The Presence of the Past

by Roy Rosenzweig, David Thelen

Some people make photo albums, collect antiques, or visit historic battlefields. Others keep diaries, plan annual family gatherings, or stitch together patchwork quilts in a tradition learned from grandparents. Each of us has ways of communing with the past, and our reasons for doing so are as varied as our memories. In a sweeping survey, Roy Rosenzweig and David Thelen asked 1,500 Americans about their connection to the past and how it influences their daily lives and hopes for the future. The result is a surprisingly candid series of conversations and reflections on how the past infuses the present with meaning.

Rosenzweig and Thelen found that people assemble their experiences into narratives that allow them to make sense of their personal histories, set priorities, project what might happen next, and try to shape the future. By using these narratives to mark change and create continuity, people chart the courses of their lives. A young woman from Ohio speaks of giving birth to her first child, which caused her to reflect upon her parents and the ways that their example would help her to become a good mother. An African American man from Georgia tells how he and his wife were drawn to each other by their shared experiences and lessons learned from growing up in the South in the 1950s. Others reveal how they personalize historical events, as in the case of a Massachusetts woman who traces much of her guarded attitude toward life to witnessing the assassination of John F. Kennedy on television when she was a child.

While the past is omnipresent to Americans, "history" as it is usually defined in textbooks leaves many people cold. Rosenzweig and Thelen found that history as taught in school does not inspire a strong connection to the past. And they reveal how race and ethnicity affects how Americans perceive the past: while most white Americans tend to think of it as something personal, African Americans and American Indians are more likely to think in terms of broadly shared experiences--like slavery, the Civil Rights Movement, and the violation of Indian treaties."

Rosenzweig and Thelen's conclusions about the ways people use their personal, family, and national stories have profound implications for anyone involved in researching or presenting history, as well as for all those who struggle to engage with the past in a meaningful way.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Grad School, Read For School, School, American History, Academic

320 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1998

Reviews

[Heather · Rating 3 out of 5]

For graduate-level Public History class to supplement my Div III. I would love to see how this survey would translate, 15 years later, in a post-9/11, internet-saturated US. Also, with accurate sampling.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book ended up depressing me, sad to say. The authors did a study of how Americans relate to the past, using a phone survey. This was back in the early 90s, when everyone was talking about how people in this country don't know their own history, and our students aren't learning anything, and crisis crisis. So this phone survey was supposed to show that people were actually very connected with the past after all. But what it actually seems to show is that people are fine with history as long as it is their own personal history or the history of their family or ethnic group. And really, they are only interested in that history as long as it conforms with what they already think they know and doesn't challenge any of their preconceived notions. Almost everyone hates the study of history in school, because they find it boring and they know they are being fed this party-line manifest destiny America rules storyline. But the solution they want doesn't seem to be a broader history; they seem to want to only have to study material that they can clearly see is directly related to their own life stories.
I'm generalizing a bit, but as a guy who is planning on having a job in a history field, this didn't make it sound easy to get people interested in history. And I take issue with the authors' decision to include activities like 'sharing photographs with family' as something that shows people are connected with 'the past'. To me that could show a past-connection, but it could also just show that people love their families and sharing pictures helps them maintain relationships.

[Jan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Main Argument: People like to learn about their own past.

Boring. Repetitive. Very PC in that they try to talk to "diverse" people. I kept waiting for some deeper insight about how people USED history. Apparently, they don't.

[Billy Marino · Rating 4 out of 5]

Might be inching towards a 4.5, hard to say. Either way, while this book is certainly dated in some ways, ahem "CD-ROMS and the World Wide Web," it is also unfortunately relevant. Many of the insights found in their study show that people do connect with the past, just not in the way professional historians make sense of the past. The conclusion is that historians, as the professionals, need to be aware of how people engage the past and help bridge the gap between public and professional history-making. While there has certainly been strides towards this in the two decades since the book's release, many historians still need to take this claim more seriously. Sure, there are issues with telephone surveys, hell, there are issues with simply asking people to consciously think and answer a question about something, but that doesn't make the results void. There are lessons here, and they still need to be heeded, because as historians, "our proper function is not to repeat the past but to make use of it." (Quoted on p 178) Otherwise, people will continue to not take professional history seriously, and all of the great findings in the field will continue to not pierce the veil into the public.

[Courtney Homer · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Presence of the Past is a fascinating study on how Americans see and use history. With the help of other historians and graduate students, Rosenzweig and Thelen conducted a thorough and meticulously crafted phone survey of 1,500 Americans on their views of and interactions with the past. The survey was conducted with two separate groups of people – a random sampling of Americans as well as a separate minority-focused survey. In compiling all the data, they paint a complete picture of American views on history and then are able to break out parallel studies on African American, Mexican American, and Native American populations. The similarities (most prominently that all Americans, regardless of ethnicity, find more value in history that has some personal meaning) and the diversions (that minorities are much less likely to trust traditional historical narratives than their Anglo American counterparts) provide some of the most interesting insight. The survey was conducted in 1994, and it is undoubtedly dated. Nonetheless, many of the lessons carry over to today and provide fascinating insight into Americans and memory.

[Kristi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Based on phone surveys conducted in the 1990s, this study concluded that Americans relate to history best personally, and that most Americans are alienated from history in education, academic, and media-driven settings. This reveals a significant gap between professional history and personal uses of history. Intriguingly, the study showed that Americans trusted museums and historical sites, as places where history is accessible, tangible, and authentic. This perception of museums and historic sites as places where one has the opportunity to personally experience history through connection with objects and historic place is central to the trust placed in museums by average Americans. The authors concluded that history was also experienced different racially among Americans, in terms of community building. Overall, the book was rather repetitive and the size of the survey samples were not extensive, yet, I greatly appreciated the initiative and found the implications of their conclusions illuminating.

[Victoria · Rating 3 out of 5]

Overall, this book is intriguing. It details the results of a national survey that asked people how they use the past and history. The results are interesting! Its nice to know that people are more involved with history (or as they view it, the past) than what some professionals may lead us to believe. However, I have a lot of issues with some of the language the authors used as well as some of their methods. Why did they choose one Native American reservation when trying to understand how Native Americans use the past? Why are white Americans the default that all other groups have to be compared to? Why are Mexican Americans praised for their answers when they are deemed patriotic? Again, I did like the book and find the premise of the survey very interesting. I just think the interpretation of the results could have been a little better. Then again, it was the 1990s...

[Ginger Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow. This book gave very good insight into how Americans viewed the concept of "History" and the Past. I was not surprised to learn as a genealogist that most Americans valued the beliefs and oral history of family members over books, TV, and "experts," especially around National events. They believed family members who had "been there" and "seen firsthand" what happened during these events were the most credible sources. This is a recurring theme in the genealogy world.

A very surprising theme, however, was that most Americans believed that the History they learned in school was rubbish and a waste of time. HOWEVER, today they believe it is IMPERATIVE that their child go through the same process in school today and they propose no changes to the curriculum.

[Dave · Rating 3 out of 5]

Two historians put together a massive research project to learn how everyday Americans relate to the past. This book presents the results of that study. It's not a dry recitation of facts. they personalize the findings quite well. I don't completely agree with the premise and some of the methodology, but it's very interesting to see how Americans learn about history and who they trust to tell them the straight facts. The study also compares differences between ethnic groups. As expected, American Indians and African Americans are going to have a different take on American history than those of us descended from Europeans.

[Laurel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Luke warm on this one. I like the conclusion that the general public feels museums are one of the most reliable sources of history. However, overall the book left me feeling a bit nauseous from its less-than-methodical telephone survey (BTW would you spend 30+ minutes on the phone with a stranger discussing your views on the past?) to its generous idea that anyone collecting coins or scrapbooking, for example, are engaged in history. An interesting piece of work but did not live up to my expectations.

[Brenda Britton]

I haven't yet rated this book because I need to finish reading it. For those who are genealogy enthusiasts, or those interested in learning about their ancestors, I recomend this book that happens to be one of my school text books. There are a group of investigators who tour the country to find out what people in all walks of life understand about history and it is interesting to read the responses.

[H. Givens · Rating 4 out of 5]

Starting to get out of date, although I fully understand the challenge of trying to update it with another nationwide survey! Even if it's getting dated, it's fascinating for a public historian and helps approach the topic from the public's perspective with actual facts, not just the way we imagine the public to be. A vital contribution to the field.

[Donnie · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an interesting book about how Americans view the past. I think its arguments have some merit, but I think the methodology is very questionable and therefore I was forced to remain skeptical through the entire work.

[Katie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Intriguing and very useful book. I think some of the chapter distinctions are arbitrary, and this book maybe would have been more effective as an article, but the interviews are very interesting and each authors' summary analysis at the end are excellent.

[Erik · Rating 4 out of 5]

As others have noted - important as this study is, it's already dated. It would be great to run it again, but ideal to simply run it every twenty years, given the pace of change in our nation and world.

[Kymberly · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting but somewhat repetitive. Agree with a lot of the book, that most people are interested in history, their history or how historical events relate to them. I wish gave it less stars because only it was respective.

[Holly · Rating 3 out of 5]

repetitive, but very interesting. read for public history undergraduate class.
how history is used in people's everyday lives according to a phone survey in the 90s.
history versus the past.
"pop history"

[Gina]

This was a good read for the second week. Great discussions on one of the only and must influential studies of public history and how people identify their history. It was short so not so bad

[Devin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another foundational book in my academic journey.

[Edwin Roman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Historians Roy Rosenzweig and David Thelen, during the 1990s, conducted a survey of attitudes and understanding of history in the United States. Notably, they found that history as taught in school does not inspire a strong connection to the past. They found that people construct their experiences into narratives that allow them to make sense of their personal histories. They also explain how race and ethnicity affects how Americans perceive the past: most white Americans tend to think of it as something personal, while people of color are more likely to think in terms of broadly shared experiences such as the violation of Indian treaties and Civil Rights Movement.

[Rebecca · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a thought-provoking book for professional historians who want to think about how to better reach "regular people" - particularly students - as it discusses how people "use" the past in every day life. These surveys from the early 1990s reveal some disturbing trends that the authors of the book may have been too sanguine about. They reveal an increasingly individualist approach to thinking about public issues. Their finding that most white people's historical narratives were of national decline look in hindsight like ominous forebodings of present day far-right politics.

[Bekah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Slow, data driven read. Will drop the most fascinating piece of information every 20 pages but you have to power through a familiar idea rephrased over and over to get there! It's definitely a dated study (landline cold calls, small sample size, limited Asian and Native American diversity) but it gives such an interesting glimpse into national polling regarding puplic histories. Prompted exciting pondering into what an updated study would look like and yield!

[Kate · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another loan from Joanna. Interesting insights into how ordinary people think about and engage with history in their every day life, at least in the late 90s. I thought the last chapter on indigenous and Black perspectives to be particularly interesting. Would be fascinated to see if or how this has changed in the past decades.

[Amber · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5. It's an interesting survey, but at times the data seemed a bit scattered, as if done by people not used to gathering and parsing quantitative data. Also, there were some glaring gaps in the authors' knowledge. That said, it's so influential and a decent read for public historians.

[Matthew William · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book. Some grammatical errors which is surprising for historians of the caliber of Rosenzweig and Thelen. Despite those errors, this book is a great candidate for a survey text in a public history course.

[Ashli · Rating 2 out of 5]

While the information presented was interesting, the book itself was extremely repetitive, making it difficult to read. It actually would have been better to be presented with the actual transcripts of the interviews.

[Kayla Price · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a foundational book in the field of public history. It was written following a national survey asking people of varying demographics how they view and use the past. Unsurprisingly, people stated that they were much less interested in the national narratives and more interested in their family (personal) histories. This focus helps individuals find their identities, make a difference in and shape the future, understand the society in which they live in, and feel more connected to history. Furthermore, it analyzes what forms of historical content and material people trust and do not trust. The book also compares the methods used by “popular history makers” with those used by “professional historians.” For example, “popular history makers” trust oral and first hand experiences more than other forms of history. This is in complete contrast with *most* “professional historians” who view oral history as an unreliable source.

I really enjoyed the demographic breakdown the authors shared in their analysis. However, I would have liked to see sexual orientation included in this and was disappointed but not at all shocked seeing as the book was published in 1998.

Though it was published in 1998, the content in the book is still relevant and I look forward to seeing how I can apply it’s lessons moving forward.

[Emily Kidd]

Read everything but the conclusion / how they explain how they conducted their survey. Other than that an interesting book and I had to do a write-up on each chapter for Dr. Humphrey's Public History class (fall semester junior year).