Who Owns America's Past?: The Smithsonian and the Problem of History

by Robert C. Post

When preserving our history, what do we choose to value, why, and who decides? Honorable Mention for the National Council on Public History Book Award of the National Council on Public History In 1994, when the National Air and Space Museum announced plans to display the Enola Gay , the B-29 sent to destroy Hiroshima with an atomic bomb, the ensuing political uproar caught the museum's parent Smithsonian Institution entirely unprepared. As the largest such complex in the world, the Smithsonian cares for millions of objects and has displayed everything from George Washington's sword to moon rocks to Dorothy’s ruby slippers from The Wizard of Oz. Why did this particular object arouse such controversy? From an insider’s perspective, Robert C. Post’s Who Owns America’s Past? offers insight into the politics of display and the interpretation of history. Never before has a book about the Smithsonian detailed the recent and dramatic shift from collection-driven shows, with artifacts meant to speak for themselves, to concept-driven exhibitions, in which objects aim to tell a story, displayed like illustrations in a book. Even more recently, the trend is to show artifacts along with props, sound effects, and interactive elements in order to create an immersive environment. Rather than looking at history, visitors are invited to experience it. Who Owns America’s Past? examines the different ways that the Smithsonian’s exhibitions have been conceived and designed―whether to educate visitors, celebrate an important historical moment, or satisfy donor demands or partisan agendas. Combining information from hitherto-untapped archival sources, extensive interviews, a thorough review of the secondary literature, and considerable personal experience, Post gives the reader a behind-the-scenes view of disputes among curators, academics, and stakeholders that were sometimes private and at other times burst into headline news.

Genres: History, Nonfiction

400 pages, Hardcover

First published September 15, 2013

About the author

Robert Post is Sterling Professor of Law at Yale Law School. He served as the School's 16th dean from 2009 until 2017. Before coming to Yale, he taught at the University of California at Berkeley School of Law.

Reviews

[RYCJ · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Good. The title. It sums up exactly, the premise of the book. It might seem puerile that this be pointed out, except in this case it was a real treat to open the book and find from beginning to end, the content stayed on target and with the premise.

The Mmeh…Okay. Readers like myself, who are unfamiliar with the internal debates to “stocking” the Smithsonian, or any other national building of similar respect, may find the book challenging in keeping up with the long list of participants and stakeholders. But too, “if you’re anything like me," you will also be fascinated by that challenge and find Who Owns America’s Past an ageless source to reference.

The Best Part! What motivated me to grab this book was knowing there would be no way getting around addressing the arc of arguments rooted in perspective and political views about how exhibits were/are selected, and who owns the telling of over a million perspectives. The Bell exchange, and the resolution of that exchange, was as interesting as the Enola Gay debacle, and much of the deepest contentions on war exhibits, for that matter. Yet, what really struck a chord were the inferences of how to represent “disturbing parts of history,” without offending, and thus at the larger offense, ‘garbling’ America’s historical view. Adhering to context and scholarship is a logical conclusion, if only it weren’t for the incongruous contradictory nature of history. It has to be a difficult story to capture and represent in any respect, long before reaching a consensuses about “what” to display in a monumental building.

[John · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a bit harder to get through than the other Smithsonian book I just read. I was kind of thinking it would be about the controversies and big events - like the Enola Gay exhibit and the creation of the newer museums of the last couple of decades. But really this is a history of the Smithsonian from the beginning, with a LOT of inside baseball. Post worked at the Smithsonian for decades, and so he knew a lot of these people, and he covers a very large cast of characters. This is kind of a detail critique, but he also is trying to tell the story of a group of museums and a lot of exhibits per museum, so he uses acronyms all over the place, and it is very confusing. I could not keep track of which museum we were talking about, and which exhibits were which.
I mean, if you want something that covers the whole long sweep of the institution, from the late 19th century almost to the present, this is clearly the book. And you do get a sense for how the Smithsonian navigated the turn toward interpretation and narrative in the 60s and 70s and 80s. But if you are just interested in the big moments/milestones I think there is too much detail here.

[Fran Hawthorne · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sure, we instinctively know that months, if not years, of work go into any museum exhibit that we see. This fascinating book digs into the history and behind-the-scenes details of one of the world's largest (if you include all the component buildings) and best-known museums, the Smithsonian.

For instance, it never occurred to me that there might be professional disputes between designers and curators over how much of an exhibit should be artifacts vs. text, or that the idea of an exhibit telling a narrative (rather than just being a display of whatever is in the backroom) is a relatively new idea.
As with any institution, it was interesting to read the story behind the mounting of old favorites like the First Ladies' dresses -- still awaiting the First Gent's tux -- and all those awesome spacecraft at the Air & Space Museum.
I figured that there must have been some controversy over corporate sponsorship, but I didn't realize how early that sponsorship began, back in the 1970s.

Unfortunately, as is too often the case with nonfiction written by insiders, this book gets lost in nitty-gritty and in-house politics. There are too many names of minor characters. And the structure is confusing, as it winds back and forth, repeating bits of stories previously told (the controversy over the exhibit about the Enola Gay and the atomic bomb, the corruption of one of the museum's leaders). Someday, I have to learn to skim when reading most nonfiction!!

[Amy · Rating 3 out of 5]

How the Smithsonian has presented American history and the influence of various curators, directors, and secretaries and scholarship on Smithsonian exhibits. Interesting deep dive into the history of public history and museums. History is always political and reflects the ideas and values of those doing the work.

[Jj Kwashnak · Rating 2 out of 5]

We know the old aphorism that “History is written by the victors,” but for a good majority of people, history is really written by those who present it to popular culture – in this case the curators of our museums. What the powers at “America’s Attic” – the Smithsonian – decide to exhibit, and how, affects both how the audience sees history but also how the stakeholders of that history react. Using stories such as the kerfuffle about the Enola Gay on the 50th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima, and how the heirs of Alexander Graham Bell objected to displays regarding rival telephone inventors’ work, Post delves into how history is molded by those responsible for designing exhibits, approving them, sponsoring them and the politicians and our national museum. Is it the mission of the Smithsonian to display only that which celebrates America or to use its collection as a mirror upon ourselves, showing our history, warts and all? That question has plagued a stream of officials in the museum since its founding. Focusing on the Museum of History and Technology, and to a lesser extent the National Air and Space Museum, Post, himself a former curator at the Smithsonian, looks at the ups and down of the history of presenting history, and how the view has changed over time.
Post introduces us to a long stream of movers and shakers of the museum – curators and directors, over the past half century plus. He looks at various experiences regarding the philosophies and execution of history exhibits both successful and aborted. The problem of the book is that it is presented semi-chronologically but contains the fabled cast of thousands. Curators weave in and out of the narrative, making it hard to keep track of who was who and what he or she did. There seems to be a lack of focus in the book, taking an almost scattershot approach to the points he wants to make. I found myself interest wandering at times. He’s written a fine institutional history for his slice of the Smithsonian, but for the casual reader, a lot of this is lost. It would have been nice if he focused down more into a few specific people and incidents, examining them fuller in their time and place of the museum, and American politics. There is a lot of valuable information in here, but you need to want to find it. I learned a lot about how the philosophy of how to develop museum exhibits has changed and I know the next time I am in a museum I will look at the layout with a different eye, but I left the book without as much understanding of the battles in the name of history that have occurred than I would have hoped.

[Biblio Files (takingadayoff) · Rating 3 out of 5]

What is the purpose of the Smithsonian? Never having given this a lot of thought, I supposed it was to save anything that had to do with the history of the United States. In my only visit to the Smithsonian, I looked at Inaugural ball gowns, Julia Child's kitchen, the ruby slippers from The Wizard of Oz. All mildly diverting, but about as interesting as going to a good antiques mall, and about as educational as an average episode of Antiques Roadshow.

In Who Owns America's Past, Robert C. Post shows that the question has been a topic of disagreement at the Smithsonian since it began. In much the same way that art museums continue to ask the question "what is art?" the Smithsonian asks "what is history?" Initially it was thought that just saving items and letting people look at them was good enough. But some thought that you needed to put the items in context and explain them, even tell a story. Others thought allowing the museum to tell a story meant taking sides.

The debate simmered until it exploded in 1994 when the Smithsonian planned to display the Enola Gay, the bomber that dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima at the end of World War II. Many thought that it was impossible to tell about the bombing without taking sides. Showing that Japanese civilians died and were injured was anti-American and the Smithsonian had to remain American, above all. Others thought you have to tell the truth as well as you can and let museum goers sort it out.

Asking the questions and detailing how the Smithsonian has tackled the challenge over the years should make for a great story, but Post spends much of the first half (or more) on office politics and individual rivalries. I found this tough going and only kept at it because every so often, another interesting question would be addressed. How much say does Congress (which allocates funds) have in controlling the exhibits? How much influence do corporate donors have in exhibits?

Those doing research on the Smithsonian or people with professional interest in museum exhibits will probably appreciate the detail. Casual readers may resort to some judicious skimming.

[Linda · Rating 3 out of 5]

My rating is really 3 and a half stars but I cannot deduce a way to show this accurately, alas.

The short (and somewhat flip) answer to the question posed in this book's title is that ownership belongs to whatever white man sits in the office of Secretary of The Smithsonian. However, the answer is really much more complex and is revealed in detail when Bob Post takes the reader behind the scenes. Personalities, philosophies, professional backgrounds and politics have all influenced what and how Smithsonian exhibits have been brought to the public. After reading this meticulously researched book I, for one, will never view another exhibit in quite the same way. Post offers a fascinating glimpse of history-in-the-making in a readable way. By including a helpful list of abbreviations for various entities referred to throughout the text, photos of interest, copious notes and an index, he further illustrates the changes and turmoil faced by those involved with interpreting America's story.

My thanks to Bob and Dian for my signed copy and the chance to peek behind the scenes of America's Attic!

[Liz De Coster · Rating 2 out of 5]

I never quite felt engaged with this book, in part because the title indicated to me a different focus. Post spends more time discussing the institutional history - funding, directors, curators, building construction, etc. - and less time talking about the objects themselves, with the exception of the occasional anecdote. There are interesting stories about exhibits and controversies related to some of the more political exhibit topics, but it can be hard to tease these out of the endless web of names.

[Bill Sleeman · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting history of the ‘history’ of SI – not sure if author Post fully meets his premise. In many ways I did not the impression that Post really disagreed with all of the transitions at SI which made his ability to convey his view about the direction of SI. Also, there was quite a bit in the book about how to communicate ideas to the general public in a museum setting but what came out loud and clear was Post’s disdain of the average viewer to interpret for themselves the history and context of an object or a setting. A good history – not necessarily a good book overall.

[Paul · Rating 1 out of 5]

I tried really hard to finish this but just couldn't get it done. I think I was bogged down with the people involved with the creation of the Smithsonian and got bored. I suspect if I had lasted the longer the story world have gotten more interesting.

[Du · Rating 2 out of 5]

Probably 2.5 stars. The idea is interesting and the information is clearly presented, but I felt that this book missed some of the goal of discussion what goes into setting up Martin displays, and headed mower into personal discussion about preference.

[Beth Py-Lieberman]

I'd like to finish this book, but I loaned it to Brian Wolly and hasn't given it back yet.

[Mills College Library]

069.09753 P8575 2013

[Meg Perry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Inside account of the history of the Smithsonian and some of the politics that determine what does and doesn't get exhibited.