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.