Playing Ourselves: Interpreting Native Histories at Historic Reconstructions

by Laura Peers

Across North America, hundreds of reconstructed ”living history” sites, which traditionally presented history from a primarily European perspective, have hired Native staff in an attempt to communicate a broader view of the past. Playing Ourselves explores this major shift in representation, using detailed observations of five historic sites in the U.S. and Canada to both discuss the theoretical aspects of Native cultural performance and advise interpreters and their managers on how to more effectively present an inclusive history. Drawing on anthropology, history, cultural performance, cross-cultural encounters, material culture theory, and public history, author Laura Peers examines ”living history” sites as locations of cultural performance where core beliefs about society, cross-cultural relationships, and history are performed. In the process, she emphasizes how choices made in the communication of history can both challenge these core beliefs about the past and improve cross-cultural relations in the present.

242 pages, Paperback

First published February 28, 2007

Reviews

[ambyr · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you can get past the fact that this is fundamentally the author's PhD thesis/compilation of previously published academic articles--with all the jargon and redundancy between chapters that implies--there's some good information here even for the general reader about how and why public history can be used to construct and shape popular narratives. I particularly appreciate the later chapters, which shift away from literature review and more toward field notes of the author's own research. The discussion of the changing landscape of intentions at historic reconstructions between the 1980s and the early 2000s was fascinating; I wish for a 2025 update.

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this review of several 'living history' type sites well written and useful for understanding the literature on museums/public interpretations of History in terms of its still biased representations. While "Native peoples" may now have been slotted in to these settings to some degree, they still have much less power in their relationships with the production of such sites. Further, Peers suggests that what tourists/visitors get out of the Native interpretation at this sites may differ dramatically than what "the experts" are trying to convey.