City of Memory - Web Review

City of Memory

http://www.cityofmemory.org/map/index.php

Created and is maintained maintained by City Lore. Reviewed June to November 2009.

"In life, it's always seemed to me that the true gift that each of us is given is consciousness. Our quest is to use that consciousness to create meaning."¹

^{Created and maintained by City Lore, the City of Memory website encourages a spatial understanding of New York City and empowers the public to take ownership over the historical significance of their own community. When City Lore began the project in 2001, City of Memory was simply a twenty-foot long map of New York City on which New Yorkers could write their memories and stories. With the help of funding by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the Rockefeller Foundation, City Lore took their project to the web and launched the official City of Memory website in 2009.}

^{Content: Content of the site is both user-generated and supplied by City Lore curators. Assessing the scholarship of the website is a challenge because of the user-generated content of the site. The vetting process for such content is negligible and can lead to an imbalance of stories in various boroughs (Manhattan receiving the most user-generated content). The strength of this type of content, however, is the fact that the public is the ultimate creator and owner of New York’s history. The City Lore curated content rests on a stronger academic foundation. A number of the curated stories are actually excerpts from local PBS programs, while most of the curated stories were produced by City Lore.}

^{Form: Overall, the site was very easy to navigate. When the site initially loads, a pop-up box provides a site introduction. Memories can be accessed in two ways. The user can search the map for memories in specific locations or users can also browse the "story directory" which provide a small text excerpt about the story.}

^{Audience/Use: City Lore states that the general public is the beneficiary of the site. The website is free to access and any user can contribute content as long as the memories are confined to New York City. Yet, City Lore excludes an important population from their project: those without internet access. This excludes a wide section of the public most notably those with limited resources.}

^{New Media: The strength of this website is its presence on the web. The digital version of this project allows for greater multimedia mediums including text, video and sound. Also, the map framework highlights how interconnected people in a city can be while allowing freedom of exploration. City of Memory does not present memories in any sequential order and users can “travel” throughout the city jumping between neighborhoods at whim or participating in a themed tour focusing on culture, ethnicity, and even recreational activities.}

^{Even with its usability and accessibility shortcomings, City of Memory is successful at present a personalized account of New York City culture and history. The site attempts to give importance to the everyday happenings allowing for a re-imagining and democratizing of New York City history.}

^Notes:

^{1 Steve Zeitlin, "City of Memory", Voices, vol. 34 (2008). Steve Zeitlin is the founding director of City Lore, a New York City based non-profit organization which attempts to preserve the cultural heritage of New York City.}

Digital History

Where to go with this week's reading? To reference one of my classmates, "my head was swimming" after reading this week. The web and history; where do we find the intersection? I have to say that this was the over-arching question I kept asking myself as I was reading. In their own ways, each of the readings was asking us to consider how the web can move forward.

The introduction from Digital History laid-out a framework for which we can think about the role of the web in the study of history. I liked the seven qualities of digital media he listed because he was able to clearly label, and elaborate on, what makes the web such a useful resource. While I think his qualities were a strong-suit within his introduction, I appreciated how he tempered his excitement. He recognized the possibilities of digital media but new technology brings new challenges. Cohen and Rosenzweig (C & R) are not disillusioned in how they conceive of the web but they seemed excited about the potential.

"Haunted Mouse" challenged me to think about how we understand the space of the internet to exist. In the term space, I am referring to the capacity of the medium. The article begins with a roll-call of websites and social-networking sites which have gone the way of the dodo bird. But, with the internet, nothing ever becomes extinct. The web seems to be this infinite repository for just about anything we want to use it for. We can load junk, significant scholarship and everything in between. The questions this raises in my mind is, do we need to keep adding to the excess? Regardless of what we make live on the web, it will eventually lose its luster and become a ghost. Personally, I think the endless capacity is a hindrance of the web. It has the ability to reduce the quality of the material which can be uploaded.

(Deep breath) What was Nate Hall discussing? Maybe I am lacking a certain tech-savvy that would allow me to understand the concept of QR. In the beginning of his article, Hall wrote about wanting to greater connect his online community to his physical community. It already seems we have this connection and constant plug into all that is digital. Each site he reference brings you one step closer to a complete breakdown of barriers. The space between Hall's online life and physical life is minuscule. With the click of a button or the flipping open of a phone, Hall's physical life becomes part of a new community. Do newer technologies need to be created to make that gap even more narrow?

Earlier in the post, I referenced C & R's hesitance with technology. I think this is the biggest takeaway from this week. It always seems as if we are one step behind the technology. We are always attempting to find ways to conform what we do to fit. I don't know if there is any way to reverse that reality. The problem is that there are no set guidelines for how to interact with the web. It feels like we are doing it on the fly. Though spontaneity can yield great results, we don't necessarily have the ability to police what is being produce. C & R gave great examples of how the web can create a false sense of truth. It's a medium which theoretically is open to all. A democratic medium for all to share ideas. Unfortunately, the ideas might not always be the correct ideas, especially when it comes to history. As professionals, we should strive to create cohesive guidelines which allow for proper scholarship.

Memory

I have to take a deep breath and really think about our readings from this week. I have to admit that I found this week to be a bit challenging. Our selections were very heavy on the theory and at times I feel like I got caught-up in the weeds of their discussions. I guess that can be the problem you stumble upon when dealing with heavy theory. Well, here goes nothing.

Coming into Alison Landsberg book, Prosthetic Memory, I thought this would be something right up my alley. She's going to be discussing memory within the context of movies. Wow! It doesn't get much better than that for me. At the heart of her book, Landsberg was examining how memory can be created within modes of mass consumption. She also investigated the ramifications to these constructs.

I found places where I agreed with what she wrote but in other cases I felt she was grasping for connections. I believe memory possesses an amazing power to transcend time and social barriers. Memory can be positive and empower people. Memory can be negative and serve as a stark reminder of the past. Regardless of the shape it takes, memory is a dynamic force and I side with Landsberg on this idea. On the other hand, I disagree with the empathetic emotions memory can evoke in people. I see memory being too easily used for finding what one is personally looking for, especially when it comes to mass consumption. For example, the Battle of Little Big Horn was a military failure for General Custer. But, the battle, and Custer, are discussed with reverence in circles outside of academia. In many cases, the memory has contributed to the "American narrative" and the memory has diverged from the event. I don't see empathy stemming from this type of scenario.

The second work we read was Jay Winter's "The Generation of Memory: Reflections on the "Memory Boom" in Contemporary Historical Studies." Winter investigated the proliferation of memory within the field. Winter laid-out a number of factors which contributed to the growth of memory. For example, the growth of identity politics and new social history contributed to the growth of memory as a field of historical inquiry.

While I was reading Winter, I kept trying to establish my own definition of memory. I wrestled with this idea but I think I've come up with my own working definition. Part of my definition is contrasted to what I see historiography being. Essentially, I see historiography and memory as being opposed to one another. Historiography would be the lens in which historians use to establish an understanding of the past. I believe memory is something which is very different. Memory has a more organic feel and it emanates from the public. Memory is the public understanding of people or events which happened in the past. The historian intervenes with memory by placing it within a larger framework but memory is truly "bottom-up."

The Community

After all of these weeks of talking about Public History, this was one of the first sets of readings where we looked at the public. As public historians, we have decided that the work we are hoping to do will filter its way to the community. Also, I took from the readings the meanings history can have on the public.

Of the three readings we had for this week, I think Nancy Raquel Mirabal's community history article, "Geographies of Displacement" resonated most with me. I was taken back to a blog posting I wrote this past summer. Though my post did not go into the same depth as Mirabal's article, we both touched upon the meaning of space and community within transitional neighborhoods. Mirabal does not go into depth about the ethnography she and her students produced about the changing demographics of the Mission District but she showed us a non-conventional way to do public history. For many of us, we see public history as being attached to some sort of institution. We have talked, and read, at length about museums, archives and historical societies. Mirabal wrote about taking history to the people. Her work epitomized "history from the bottom up." During a time of intense displacement of the Latino community, she and her students were able to put their stories at the forefront. The power of gentrification/revitalization is real and it has the ability to whitewash the history of neighborhood. Mirabal worked to preserve a history which would easily be forgotten.

As public historians, I see this type of work becoming more common. Cities across the country are working to bring people back to their city centers from the suburbs. Mirabal alluded to the notion of their being a metric to determining which neighborhoods will be revitalized. More communities will find themselves displaced from the neighborhoods where they laid roots. Revitalization inherently says to the community, you no longer belong in this space. In many cases, the forces of development will not be dissuaded by the criticism of a displaced community. But, as historians, we can use some of our training to express the importance of the marginalized group.

Cary Carson's article about History Museums' Plan B did not have the same resonance for me as Mirabal but I had a great takeaway. The future of history museums lay in the interactivity with the visitor. Carson devoted a section of his article to the instant gratification phenomena within our society. Technology has caused educators to re-envision how they deliver their message. Carson wrote, "Educators everywhere are challenged to repackage their instruction as a form of performance art in which the instructees can participate using these new personal technologies." (Carson, p. 21) What Carson attempted to show was how history needs to be dynamic in its presentation. The public needs to believe they can interact with history in new and exciting ways. They cannot just be passive observers as history is presented to them. Similar to Mirabal, Carson believed history needed to empower the public.

Finally, there was Eric O'Keefe's article from the New York Times. O'Keefe's article focused on the liquidation of a $7.8 million collection of "Old West" collectibles. The items had been purchased by Stephen Reed, Mayor of Harrisburg. Reed used public money to establish the collection and his ultimate goal was to establish a museum to honor the contribution Harrisburg made in the western migration during the 1800s. Eventually the idea was scrapped because the cities budget was in the red. Again we are pulled back to the public significance of history. Reed believed this was necessary for his community and this new museum would serve the role of highlighting Harrisburg's contribution.

All three articles addressed the idea of community impact and history. As I mentioned earlier in the post, public history isn't only historians making history accessible for the public but it can be taking it to the public. History can have a variety of meaning to the community and it is a topic which needs to be explored.

Interpretation

This week's readings focused on the idea of interpretation and how that related to interactions at historic sites. The readings as a whole traced an evolution in historical interaction which seeks to be more critical of its subject. Like with the each set of readings we've had this semester, the content is divergent but they all work together and this week was no exception.

The book we read for this week was Freeman Tilden's, Interpreting Our Heritage. I think this book provided a strong base for a lot of what we have been discussing in our recent class meetings. On a side-note, this book was entertaining to read mainly because of its publication date (1967 for the revised edition). The focus within most history courses is to read some of the latest literature so it was illuminating to read a book with a first publication date of 1957. I know I originally posed this as a side-note but in thinking about it more, this had great significance to understanding this book. What Tilden provided was a way in which we used to and, in some ways, still interact with historic sites. Tilden wrote at length about the role the interpreter can contribute to the experience a visitor has with the site. Tilden saw the interpreter as the medium between site and visitor but he also believed there was a place for the visitor to make their own understanding of history.

The shortcoming I found with Tilden was how sites should cater to the comfort of the visitor (going back to the readings we had about reenacting slave runaways). Tilden doesn't seesites as being a space in which to challenge the visitor and truly question history. I believe part of his stance has to do with the context in which he's writing. He was writing in the 1950s and historical analysis has become more critical in presenting a more robust account of history. But, I also think Tilden has resonance. There should be a space in which visitors can make history for themselves. To a certain extent, don't trained historians do something similar? I still find myself thinking historical sites do need a certain element of 'feel good'. A visitor should leave educated but they should leave with a sense of pride.

Handler and Gable's (H&G) chapter about their ethnography of Colonial Williamsburg was the most charged of all three readings. H&G began their research with a belief they would find revisionist history abound at Colonial Williamsburg. They believed the shifts in social history during the 1970s had finally made a lasting impact on how history would be presented. They believed they would find greater examples of marginalized people taking a bigger role as historical actors. Because the new social historians, who were on the ground floor during the 1970s, were now in administrative positions, they believed Colonial Williamsburg would present a richer historical narrative. This was not the place they found. According to H&G what they found was, "a place that downplayed class conflict, denigrated those who complained about their lot, and celebrated upscale consumerism." (p. 221) H&G presented a disconnect between the historians and the interpreters who are on the "front lines."

I hate to keep feeling like a broken-record but H&G left me with an important question of definition. This is the same question I keep coming back to, 'what should a historical site be?' H&G saw a binary between a site being a place for escapism or a place where visitors really wrestle with historical questions. I am reluctant to think most people want a place which is going to challenge them. In the example of a place like Colonial Williamsburg, H&G believe it to be a place where people want to experience an antiquated way of life. A place where electricity doesn't exist and where you churn your own butter as opposed to going to your local mega-mart. People want to see where we've come from and how we have advanced. While I don't see people jumping for the chance to be challenged, I do see the need for challenging topics. Without such topics, we only perpetuate the standard narratives which limit the range of historical actors.

Finally, we read Patricia West's chapter from Domesticating History. The chapter we read focused on the establishment of the Orchard House house museum which was the childhood home of Louisa May Alcott, and the setting for Alcott's novel Little Women. While I saw H&G's reading to be the most charged, West's reading was the most dynamic. West contrast Orchard House to other house museums and this was how her selection was so dynamic. According to West, most house museums were established to honor an individual of historic significance. Orchard House differs because it was not venerating a political icon but an author and her novel. This was important because the social roles of women in society were shifting at the time of the museums establishment. The museum became a reflection of a historical moment and dealt with changing social structures. The establishment of the museum felt like a proto-new social history. The central players in the historical narrative were a marginalized group whose story now has historical resonance. It was almost surprising to see a site be established under those conditions in the early twentieth century.

As I said at the beginning, this week's reading focused on interpretation and how visitors are to interact with a site. This is an issue we need to consider as public historians. How do we want the public to interact with the work we do? But, what I think is more important is making sure we find a way to do 'good' history and pass that along to the public.

Preservation

The readings for this week focused on themes of preservation and revitalization. While the scope of the readings differed vastly, I think they work together in a strange way. Thinking back on my reading of the texts, I would have read them in a different order. I would have read Diane Lea's "America's Preservation Ethos" first. Lea quickly traced the history and evolution of preservation in American culture. Her writing would have placed Lowell into a larger historical context of preservation.

As with most fields, preservation has gone through a maturation process in which core values changed to reflect those of society. According to Lea, preservation in America started with the goal of preserving and "memorializing the heroes of the Revolutionary War." In the early days, preserved sites were places such as Independence Hall and George Washington's Mount Vernon. Lea discussed how preservation transformed into a field which eventually saw value in preserving entire sections of cities, as well as sites of marginalized people. I saw this shift as being reflective of shifts in history. History has shifted its focus over the decades; histories about mythic figures have given way to an exploration of history from the other end of the social spectrum. What we find now are factories and neighborhoods being preserved because we deem them to have significance and necessary to preserve.

In The Lowell Experiment, Cathy Stanton examined this phenomenon in practice. Her book is an ethnographic look at the transformation of Lowell, Mass. Lowell used its industrial past as a catalyst for revitalization. Stanton wrestled with how successful Lowell National Historic park was as a vehicle for revitalization as well as how they framed the industrial history of the area.

There was one section of the book which actually took me back to last week's topic, slavery and public history. A discussion arose about the role of historic sites and should they address tough issues. On the "Run of the Mill" tour, one of the guides talked about globalization and the world economy and how labor played into the situation. Stanton wrote how the unexpected tough issue shocked the patrons. Again, I'm confronted with the question but I don't have a good answer. Should sites which are meant to instill pride tackle these thorny issues? I have no idea if I will ever reconcile this to myself.

I think preservation will continue to grow as we expand as a nation. Preservation allows us to keep the past present. As a country, we could easily cannibalize our past and build new but this would strip the significance of the past away. Preservation places importance on our past and how the public should interact with it.

Does the Tough Really Get Going?

This week's readings provided a lot of food for thought. The central theme for the readings was dealing with challenging subjects. Both sets of readings took a different approach in addressing the issue but each was critical of the concept.

In Slavery and Public History, James and Lois Horton compile eleven essays which address the ways in which public historians handle the topic of slavery within the scope of American history and how its presented to the public. The Hortons chose slavery as their focus because they see slavery as being "the nation's most enduring contradiction." (p. vii) Each essay tackles the issue of slavery and how it can be controversial in the production of national memory. How do we handle "historical sites of shame?"

In "The Public History of Science", Roger Launius discusses how museums, specifically The Smithsonian, contribute to the creation of national memory. Launius traces how the goal of the museum has changed as the focus of academic history has evolved. Launius writes about walking the line of a more encompassing depiction of history versus consensus history which just highlights American exceptionalism.

I think the readings brought up a number of points to explore. The broadest issue in this weeks' readings was the role of museums and historic sites. This is a topic we've been discussing a lot in class and I see it as being the over-arching theme for our entire class. In preserving history and memory, what stance do sites need to take? Does a site need to present a more full version of history; one which presents some of the dirty laundry. Or, are tough topics glossed-over to present a nationalist myth which is meant to encourage pride? I have to admit I see historical sites as needing to do a bit of both. One question this issue raises for me is how prepared are these sites for facilitating the discussion of challenging topics? This was never addressed in any of the essays. It is one thing to present tough historical realities but a site needs to posses a staff which can discuss how it has played a part in constructing a national narrative. Also, I see historical sites as tools for establishing national pride. Many of these sites commemorate major events within American history and they should leave patrons with a sense of pride. It is imperative for sites to walk this fine line.

Neither readings discuss the savviness of the historical consumer but it is definitely an underlying theme. Visitors to many of these sites have a greater understanding of history and they realize there is more to history than just myth. History which has been more critical of the traditional narratives has filtered its way to the public. Because of this reality, historical sites see a necessity in presenting difficult subjects. For example, Launius writes about the increase in "controversial exhibits" in the 1990s. While I struggled with his use of the term "controversial exhibit" because he never qualifies controversial, I think this speaks to the sophistication of the audience. Regardless of the direction in which the controversy emanates, clearly someone is questioning historical presentation. Traditional narratives aren't just being taken for granted, they are being challenged by sites and the public.

The handling of tough topics will never disappear as an issue. No history is perfect. With every good a historian will uncover something which is not so good. The responsibility for the public historian is to present the public with an accurate depiction on what transpired.

Historic Site Visit

Before 1836, the options of burial for the deceased were limited in Philadelphia. Most people were either buried in churchyard burial grounds or in small family plots. Just within the center city, there were over seventy of these types of burial grounds. Overcrowding in the churchyard burial plots became a serious problem and it was common for previous burials sites to be accidently uncovered while digging new sites. Burial grounds also had to contend with the expansion of the city, numerous burial grounds were sold in order to make room for new construction. Unfortunately, this did not sit well with Philadelphians who had loved ones buried in these cemeteries. In fact, it was reported that on April 2nd, 1836 a riot broke-out at Arch and Fifth Streets over a church burial ground which had recently been sold for development purposes.

It was at this point when John Jay Smith, a librarian at the Philadelphia Library Company, and amateur horticulturalist, offered Philadelphians another option for the deceased. His rural cemetery would be located well outside the city, allowing it to be safe from development. The site would be expansive, which would keep congestion to a minimum. The setting would also be picturesque; it would include verdant plantings, large monuments and breathtaking vistas of the Schuylkill River. Originally developed on twenty-acres of land, Laurel Hill has grown over time and currently spreads across almost eighty acres.

Laurel Hill is currently open to the public on a daily basis for multiple uses and this has actually been the case since the cemetery’s founding. Entrance to the cemetery is free of charge and the public is encouraged to use the site for running, dog walking and even picnics. The cemetery does still serve as a burial site with approximately thirty burials per year which provides a consistent flow of revenue for the cemetery. The cemetery also has an affiliated non-profit organization, The Friends of Laurel Hill Cemetery, which organizes various fundraising events such as: Halloween nighttime flashlight tours, family fun-days, spirit-channeling, dinners, a 5-K run and their annual Gravediggers’ Ball. These events serve a dual purpose. First, they provide the cemetery with extra revenue to maintain the site. Second, it allows the public to interact with the space because a cemetery is not the first place people think of as a historic and cultural institution. This provides Laurel Hill with a level of exposure that hopefully encourages more people to interact with the space.

Museums....What are they good for?

This week's readings have taken a bit of a shift in regards to their focus. All three of our readings focused on museums. The American Association of Museums annual report presented the current state of museums and its initiatives for moving the field forward. In Making Museums Matter, Stephen Weil takes a critical look at assessing the value of museums in America. In essence, he is trying to argue if an objective value can be placed on museums. He also seeks to explore how is it that some museums become valued more than others. Amy Tyson, pushes the conversation from the abstract into the actual. Her journal article, "Crafting Emotional Comfort" explores how two different living history museums address the issue of slavery in their past. Both sites choose to handle slavery in different ways. One addresses it head-on. They host a ninety-minute reenactment where patrons pay $16 to role-play the experience of being a fugitive slave in the early nineteenth-century. On the other hand, the second site chooses not to actively engage in the discussion of slavery. She brings the discussion back to of each site wanting to provide a comfortable experience for their patrons. She argues that since they are first concerned with comfort, they never truly achieve the experience they set-out to present.

The annual report had an immediate importance which i didn't find in the other readings. Though the piece was brief in its length, the section which discussed "communicating the value of museums" resonated most strongly. I believe this was most relevant because of the unique economic shape our country is in at the present. We find ourselves in a moment where cities are contemplating leveeing greater taxes on cultural institutions and in some places closure is a distinct possibility; a concerted effort by the greater governing association is a necessity.

There are sections of Weil and Tyson I believe weave together very well and they present us with a most important question. In Weil's first chapter, he explicitly states that a museum must clearly state their purpose for them to be truly effective. This ties into her discussion of Conner Praire (CP). CP chooses to wrestle with the issue of slavery but according to Tyson, they don't address it in a manner that facilitates a more true understanding of slavery. This is what leads back to the central issue of explicit definition of purpose. But, a second question to address is how to manage a true experience, wanting to keep interest high, without alienating patrons?

I think this raising an important issue. How can public institutions such as museums handle sensitive issues and give a true experience? I believe this puts museums into a tough situation but museums need to challenge themselves to give a true experience to their patrons. Regardless of how uncomfortable patrons might become, public perception of museums is a place of true information. If museums can stay true to this belief, they can make themselves matter.

What is history to you?

This week’s readings took a bit of a departure from what we discussed the previous week. The three selections each had their own feel and disparate focal points. The main reading for the week was Presence of the Past: Popular Uses of history in American Life, which was co-authored by David Thelen and Roy Rosenzweig. Thelen and Rosenzweig presented us with a work which was to give us insight to the ways in which everyday people use and/or create history within their daily lives. Thelen and Rosenzweig used data compiled from a survey they created with the assistance of other historians.

After a while, I felt this book to be repetitive in the manner they chose to present their information. I mean there are a number of charts which provide us with the quantitative data that reinforces the qualitative analysis they discuss during the body of the book. I became frustrated in what I saw as the overuse of respondent quotes. I believe they overused the quotes to hammer home the point but I think it just trivialized their potential impact.

I truly think this book has great value and it forces us to think about some very important questions and ideas as public historians. Historians would be arrogant to believe they have sole ownership in the creating of what history is. Thelen and Rosenzweig present a picture in which history is an important part of peoples’ everyday lives. The ways in which people interpret, create and process history fluctuates and history can have a variety of different meanings.

I think this book left me with more questions than answers but that’s where I see its strength. We need to see history as something more than just within the academy, and if we are to see history in such a way, we must meet the public where they are. Thelen and Rosenzweig provide tools to begin this type of understanding.

Public History?

I have to admit I was a bit nervous coming into this week’s readings. This was the first set of readings that could decidedly be called Public History. Do I read them differently than books from my other classes? Instead of worrying about that I just jumped right in.

I think Tyrrell’s piece made the biggest impression on me this week. Granted, it was the longest piece we had to read but I believe there was a lot to chew-on between the covers. In essence, Tyrrell gave a history of historians and their interactions with the “public”. Throughout the book, he made reference to Peter Novick’s, That Noble Dream: The 'Objectivity Question' and the American Historical Profession and Historians in Public had a very similar feel. Both books presented a comprehensive account of the central figures and movements within the field. To a certain extent, Historians in Public can be seen as complimentary work to Novick while at the same time being an extension. Public Historians have grown out of the professionalization of history.

Though I found myself struggling to get through sections of Historians I believe Tyrrell’s book to be the perfect introduction to this semester of work. Before we begin a semester of analyzing and parsing what it means to be a “public historian”, we are presented with a framework to understand the evolution of the field. Using his historical account, a pattern of conflict between “public” and “academic” history becomes apparent.

I’m not sure if this book will go down as the most exciting read for the semester, I know it will prove invaluable as we progress through the course. I mean Professor Bruggeman chose it to be our first book.

Time to Press the Clutch and Shift Gears

Ok, so the title of this post was cheesy but most of my titles have been cheesy. The summer has ended, I've concluded my internship and I'm back to school. Life, and my blog, will be shifting gears. While I still plan to use my blog as a vehicle for my musings about urban space, it will mainly be devoted to my Introduction to Public History course. In essence, this will be my first post for class and it's an introduction to my classmates. I have to admit this will be a bit strange, an introduction eight posts into the life of my blog? Oh well. We do what we've got to do. So here it goes.

My name is Javier Garcia and I am a second-year MA student in the Public History program here at Temple University. My research interests are in twentieth-century American urban history. Specifically, I am interested in how cities and neighborhoods have developed. My MA thesis will be about the proposed Crosstown Expressway which was to be built along South Street here in Philadelphia.

I graduated with my BA from Haverford College in the Growth & Structure of Cities program. The interdisciplinary nature of the department has greatly influenced my graduate work. My undergraduate work in Architecture and Urban Planning are still present in my non-traditional path through Public History. While most students traditionally take archives and manuscript courses, my supplemental coursework has been in the Community and Regional Planning department at Temple. While I haven't set my sights on a specific career, I hope to do work which can fuse my interest in Public History and Urban Planning.

Articles, More Articles and the Future

So, the past few two-weeks of work have consisted on putting together a short literature review for Professor Bruggeman. The goal of this assignment was to compile a number of articles from the scholarly journals of the History, Public History and Planning fields. I was to focus my attention on articles which bridged the gap between theory and practice. Specifically, how GIS technology and Public History intersect?

On the surface, the assignment should have been straight-forward but unfortunately I struggled. I was able to find a few articles which explicitly fused GIS and historical research. These articles proved to be amazingly dynamic in combining what seemed to be two divergent research techniques. I learned a lot about this new direction of historical discourse. By no means do I see GIS becoming de rigueur in History, but it was refreshing to see the use of newer technologies.

As I moved away from these initial articles, I had to broaden my article search. Instead of finding articles which precisely suited my needs, I looked for articles which had themes in either the field of Public History or Planning and could be applicable to the other. The two major themes I highlighted were access and the use, and future, of technology. I won't go into details but scholars and practitioners made a variety of arguments. Some surprised me while others challenged my perceptions of each field. Now that I have had time to process this experience, it got me thinking about my future path.

I've let my interests guide the direction I've taken my studies and I also hope it will take me to a career which excites me. Unfortunately, my interest don't easily align. There is some crossover but they don't fit nicely into each other like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. As with this assignment, it can be a challenge to find a field that meets all my requirements. I know what I like but at times even I struggle to define it. This makes me fearful of where I go after school is finished. Where do I work? What kind of work do I hope to do? I know I have time to figure this out but it'll be here before I know it. Have my varied interests provided me with wide-ranging options or just painted me into a corner? I guess time will tell.

The Gallery at Market East

When you live in downtown Philadelphia, and you're craving a cinnamon-sugar pretzel, Bourbon Chicken samples and a new pair of sneakers, who says you need to travel to King of Prussia, Plymouth Meeting or Cherry Hill for the mall. Directly in our own downtown one can find all these mall features at The Gallery at Market East.

Originally opened in 1977 as part of a redevelopment project, the mall has become a fixture on Market Street. The mall's central location makes access relatively easy. There are a number of bus lines which have stops just outside its doors and the mall is located on top of Septa's Market East Station. I see car-free alternatives as being one of the main factors to the mall's success. The Gallery offers mall shopping to many who don't have their own transportation and I can only assume this to be one of the selling-points when the mall was in its planning stages.

For the first eight-months after I graduated from college, I worked in a mall so I didn't think The Gallery would surprise me. I mean, I think when you've seen one mall you've seen them all. Suffice to say, I was surprised during my stroll through the urban mall. The standard players were visible: Footlocker, Borders, the Food Court, Wet Seal, music stores as well as jewelers. This is pretty much standard fare for the mall. What did surprise me was the produce market, fresh seafood market and butcher shop on the ground floor. When was the last time you saw a fresh produce store in your local mall? In this type of setting, I have never known of a place where I can buy cds, sneakers and a half-pound of salmon. I’m still haven’t fully processed my thoughts on the markets.

Walking through The Gallery made me consider the place of urban malls. How successful are they and what is their necessity? Should these dens of consumerism be the cornerstone of redevelopment? I see the growth of urban malls as being another layer in the push for renewed interest in our cities. You can’t bring people into the city without giving them a place to buy their goods. Also, what effect do urban malls have on independently owned shops? All these points deserve significant consideration.

As of right now, it seems the urban mall is here to stay. With the presence of other malls such as, The Manhattan Mall, Newport Center Mall, The Shops at Columbus Circle and Atlantic Terminal Mall offering easy access fostering greater economic growth, it’s just a reality with which we have to contend. It isn’t just the suburbanites who should have the pleasure of listening to Muzak.

Disclaimer:  I hoped to have pictures of the inside in this post but post-9/11 security does not allow photography of the interior.

A Change in Scenery

The majority of my summer internship has kept me in the computer lab of the Design School at Penn. I can't complain because I get to be in an air-conditioned lab, researching, and being around some the next generation of great planner. This past week took me back to a place I got to know very well during second semester, the Urban Archives at Temple University. I spent the spring researching the Crosstown Expressway for a research seminar course. While I wasn't going back to work on the Crosstown, expressways were still my focus. The main difference was I was looking-up information on an expressway which was built, the Delaware Expressway (I-95).

The goal of the trip was to search the newspaper clippings to find personal stories which could be mapped. I was amazed to see how long the controversy over the expressway lasted. Thinking about the Delaware provided me with the chance to think about highways in a different light. The Crosstown, which was never realized, united a broad community and they were successful in showing what the human impact of an expressway would be. On the other-hand, I-95, which was built, has become an integral part of current-day Philadelphia transportation network. Is there ever a morning where you don't hear about congestion or an accident during rush-hour? I didn't think so.

I am constantly torn over how I think about highways. In our modern society they are a necessary evil. Imagine thousands of cars traveling through the streets of Philadelphia had it not been for the highways. In one of my earlier posts, I stated how I believed in the human-scale and taking into account what the personal impact of projects can be. Highways are projects which can have one of the greatest effects on a community, but I just can't find a way to reconcile highways. With our ever-growing dependency on the personal auto, highways are needed. If only we could find ways to make them less intrusive. This might not be possible but one can only hope.

Adventures in Babysitting and The City

I am proud say I am an '80s baby. I guess most people are proud of the decade in which they were born and I think the 80s were no exception. Personally, I love 80s pop-culture - especially movies. These were the movies I grew up watching on VHS and they defined my early youth. Unfortunately, some of these movies haven't withstood the test of time and watching them as an adult can be a bit of a disappointment. The magic of a movie from my childhood sometimes does not transfer to my highly sophisticated 28 year old standards (although the Never Ending Story is a classic - 28 or 8, it is still one of the best films ever made). While we can't always look to older movies in order to re-live some much loved childhood memories, we can enjoy older movies for what they embody: a specific period in time. Older movies can serve as a time capsule, a window, into the social norms, culture, humor, and values of decades long gone. Ah yes...decades in which high-tops, Michael J Fox, and wood paneled station wagons were rockin. 

Last week, one of those "oldies but goodies" came on tv. There was no way I could pass on watching Adventures in Babysitting.For the sake of the post length, here is a link for a synopsis of the movie. The movie embellishes city life but there was an unintentional commentary of urban life in the late '80s. To the suburban teenagers in the movie, Chicago is seen as a wild place. A place where anything can happen and danger lurks around every corner. In essence, the movie satirizes the urban crisis of the late '80s, especially within the older cities of the East. Unemployment, recession and the crack epidemic all contributed to instilling a certain level of fear regarding our cities; the movie highlights the ills of the city.

I also believe this movie can serve as a testament to how far our cities have come in the three decades. Through the time, energy and money of various entities, we've started to re-claim our cities as places of culture and excitement, not fear and despair. In no way do I believe the work in our ciites is finished. The widespread levels of inequity are too obvious to overlook but "the city" has once again become a cultural center. A place where you go to enrich your life, not endanger it.

Even at the end of this post, I'm still shocked how a movie such as Adventures would challenge me to think critically about urban space. I guess inspiration can be found anywhere...even amidst high-tops and leggings. 

Maps Don't Only Show You Where You're Going...

...they can also show you where you've been (I mean this in a historical sense). The past week was pretty calm in-terms of what I was doing at work. Amy Hillier had me do some work with a few historic maps. The work she had me doing was in conjunction with her Du Bois project. The task was simple; using the 1896 city atlas, list all the alleys and street names (which differ from the current map) within the Seventh Ward. Without going into a long description of her project, yes, listing street names is very relevant to her work. I don't have an example of the specific map I was using but if you go to Philadelphia GeoHistory's interactive map, and use the "1875 Philadelphia Atlas" you can get a good idea of my map.

A project which I thought would only take me a few hours actually went into a day and a half of work. I became fascinated by the details of the map. The atlas listed all the property owners for the homes and names of businesses. At some point between the printing of the 1896 atlas and the turn-of-the-century was the unification of the alleys in downtown. Most alleys had a different name on each block but out of the unification we have full streets such as Sansom, Delancey and Naudain. I was also able to see a number of institutions in the city such and mental institutions and orphanages. In fact, the Locust on the Park lofts used to be a worsted textile factory.

Historic maps are an amazing resource because they can provide a sense of context you can't find within a book. A historic map can give you enormous amounts of information which, because of the maps relative nature, can suggest trends within a given space. For example, a historic map could show a present-day Philadelphia how Fourth Street, just below South Street, was a thriving Jewish neighborhood. The map would provide an understanding of the number of historic synagogues which are still in use in the neighborhood.

Maps really can show us from where we've come.