
Trump Exhibition Editing of discussion Sparks
It may seem the most obvious in concepts: something happens, go to history books or add to the museum exhibitions. But whether something is remembered and how – especially when it comes to the history of the country and its leader – is often the farthest thing.
The latest example of this came on Friday, when Smithsonian Institute He said that He has removed a reference To the factors of President Donald Trump 2019 and 2021 from a committee in an exhibition on the US presidency. Trump pressed the institutions and agencies subject to federal supervision, often by pressing financing, to focus on the country’s achievements and progress and move away from the things he describes as “divisive”.
A spokesman for Smithsonian said that the removal of the reference, which was installed as part of a temporary addition in 2021, came after a recent review of “old content”, and in the end the exhibition will include “all covers.” There was no time frame for when; Exhibition renovations can be a long time.
In a statement, the dismissal references did not address directly, White House spokesman Davis Angel said: “We fully support the update of offers to highlight the American bone.”
But does history aim to highlight or document – to report what happened, or to serve a desirable narration? The answer, as with most things about the past, can be intensively complicated.
It is part of a greater effort about American stories
Smithsonian’s move comes in the wake of the Trump administration’s business like Remove the name From a gay rights activist from a marine ship, they are pushed to Republican supporters in Congress Calm the company for public broadcasting And get rid of Driving at Kennedy Center.
“Based on what we saw, this is part of a broader effort by the president to influence how to depict history in national museums, parks and schools,” said Julian E Zelizer, Professor of History and Public Affairs at Princeton University. “Not only pays a specific novel to the United States, but in this case, he tries to influence how Americans learn about his role in history.”
It is not a new conflict, in the world in general and the political world in particular. There is a force in the ability to form how things are remembered, if they were absolutely remembered – who was there, who participated, who was responsible, what happened to lead to this point in history. Humans who manage things often expand their authority to the stories they told them.
In China, for example, the references to the June 1989 campaign prohibited pro -democracy demonstrators in the Tiananmen Square in Beijing and organized by the government of the ruling Communist Party. In Russia in the Soviet era, officials who ran from leaders such as Joseph Stalin disappeared not only from the government itself but from photographs and history books where they once appeared.
Jason Stanley, an expert in tyranny, said controlling what and how people learned about their past have been used for a long time as a vital tool to maintain strength. Stanley showed his views on the Trump administration; Yale University recently left to join the University of Toronto, citing concerns about the American political situation.
He said: “If they do not control the historical narration, they will not be able to create a kind of fake history that supports their policies.”
It explains how history is offered
In the United States, presidents and their families have always used their strength to form history and calibrate their photos. Jackie Kennedy insisted on the discounts in William Manchester’s book about the assassination of her husband in 1963, “the death of the president.” Ronald Reagan and his wife got the cable TV channel to carefully release a documentary film. Those who transformed Franklin de Roosevelt, including the journalists of the age, took pain to hide the effect of paralysis on his body and movement.
Nevertheless, Trump has made a more intense level – a sitting president who encourages the atmosphere where institutions can feel that they have to choose between him and the truth – whether he is calling her directly or not.
“We are constantly trying to put ourselves in history as citizens, as citizens of the country, citizens of the world,” said Robin Wagner-Bassifi, Emerita Professor of Sociology at the New School of Social Research. “That is why part of these exhibits and effects revolve around our time in time. Without them, it is very difficult for us to put ourselves in history because it seems that we are exploding from the ground.”
Timothy Navataly, director of the Richard Museum M. Nixon Presidential from 2007 to 2011, repaired to make a more objective offer for Watergate – one of whom did not have the president’s loyalists. In an interview on Friday, he said it was “anxiety and disappointment” about Smithsonian’s decision. Naftali, a senior researcher at Columbia University, said that the museum’s directors “must have red lines” and that he is considering removing the Trump committee to be one of them.
Although it may seem illogical for a person to be interested in power about the museum’s shows, Wagner-Pacifici says Trump’s looks at history and its role in it-earlier this year, said that Smithsonian “had been subjected to an exciting ideology of fraud”-showing how important these matters are in power.
“You may say about this person, whatever this person, their strength is very huge and his legitimacy is so stable and so important that why do they bother them like this … Why are they bothering to waste their energy and effort on that?” Wagner-Bassifi said. Its conclusion: “The legitimacy of those in power must be reshaped constantly. They can never rest on their glories.”
Post Comment