I feel that it's use today is very much appropiate and necessary. It is beneficial to the millions of people who may never have the opportunity to visit a historical museum or landmark in person, and to millions of people researching information about a particular site or artifact. However, I do not believe that it will or should ever take the place of actual musuems. Concerning the possibility of "museums melt[ing] into air", Wallace poses the question on pg. 108 of, "who will collect and care for the objects to be beamed into cyberspace?" Americans, are enthusiastic and active in learning about history as we have learned in Rosenzweig and Thelen's work, "The Presence of the Past". I therefore do not believe that as a society we will suddenly begin to ignore our true tangible history and settle for online, technological presentations. There will always be a need for museums and curators to present our history and for we as a society to have a say in how and what we want presented.
Post a Comment