I support local historical societies – often small enterprises in rural communities that maintain libraries, archives, and artifacts of great interest to residents. Societies like the Lucasville Area Historical Society provide information and services unavailable anywhere else because they preserve the intimate history of individuals, families, locales, and communities that all played their part in shaping and being shaped by history.
Unlike associations that focus mainly on broader studies such as the rise and fall of civilizations, world events, and even the national “big pictures,” local history societies preserve the stories of common folk and their past. Local history contains a wealth of details that help reveal how societal changes impacted the lives of ordinary people. This history can be seen as a microcosm, or representation, of large patterns on a small scale.
Learning about local
history turns those larger patterns of historical change into concrete
stories that tell of the lives of individuals. It is thus vital to
increasing one’s understanding of historical processes. And, to many, the more local "touch" with history, the more the appeal.
Despite the contributions of local societies, one problem is fairly persistent – declining membership and visitation. The news magazine of the American Historical Association, Perspectives On History, states …
“Many of these societies are tiny, underfunded, and understaffed. For example, more than 50 percent of the 150 historical museums in the state of Utah have a budget of under $25,000 a year, according to the Utah Humanities Council. An informal poll on the American Association for State and Local History's LinkedIn page (2012) suggested that approximately 15 percent of local historical societies are staffed entirely by volunteers, 25 percent by volunteers and a part-time staff member, and only 25 percent have more than one professional staff member. This means both that staff resources are stretched thin and that many historical societies are run by people with little formal training in history.
“Recent financial crises have also impacted the field. Local societies that rely on grants or subsidies from the local and state government increasingly faced draconian budget cuts, while competing for an ever-shrinking pool of private and government grant money. As a result, many societies simply don't have the resources to update their exhibits or conservation practices.”
(Debbie Ann Doyle. “The Future of Local Historical Societies.” Perspectives On History. https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/december-2012/the-future-of-local-historical-societies. December 01, 2012.)
The American Historical Association cites one reason for declining attendance as the inability to update interpretation and programming. A recent national study revealed that “the core audience for history museums is white, older, and upper middle class, a serious drawback in a country that is being radically transformed in demographic (and ethnic) terms."
(Cary Carson, "The End of History Museums: What's Plan B?" Meeting of the American Association for State and Local History in Salt Lake City. Public Historian 30. November 2008),
Many local historical societies serve communities that are rapidly changing due to immigration and changes in the local economy. These new audiences might feel less connected to the local history that interested the founders and is documented in current exhibits. The local historical societies are, therefore, struggling to tell stories that remain relevant and significant to their evolving constituencies.
Initiatives to address the sustainability of historic sites in the 21st century focus on transforming historic sites into vibrant centers of community life. Recommendations have ranged from monthly "history happy hours" for young professionals and providing meeting space to community groups to transforming a history museum aimed at adults into a children's museum aimed at multi-generational audiences.
Also, programs have been established to help underfunded and understaffed historical societies improve their services. The StEPS program of the American Association for State and Local History is a series of workbooks and self-study guides that help societies assess their governance, interpretation, collections care, and management, and to develop an improvement plan.
(Debbie Ann Doyle. “The Future of Local Historical Societies.” Perspectives On History. https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/december-2012/the-future-of-local-historical-societies. December 01, 2012.)
A Brief History
Academic research and what we now call public history were just beginning to evolve into distinct fields when the American Historical Association was founded in 1884. Early AHA members included history professors, scholars affiliated with state and local historical societies, and wealthy amateurs. As the Association became more focused on academic history, a Conference of State and Local Historical Societies formed within the AHA in 1904. In 1940, it became an independent organization, the American Association for State and Local History.
Many local historical societies were founded in the late 19th and early 20th century by amateur historians whose interest in the past was often combined with a desire to celebrate the significance, growth, and business potential of the community.
Debbie Ann Doyle, a coordinator of committees and meetings at the American Historical Association, says …
“These early societies were commonly formed by elites whose main interest was the history of people like themselves, leaders in business, commerce, and government. Their mission was to preserve the legacy of their ancestors, to commemorate local heroes, and to preserve historic architecture. Rapid urbanization and urban renewal in the 20th century led to another wave of interest in preserving local history. No one knows for sure how many local historical societies and small museums exist in the United States today – rough estimates place the number at over 10,000.”
(Debbie Ann Doyle. “The Future of Local Historical Societies.” Perspectives On History. https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/december-2012/the-future-of-local-historical-societies. December 01, 2012.)
Problems To Face
Doyle cites problems in finding new board members and attracting young families as challenges for local history societies. The running joke is that local societies have always been run by “little old ladies in white tennis shoes.”
Doyle continues …
“Once Generation X (generally defined as people born from 1965 to 1980) hits 65, there will quickly become a dearth of retirees in comparison to the previous generation. That’s strike one. There will simply be fewer people around who typically fit the description of local historical society leaders. Sadly, this also takes away a large portion of the membership that attends lectures, nostalgic programs and more. Fewer people will be available to run historical societies, and fewer will be interested in what they have to offer.
“But there are more factors involved. The typical local historical society board member has strong ties to his or her community. He can say, 'I was born on Main Street, right between the Smith house and the Washington house. My dad ran the local gas station, right over there, and my mom taught at the elementary school for 36 years.' How many of us can say that anymore? We have become transient as a society and no longer can claim that the old adage 'you marry someone born within 25 miles of where you were born' is absolutely true. We’re not local in nature anymore. There will be fewer and fewer people with long, deep knowledge of local landscapes, people who are really dedicated to the preservation of their hometown history. That’s strike two.”
“Can you see a pattern? Now, consider this final pitch. Local historical societies are just that – local. I had the pleasure of working with a friend who was as fiercely dedicated to his hometown as anybody I have ever met. He had this beat-up old pickup truck that he bumped all over town, and we used to joke that it had never seen the neighboring towns.
“Wouldn’t you know it, one day he was driving it to the next town over, and it died on the town border. Local historical societies as they currently operate can be just that myopic; they can’t see beyond the borders of their towns.”
(Debbie Ann Doyle. “The Future of Local Historical Societies.” Perspectives On History. https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/december-2012/the-future-of-local-historical-societies. December 01, 2012.)
Doyle sees the answer as rigorously engaging Generation Y (typically defined as people born from 1981 to 1996), providing less static and more digital exhibits, and producing programs that are kid-friendly and cater to young families.
Also, Doyle says that membership packages should have perks the whole family can enjoy. Societies will have to teach history through fun at an early age, as kids no longer get it in school.
The last and what Doyle calls her “most important understanding” is to not see history “as white as our traditional interpretations suggest.” Societies will have to embrace all of the cultures that make – and have made – their communities great, so that they might become a part of the future of the local history world.
Conclusion
I totally agree with Doyle. The future success of local history societies depends upon an evolution – a progression from gatherings of old folks ruminating on events of the past to active groups engaging younger members and history “beyond their own towns.” As society changes, so does the need for inclusion. In fact, this embracing attitude will surely provide new, exciting perspectives for both members and other interested parties alike.
I would also like to state: history is not “cut-and-dried” as an artifact preserved at some local site. History involves an issue-centered analysis. Decision-making activities place students of history squarely at the center of historical dilemmas and problems faced at critical moments in the past and the near-present. In a study of local history, examining issues is interwoven in the lives of the people. As perspectives change with new discoveries from the past, so do attitudes and crucial understandings. In brief – history is alive and requires the study of ever-changing interpretation. The earth is not longer considered to be “flat,” nor are minorities or LGBTQ people no longer viewed as “property” or “second-class citizens.”
Confronting the issues or problems of the time, analyzing the alternatives available, evaluating the consequences that might have followed those options for action that were not chosen, and comparing with the consequences of those that were adopted, are activities that foster students’ deep, personal involvement in these events. These activities also nurture critical thinking.
UCLA History's “Public History Initiative,” – a land grant institution that acknowledges the Gabrielino/Tongva peoples as the traditional land caretakers of Tovaangar (Los Angeles basin, So. Channel Islands) – writes …
“If well chosen, these activities also promote capacities vital to a democratic citizenry: the capacity to identify and define public policy issues and ethical dilemmas; analyze the range of interests and values held by the many persons caught up in the situation and affected by its outcome; locate and organize the data required to assess the consequences of alternative approaches to resolving the dilemma; assess the ethical implications as well as the comparative costs and benefits of each approach; and evaluate a particular course of action in light of all of the above and, in the case of historical issues-analysis, in light also of its long-term consequences revealed in the historical record.”
“And because important historical issues are frequently value-laden, they open opportunities to consider the moral convictions contributing to social actions taken.”
(“Historical Issues.” UCLA History. Public History Initiative. 2022.)
Isn't that the true importance of local historical societies – to build historical thinking standards by a more critical analysis?
UCLA's Public History Initiative cites the following thinking standards:
The student is able to:
Identify issues and problems in the past and analyze the interests, values, perspectives, and points of view of those involved in the situation.
Marshal evidence of antecedent circumstances and current factors contributing to contemporary problems and alternative courses of action.
Identify relevant historical antecedents and differentiate from those that are inappropriate and irrelevant to contemporary issues.
Evaluate alternative courses of action, keeping in mind the information available at the time, in terms of ethical considerations, the interests of those affected by the decision, and the long- and short-term consequences of each.
Formulate a position or course of action on an issue by identifying the nature of the problem, analyzing the underlying factors contributing to the problem, and choosing a plausible solution from a choice of carefully evaluated options.
Evaluate the implementation of a decision by analyzing the interests it served; estimating the position, power, and priority of each player involved; assessing the ethical dimensions of the decision; and evaluating its costs and benefits from a variety of perspectives.
Meeting all of those standards may be a tall order for a local historical society, but pursuing them surely pays benefits. It seems to me that closure and refusal to address changes that impact our lives makes a historical society just a trite curiosity and nonessential.
We are growing more diverse as a country, not less, and that must be reflected in our local historical societies. Then, with families engaged, and a broader spectrum of cultures involved, future generations may provide the leadership needed. The continuing hope is “if it benefits their kids, they will be willing to support it.”
No comments:
Post a Comment