Trust, Risk and Public History: A View from the United States

In the public history and museum communities today there is much difference of opinion over the concept of ‘radical trust,’ which basically argues for us to give up control and trust the public to develop content for our websites and exhibitions and provide direction for our work. Most public histor...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: James B. Gardner
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: UTS ePRESS 2010-12-01
Series:Public History Review
Subjects:
Online Access:http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/phrj/article/view/1852
id doaj-d0bbb883836245e392a3c17d5c5f5891
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d0bbb883836245e392a3c17d5c5f58912020-11-24T21:29:10ZengUTS ePRESSPublic History Review1833-49892010-12-0117052611182Trust, Risk and Public History: A View from the United StatesJames B. Gardner0Smithsonian InstitutionIn the public history and museum communities today there is much difference of opinion over the concept of ‘radical trust,’ which basically argues for us to give up control and trust the public to develop content for our websites and exhibitions and provide direction for our work. Most public historians and curators are happy to share authority with the public, but are we now expected to yield all authority? Are we now taking historian Carl Becker’s well-known phrase ‘everyman his own historian’ and updating it to ‘every person his or her own curator’? What is the role of historical knowledge in a world of opinion? Unfortunately, at the same time that many of us are embracing risk online, in a world we have little control or even influence over, we seem to be stepping back from risk taking in our museums, on our own turf. We’ve become risk averse—afraid to make mistakes, afraid of trying new approaches and tackling the historically controversial or the ambiguous. Rather than the ‘safe place for unsafe ideas’ that Elaine Gurian proposed, we have become no more than safe places for safe ideas. We need to push back on both fronts. Public historians should be thought leaders, not followers—not wait to see what the future holds for us but rather try to shape that future.http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/phrj/article/view/1852radical, trust, online, authority, curating, risk
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author James B. Gardner
spellingShingle James B. Gardner
Trust, Risk and Public History: A View from the United States
Public History Review
radical, trust, online, authority, curating, risk
author_facet James B. Gardner
author_sort James B. Gardner
title Trust, Risk and Public History: A View from the United States
title_short Trust, Risk and Public History: A View from the United States
title_full Trust, Risk and Public History: A View from the United States
title_fullStr Trust, Risk and Public History: A View from the United States
title_full_unstemmed Trust, Risk and Public History: A View from the United States
title_sort trust, risk and public history: a view from the united states
publisher UTS ePRESS
series Public History Review
issn 1833-4989
publishDate 2010-12-01
description In the public history and museum communities today there is much difference of opinion over the concept of ‘radical trust,’ which basically argues for us to give up control and trust the public to develop content for our websites and exhibitions and provide direction for our work. Most public historians and curators are happy to share authority with the public, but are we now expected to yield all authority? Are we now taking historian Carl Becker’s well-known phrase ‘everyman his own historian’ and updating it to ‘every person his or her own curator’? What is the role of historical knowledge in a world of opinion? Unfortunately, at the same time that many of us are embracing risk online, in a world we have little control or even influence over, we seem to be stepping back from risk taking in our museums, on our own turf. We’ve become risk averse—afraid to make mistakes, afraid of trying new approaches and tackling the historically controversial or the ambiguous. Rather than the ‘safe place for unsafe ideas’ that Elaine Gurian proposed, we have become no more than safe places for safe ideas. We need to push back on both fronts. Public historians should be thought leaders, not followers—not wait to see what the future holds for us but rather try to shape that future.
topic radical, trust, online, authority, curating, risk
url http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/phrj/article/view/1852
work_keys_str_mv AT jamesbgardner trustriskandpublichistoryaviewfromtheunitedstates
_version_ 1725967004908650496