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.