RSS
 

Archive for November, 2009

Connecting People and Parks: The PAIR Model

25 Nov

by Allyson Mathis

Author Allyson Mathis interprets geology at Grand Canyon National Park using the PAIR model. Photo by National Park Service / Michael Quinn.

Author Allyson Mathis interprets geology at Grand Canyon National Park using the PAIR model. Photo by National Park Service / Michael Quinn.

According to Freeman Tilden’s classic 1957 definition, interpretation is “an educational activity which aims to reveal meanings and relationships through the use of original objects, by firsthand experience, and by illustrative media, rather than simply to communicate factual information.” As the profession evolved, definitions of interpretation also changed to highlight the purpose of interpretation and describe its outcome. The NAI Definitions Project defines interpretation as “a mission-based communication process that forges emotional and intellectual connections between the interests of the audience and meanings inherent in the resource.”

Regardless of the definitions they use for interpretation, most interpreters agree that facilitating connections between people and parks (or resources) is at the very heart of successful interpretation. Interpreters facilitate these connections through a variety of media, ranging from informal contacts through exhibits or guided walks to multimedia presentations. Interpreters must use effective presentation techniques, have awareness of audience characteristics, use interpretive methods, and incorporate resource information. These four components can be put together to make up the acronym

PAIR:
Presentation Techniques/Style
Audience Characteristics
Interpretive Methods
Resource Information

The PAIR model: P (Presentation Techniques/Style), A (Audience Characteristics), I (Interpretive Methods), R (Resource Information). Photo illustration by Maddie Tighe.

The PAIR model: P (Presentation Techniques/Style), A (Audience Characteristics), I (Interpretive Methods), R (Resource Information). Photo illustration by Maddie Tighe.

Successful interpretation can be described as PAIRing people with parks, using the definition of pair: “to become associated with one another.” Visitors who become associated with park resources and significances to develop stronger stewardship ethics. Interpretive activities and media build those associations and make park resources more accessible and meaningful to the public.

The PAIR model utilizes the characteristics of a chain to illustrate the outcome of successful interpretation: strong, durable, and long-lasting connections between visitors and resources. In addition to being strong, chains are versatile and flexible. Chains are used with anchors, and an ultimate goal of interpretation is to anchor people and their parks together.

Another important characteristic of a chain with implications for this model is that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Therefore, all links or components in the PAIR model have equal value. A weakness, or lack of knowledge or skill, in any of the links is enough to break the interpretive chain and prevent the facilitation of meaningful relationships between people and parks.  

P: Presentation Techniques/Style
Presentation techniques or style are essential in any interpretive program or product. Presentation techniques include choosing the appropriate technique to present the interpretive product in the first place, and then effectively using that method. The presentation techniques link is applicable to both personal and nonpersonal services.

Effective presentation techniques vary depending on the type of interpretive service. In the case of an interpretive talk, presentation techniques should include good communication skills and effective delivery techniques. To be effectively presented, a piece of interpretive writing must be written at an appropriate comprehension level, use attractive and engaging design and good grammar, and not have any typographical errors. Exhibits must be visually engaging, easy to read, universally accessible to all audiences, and replaced when worn or damaged.

Even if all other links in the PAIR model are present, poor presentation can prevent the facilitation of connections between people and parks. With ineffective presentation, the audience will not receive the message(s) that the interpreter is trying to communicate.

A: Audience Characteristics
Knowledge of audience characteristics is necessary for an interpreter to focus an interpretive service toward a particular audience or audiences. Different audiences have different needs and characteristics and will establish connections to park resources through different channels. For example, children are different from adults and an interpretive activity that may be successful with adults may completely fail with children. Understanding audience characteristics enables an interpreter to choose from the range of interpretive methods available and to determine what aspects of the resource information to incorporate into an interpretive activity for particular audiences.

Knowledge of audience characteristics includes an awareness of potential visitor groups and an understanding of what significances they may or may not already ascribe to park resources. It includes an insight to various demographic visitor groups, including those who may visit only electronically or through mass media.

I:  Interpretive Methods
Interpretive methods are used to link the interests of the visitors to resource information. The use of interpretive methods is the revelation step in the PAIR model. As Tilden wrote in his principles, interpretation is “revelation based on information.” Interpretive methods include the use of thematic interpretation, tangible/intangible links, compelling stories, and other tools and techniques.

The skilled interpreter uses knowledge of audience characteristics and chooses what resource information to relate in an interpretive activity or product. Interpretive methods help make that information meaningful, relevant, and significant to the audience. An interpreter should also attempt to expand the range of relevance for the visitor and to promote new relationships between the visitor and the resource.

R:  Resource Information
Accurate resource information is essential in interpretation. A program product lacking in accurate resource information will not facilitate meaningful connections between visitors and resources. In other words, resource information must be accurate in order for visitors to form a true bond with park resources. Accurately interpreted resource information also promotes public understanding of scientific, natural, and historical resources of park areas. Since interpretive programs and media have the potential to reach large audiences, incorporating accurate resource information in interpretation may increase the public’s scientific and historic literacy.

Resource information includes a vast array of information about park resources at a variety of technical levels that can relate to a wide spectrum of visitors. Resource information includes knowledge of a site’s significance as identified in enabling legislation, administrative history, current management plan, and the ecologic, geologic, historic, and/or ethnographic context of the park.

Using the PAIR Model
The PAIR model can be used to present interpretive concepts in training situations and as a tool to evaluate interpretive programs and media. One of the strengths of the PAIR model as a training tool is that it identifies the four necessary components of an interpretive product, demonstrates that the components are equally important, and illustrates the outcome of successful interpretation—a connection between people and parks.

Evaluations of interpretive programs and media can also incorporate the PAIR model. It can be used to identify the strong and weak components, or links, in an interpretive program or product. Identifying the weak link can help evaluators and interpreters determine components that most need improvement.

While the PAIR model contains the same elements of interpretive programs and products as other models, including the National Park Service’s Interpretive Equation, it separates the “appropriate technique” component into two distinct ones: presentation techniques/style and interpretive methods. These two components are, in fact, independent. A program can use effective presentation techniques, yet not include interpretive methods, and vice versa. Separating these two components allows further insight into what ingredients an interpretive program or product must incorporate in order to promote the interpretive outcome of increased resource stewardship.

Each component in the PAIR model is essential in the interpretive process. In a good interpretive program, all four links will be strong. Learning resource information, utilizing interpretive methods, recognizing and relating to different audiences, and presenting effective interpretive products all are difficult to learn and master. It takes a great deal of effort to make the chain illustrated in the PAIR model strong. The PAIR model is presented as a tool that interpreters can use in their efforts to protect park and heritage area resources, promote resource stewardship, and anchor people and parks.

For More Information
Tilden, Freeman. (1957). Interpreting Our Heritage. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Acknowledgements
Roger Riolo and Bob Lillie both provided encouragement to me to publish the PAIR model. Roger Riolo and Jan Balsom provided helpful reviews of the manuscript. Discussions with numerous NPS interpreters, including Bob Roney, Kathy Brown, Laura Illige, and Kim Sikoryak, were helpful in the development of the PAIR model.

Allyson Mathis is the science and education outreach coordinator for the Division of Science and Resource Management at Grand Canyon National Park. Her background is in geology and prior to her current position, she worked as a field interpreter for a total of 15 years in four national park sites. With her expertise in the interpretation of geology, she has presented many sessions on interpreting geology to interpreters and scientists. She may be reached at allyson_mathis@nps.gov.

 
 

A Fork in the River: Experiencing the Change from First- to Third-Person Interpretation at Historic Fort Snelling

19 Nov

by Rick Magee

“A sight never to be forgotten was when on turning a point in the river there suddenly appeared, a mile or so before us, the imposing and beautiful white walls of Fort Snelling, holding, as though by main force, its position on a high precipitous bluff, and proudly floating the stripes and stars.”

— John H. Bliss, Reminiscences of Fort Snelling, 1894

A laundress demonstrates the process of washing clothes in the 19th century.

A laundress demonstrates the process of washing clothes in the 19th century.

Fort Snelling was established at the fork of the Mississippi and St. Peter’s (now Minnesota) Rivers in 1819 on land acquired by treaty in 1805 by Lieutenant Zebulon Montgomery Pike. Its limestone walls and batteries commanded the rivers below and it was a symbol of the United States’ sovereignty and power in the Old Northwest, an “American Gibraltar.”  John H. Bliss first saw the fort from the steamboat Warrior as a young boy when he accompanied his father, Major John Bliss, who took command of the post in 1832.

From the fort’s original mission to protect the American fur trade to its service as a World War II recruitment and training post, the roles of Fort Snelling changed as American policy changed. Troops garrisoned at Fort Snelling kept the peace on the prairies, originally by excluding European-American settlement. Doctor Emerson, the military doctor assigned to the fort in the 1830s, had two slaves—Dred and Harriet Scott. Later the Scotts sued for their freedom since this was free territory—one of the contributing factors to the Civil War. During the Civil War, regiments from the new state of Minnesota were raised and saw action in many battles, including having a pivotal role at Gettysburg. In the late 19th century, the old fort became a supply depot for posts further to the west and home to a regiment of Buffalo Soldiers, the 25th infantry. From 1888 until World War II, Fort Snelling was the headquarters of the Third Infantry, known as “The Old Guard.” Soldiers reported and were trained for duty for the Spanish-American War and both World Wars of the 20th century.

Fort Snelling was decommissioned in October 1946, and most of its extensive lands were transferred to the state of Minnesota. Today it is occupied by an international airport, Fort Snelling State Park, municipal recreation fields, Fort Snelling National Cemetery, and various state and federal buildings. Many of the old buildings built after the Civil War that were part of the once-active post are slowly deteriorating.

By 1957, there were plans to demolish what remained of the Old Fort to make way for a new highway interchange. Public outcry managed to force a change in the alignment of the road, sparing the original, remaining buildings. In the 1970s, Historic Fort Snelling was rebuilt based upon extensive archaeology and historical research. The facility was opened as a historic site managed by the Minnesota Historical Society on the property owned by the state.

First-Person Interpretation at Historic Fort Snelling

Soldiers salute the birth of the country with a Fourth of July cannon firing.

Soldiers salute the birth of the country with a Fourth of July cannon firing.

Originally interpretation at Fort Snelling was all done in first person.  Staff used “I” or “we” when talking about the people and events of a given year in the past. The uniforms, civilian attire, military drill, and other details were those of the year 1827. Staff took the part of people who were known to have been at the fort in 1827 and endeavored to create an experience of immersion into that time. By the 1980s, the method employed was known as “modified first person,” where the year was 1827, but interpreters might answer questions with the preface, “In your time….”  This was similar to “ghost interpretation” sometimes used at other sites.

First-person interpretation was the heart and soul of the program at Historic Fort Snelling. If well done, first-person interpretation can be an effective way to communicate the stories of the fort from the chosen period. Vignettes were employed to further create a picture of the era.  Events included Independence Day orations, courts-marshal, weddings, and funerals. These successfully elicited an emotional connection by staff and visitors to the story and to the history presented by the fort.

The success of interactions with visitors depended upon the talents of the interpreter. Much of the success relied upon the willingness of the visitor to set aside their reality and play along. Good interpreters can read the visitor and go where the visitor wants to go. Nevertheless, veteran interpreters reported that they had maybe one successful first-person interaction with a visitor in a month.

The downside of the program is that it created confrontational situations. For example, some staff offended the modern sensibilities of female visitors who visited the soldiers’ barracks. Some visitors would take it as a challenge to break the character of the interpreter.

Successful first-person interpretation demands many resources.  There must be extensive original documentation of the lives of the people who lived at the site during the period. And there must be resources to train modern people to integrate that information into their program. Many necessary resources did not exist at Historic Fort Snelling.

The Fork in Interpretive Method
By the turn of the 21st century, the management at Historic Fort Snelling faced a fork in the interpretive technique being used. Finally, in 2006 the decision was made that third-person interpretation would be the primary method used. First-person is still used by “History Players” portraying Colonel and Mrs. Snelling in the Commander’s House. Elsewhere in the fort, staff talk about the past from the perspective of our current day.

There were several reasons for the change:

  • The program was perceived to be stagnant.
  • There was declining attendance over time.
  • The program was stuck in 1827; it needed to be open to interpreting other periods and stories.
  • Reviewers from the American Association of Museums strongly urged that first-person methods be replaced by third-person interpretation.

Upper management made the decision that Historic Fort Snelling would abandon the modified first-person technique. Since 2007, costumed interpreters have used the third person to communicate the many stories represented by the old fort.

There was some turbulence when this fork was turned. Approximately 10 percent of the staff did not return. Some of the returning staff had difficulty not taking on a different persona when talking to the public. Site supervisors and staff were concerned that first person had been the heart and soul of the program. How could they successfully continue to communicate the historic importance of their site?

Smooth Sailing on the New Fork
Today Historic Fort Snelling employs costumed interpreters who demonstrate military life at an Army post beyond the western frontier of the United States as it would have been experienced in the late 1820s. A few interpreters wear modern clothing to interpret the experience of Dred and Harriet Scott, their subsequent lives in St. Louis, and the important court case that made Dred Scott famous and the Civil War inevitable. On special weekends the fort is transformed with staff and volunteers in Civil War or World War II uniforms demonstrating life in Minnesota and in the Army during those crucial times of our history.

The change to using third-person interpretation has had many benefits.  Now interpreters can answer visitors’ questions directly. Interpreters can admit they do not know the answer to questions about life in 1827. The staff has been freed to interpret slavery, the U.S.-Dakota War, the World Wars, and many other stories. Third-person interpretation has proven to be more flexible, more visitor friendly, and more intellectually honest.

Visitor reaction has been mostly positive. Reenactors and some visiting staff from other historic sites have expressed disappointment that modified first person was largely abandoned at Historic Fort Snelling. But other visitors have said, “It’s about time.” Many returning visitors, when asked, reported not noticing a change in method. Staff members who also work at schools have reported that students from their schools did not go on field trips to Historic Fort Snelling because the parents and teachers were afraid of the first-person interpreters and did not know how to react to the dialogue from 1827. Now they are returning. A large and growing number of home schoolers are coming to Historic Fort Snelling.

A surgeon dispenses medical theory of the period and shows some of his surgical tools to a young visitor.

A surgeon dispenses medical theory of the period and shows some of his surgical tools to a young visitor.

Successful new program additions at Historic Fort Snelling are “camps” for children. These four-day sessions during the summer have been great hits. Participants get hands-on experiences in the fort, enhancing their knowledge of and appreciation for history. They usually fill quickly in the spring when registration opens. The camps were a Nickelodeon Parents Pick winner and have been rated by local media as the best camps for children in the Twin Cities. These programs are only possible in a third-person interpretive setting.

Perhaps the most significant evidence of the success of the change in method is that visitor numbers have increased over the past four years, bucking trends for historic sites elsewhere in North America.  Despite the bad economy, visitation is expected to increase by four to five percent in 2009.

Historic Fort Snelling still is an imposing sight at the fork of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. Costumed interpreters still fire the cannons and demonstrate the infantry drill. Women in 1820s dress still show how clothing was washed and food prepared when the fort was new. Interpreters in the hospital still discuss the changes in medical procedures throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. But now interpreters can honestly answer questions about what is beyond those walls, what happened after 1827. The stripes and stars still proudly float above the fort.

Costumed interpretation at Historic Fort Snelling has successfully navigated its fork in the river. Visitors will continue to look down from the Half Moon Battery at the confluence of the Mississippi with the Minnesota River.

Rick Magee is a volunteer interpreter at Historic Fort Snelling in Minnesota. All photos are courtesy of Historic Fort Snelling.


 

Social Media: Networking with Visitors

13 Nov

Heidi_headshotby Heidi Bailey

Imagine if you could instantly talk to interpreters around the world—share stories, exchange ideas, discuss experiences, and request solutions to problems. Imagine if you could easily talk to your visitors while they are planning their trip, throughout their stay, and even after they have gone home.

How would you like to find out what appeals to your visitors and what they think of new programs and exhibits before you implement them? Would you be interested in multiplying the number of personal contacts you make with just a few keystrokes?

All of this is possible, and other than your time, it doesn’t cost a dime.

Many of our visitors and potential visitors are living in online communities and traveling through virtual spaces. These places exist in the realm of social media. Social media is a burgeoning new communication tool that allows people to interact online. The potential exists for social media to create new opportunities for interpretation.

Social Media and Interpretation
Interpretation is a communication technique that takes place in an informal setting and offers a way to connect people’s minds and hearts to places. Yet interpretation is primarily a one-way process, with programs and exhibits designed by staff sitting behind closed doors. Social media creates an opportunity for interpreters and the public to engage in genuine conversation.

Until recently, I thought of social media as just a fancy form of text messaging and sharing photos—a place that my teenage nieces went to gossip with their friends. Then a colleague of mine returned from the 2008 NAI National Workshop and said, “Technology is huge. You should look into social networking.”  My friend is the lead interpreter at a National Park Service site and her advice is always excellent, so I looked.

In the process, I discovered a dizzying array of terms I didn’t understand—like widgets and Web 2.0—so I bought the book Social Media is a Cocktail Party by Jim Tobin and Lisa Braziel. The premise of this book is that social media is nothing more than a conversation between people. To participate, you must behave as you would at a party—listen and respond with genuine enthusiasm, don’t be pushy, and if you are going to share information or a story, it should be interesting and entertaining.

Social media is not a place for stuffy press releases, slick ads, or tedious education campaigns. Social media is a place for engaging with people in a personal way. This makes it a wonderful avenue for interpretation. Social media is an opportunity to make interpretation what it should be—a two-way conversation between interpreters and the public that allows us to share the delight of discovery.

This article is the first of a three-part series that introduces the tools of social media and offers thoughts on how they might benefit interpreters.

Social Media Tools
Social media is a suite of online technologies that provides users a podium from which to express their knowledge, experiences, and opinions. Have you ever read an online review of a product or movie? This is social media at work. You are gleaning information from another person’s experience.

Social media allows you to attend people’s online “parties” and listen to their conversations. One of the keys to successful interpretation is to know the attributes of your audience. By listening to what your target audiences have to say, you can learn to give them what they want.

A catch phrase that you may hear is “Web 2.0.” In Social Media is a Cocktail Party, the authors explain Web 2.0 in this way: “Two-way communication has transformed the Web from a place to house brochures into a place to house conversations.” In other words, the Internet has evolved from a static information source into an interactive environment.

The Web 2.0 world has the potential to change the way we run public comment periods, the way we design exhibits, and the way we meet the needs of visitors. A public comment period can become a dynamic discussion forum. Exhibits can be co-designed with a team of people representing different interests. The evolving needs of visitors can be met faster and more precisely.

As an example, a number of years ago, geocaching became a popular pastime for GPS users. Caches started to appear in parks and protected areas, sometimes causing damage to resources. Managers were slow to respond to this new field of recreation because it took them a while to realize what was happening. Eventually, rules and regulations concerning geocaching began to appear and some sites embraced the idea by planting their own caches. By monitoring social media sites, we can pick up on these trends more quickly.

Networking with Visitors
You may have heard of social networking sites like Facebook. People use these sites to build personal profiles and to keep in contact with friends. Sites like this also allow professionals working in similar fields to exchange information and ideas. NAI maintains pages on several of these sites, which you can find at www.interpnet.com. I encourage you to join one of these online communities and start interacting with interpreters around the world.

It’s important to understand that a Facebook page is not a traditional Web page. Nor is it a press release or an ad. A Facebook page is actually more like a coffee house or a pub—a place where people congregate to meet friends, swap stories, share pictures, and exchange information. Your interpretive site can join in the discussion, but networking with visitors online only works if you show up on a regular basis and contribute something interesting to the conversation.

People can also build online communities around photos. Sites like Flickr allow people to organize, share, and even tag their photos with related information such as geographic coordinates. Photo sharing is another form of social networking and these sites can often be connected to sites like Facebook. For instance, Bright Kite is a photo-sharing site that describes itself as a “location-based social network.”

Since photo sharing often revolves around a place, this is an excellent tool for connecting people with interpretive sites. Photos allow visitors to see a place before they embark on a trip or enable them to take a virtual vacation to a place they may never visit. Visitors can also discover new meaning in a landscape by viewing a place from another person’s perspective.

A popular form of photo sharing is called a “map mash up.” A mash up is created by mashing two different social media tools together to create something new. The most common mash up is a custom Google map. You can create map mash ups that attach photos, interpretive text, and visitor information to a map of your site. Check out an example from the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum at www.ushmm.org/maps.

Penelope Seal is the official spokes-seal for TOPP (Tagging of Pacific Predators), a project of the Census of Marine Life. Penelope has her own profile page on Facebook that she uses to keep her growing network of friends apprised of her activities.

Penelope Seal is the official spokes-seal for TOPP (Tagging of Pacific Predators), a project of the Census of Marine Life. Penelope has her own profile page on Facebook that she uses to keep her growing network of friends apprised of her activities.

The Five Fs of Social Networking

Fans
Social networking sites like Facebook allow members to join online fan clubs and follow the activities of an organization, museum, or interpretive site. Fans interact with an organization’s profile page by posting messages, photos, and other content. These posts generate updates that let their friends know about new activity on the page. This feature creates a dynamic environment that is more interactive than a traditional Web page. Another way for fans to interact with a site is to become “friends” with an online presence, such as a historical figure, mascot, or animal.

Feeds
Internet users monitor feeds to keep track of new posts. A feed provides a snippet of information that allows users to decide if they want to read more about a topic. On social networking sites, a feed is generated when people make updates to a profile page. To ensure a regular stream of feeds, you will need to make the experience of interacting with your page rewarding for visitors. Think of ways to keep fans engaged—start discussion topics, run contests, or invite fans to comment on programs.

Fun
To get involved with social networking sites, you need to adopt a communication style that is conversational and fun. Each time you post new information online, simply ask yourself, “How would I tell this story to a friend?” Social networking is about people chatting with people, not agencies talking at people. Put away your technical writing manuals and pull out your personality—say what you need to say in a fun and engaging way. 

Fascinating
A fun communication style is only part of the social networking equation. Your subject material must also be fascinating enough to capture people’s attention. Think about whether or not the information you want to share is something you would tell someone at a party. For instance, you might tell people about an interesting event that is coming up or wow them with a little-known fact. You probably wouldn’t discuss routine maintenance or launch into a dissertation about an obscure topic—don’t do it online either. Your fans will be more interested in visiting your page if you have something fascinating to say.

Frequent
The most important aspect of developing a thriving online fan group is frequent participation.  Take a moment to think about how you maintain relationships in your personal life. Perhaps you meet friends for lunch or phone family on a regular basis. Your best friends are likely the ones you spend the most time with. Social networking works the same way. You must be committed to making frequent posts on your page and sending out regular updates to your fans. If you do this, your fans will reward you by spreading your message and rounding up new fans. This is the power of social networking.

Heidi Bailey is the author of the first electronic book published by NAI’s InterpPress, Putting Interpretation on the Map: An Interpretive Approach to Geography. She holds a bachelor of science degree in geography from New Mexico State University and a master of science degree in recreation, parks, and tourism from West Virginia University. Contact her at geointerpretation@yahoo.com.

 
1 Comment

Posted in Technology

 

Costumed Interpretation: What We Are Is Because of What We Were

07 Nov

by John C.F. Luzader

“History may be divided into three movements: what moves rapidly, what moves slowly, and what appears to not move at all.”

—Fernand Braudel, French historian (1902–1985)

luzader-1American costumed historic interpretation is far from being a new field. Since immediately after the American Revolution, living history events have been a regular aspect of special anniversaries and commemorations, entertaining millions with their presentations.

By the end of the 19th century, the American public was familiar with enthusiastic bands of amateur historians who regularly presented re-creations of our American history.

These interests continued into the 20th century with re-creations of Revolutionary and American Civil War battles. New themes based on Western expansion included programs devoted to the centennial of the Lewis and Clark expedition, 60th commemorations of the Oregon Trail, the Gold Rush, various statehoods celebrations, founders’ day activities, and an assortment of local interests and regional topics. With interpreters dressed in period-like costumes, these activities usually involved the same basic elements: a battle re-creation, craft and lifestyle demonstrations, house tours with period-like costumes, docents, and costumed balls. Rarely did these activities include on-field, first-person campaigns, minorities, or women other than in a subsidiary aspect to a male-dominated presentation. From 1900 to the 1940s, these types of programs rarely changed or progressed at numerous sites across the United States.

Cade family members prepare for a Civil War reenactment in Richmond, Virginia, in 1923.

Cade family members prepare for a Civil War reenactment in Richmond, Virginia, in 1923.

However, during this slow-moving period of the field, we also saw the development of Plimoth Plantation and Colonial Williamsburg as premier cultural and historic sites in the United States. It was these sites that soon became the standard for other groups and sites to equal in quality and accuracy and whose historic film presentations were seen in school rooms across the nation.

With the advent of the commemorations of the American Civil War centennial, the nation began to take on new dimensions in living history.

Beginning in the mid-1950s, more and more groups, primarily centered around men’s muzzle-loading organizations, began to expand in numbers. Far from the sporadic peppering of groups found in regional locales, the nation began to see formations of groups of military reenactors organizing and training to participate in the planned centennial celebrations scheduled for 1961–1965 in Civil War battlefield sites nationwide. Towns and cities across the nation were participating in a national celebration of this momentous period in American history. This movement created a number of significant contributions to the American living history scene.

First and foremost were the numbers. Battle re-creations during this period were not limited to a few dozen men or members of the National Guard representing major battles and conflicts. Suddenly, hundreds of men were making themselves available for these living history events.

Second, this period saw the beginnings of new and better material resources for historical interpreters. The field saw the move from rayon and nylon military uniforms and handmade equipment to a discipline that could find numerous suppliers of re-created clothing, equipment, patterns, documents, monies, and firearms. This new and improved equipment was augmented by magazines devoted to the history of the Civil War with quality articles on battles, leaders, and resources for the general public and the enthusiast, as well as numerous reprints of Civil War regulations, literature, and logistical paperwork.

Next was the beginning of a new aspect of living history; the families of the men involved were taking a larger interest in the field and were accompanying the men to events and participating in historic activities. Small in number at first, families became a common sight at most living history events by 1965.

National agencies such as the National Park Service and local museums and historic sites began utilizing costumed interpreters as a regular feature in their presentations.

Finally, the interest generated by the activities of the centennial of the Civil War created large groups of people who wanted to continue doing reenactments beyond the Civil War centennial and in a variety of different fields and themes.

From the late 1960s, the field of costumed interpretation grew quickly. National organizations that had started in the 1960s, such as the North-South Skirmish Association, were being joined by other groups that specialized in numerous historic subject matters. Interest in the period of the American fur trade, which had had a small following from the 1920s, suddenly blossomed. Large national groups featured their own publications and regular gatherings (rendezvous) across the nation. By the mid-1970s these groups where recruiting large numbers of followers and their families.

Increasing the interest in living history was the advent of the American Bicentennial. Organizations like the Brigade of the American Revolution generated profuse numbers of like-minded and enthusiastic “history buffs” who immersed themselves in re-creating not only the battles of the conflict, but also the daily life styles, crafts, and cultures that were common to the time period they were depicting. Towns and cities across the nation began sponsoring historic events and activities to illustrate not only the nation’s history, but also the heritage of their own locales. Nationwide groups flourished with a common interest—the passion of our past.

The 1970s saw the National Park Service, which had been involved in on-site living history costumed events from the 1950s through the Civil War re-creations of the 1960s, make major commitments and contributions to the field through training, research materials, interpretive manuals, publications, and improvements in firearm training standards.

Colonial Williamsburg and Plimoth Plantation moved from third-person interpretive formats to first-person interpretive formats, giving each site a more believable presentation to the public. Other large national sites followed suit. Fortress of Louisbourg in Canada, Conner Prairie in Indiana, Sutter’s Fort in California, James Towne in Virginia, and Fort Ticonderoga in New York became some of the premier living history sites in North America, setting standards that many others emulated.

However, even as this interest grew, many sites and organizations became stuck in many of the same activities that had originated in the early years of the 1910s and 1920s—a heavy reliance on craft demonstrations, firearm demonstrations, parades, balls, and other activities that did not necessarily reflect an accurate or authentic illustration of the periods that were being represented. Professional historians criticized the unprofessional and inaccurate presentations that were abounding throughout the country, labeling many of the activities as faddish and more suited for the stage or movies than for historic sites. This stigma would plague the field for over three decades.

The late 1970s through 2000 saw an even more fervent growth in the field of living history costumed interpretation. The Civil War was re-created every five years with thousands and thousands of people participating in events all through the country. The passion of representing this conflict brought more and more people of all ethnic backgrounds into its folds. So much had it grown that by 1998, the 135th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg had more than 37,000 participants from all around the world. For the first time since the actual event, the re-creation of Pickett’s Charge had nearly the number of participants who had taken part in the actual battle.

Guards man the gate at Fort Du Bois, Illinois, during the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial in 2006.

Guards man the gate at Fort Du Bois, Illinois, during the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial in 2006.

This growth was not limited to just Civil War activities. Sites, museums, and individuals illustrated the historic lives and conditions of the Americas from tribal activities; first contact; the colonization of the United States by the Spanish, French, and English; the French and Indian War; Trekking; the American Revolution; the War of 1812; the Mexican-American War; Indian Wars; the Spanish-American War; both World Wars; the settlement of the West from the 1840s through the 1890s; the cowboy era; the fur trade; the birth of women’s rights; Afro-American progression; Exodusters;  and the list goes on and on. From the famous to the unknown, there are few aspects of the American past that are not represented in some shape or form in a historic costumed venue.

This  does not cover the groups from coast to coast that represent the Renaissance through fairs. Others portray characterizations that are not limited to the histories of the contiguous Unites States; World War I and World War II German troops fight regularly at battle re-creations in the United States. Vikings, Romans, and English Civil War soldiers and ladies can be seen at living history activities and schools. There is no limit to what can be presented by enthusiasts in the field.

From the 1970s through today, the resources for interpreters have grown by leaps and bounds. No longer do costumed interpreters need to use original materials for accurate portrayals. There are now available historic patterns, reproductions, research information, articles, reprints, labels, cans, food stuffs, live stock, manuals, blacksmith items, clothing, camp gear, arms and armor, reproduction music and instruments, reprinted period books, tapes to learn language and song, and again, the list goes on and on.

Internet sites (both good and bad) have created resource bases at a touch of the keypad and offer new media for the exchange of ideas, discussions, and publications that no other period of historic interpretation has ever had.

This is also the period when new  organizations such as the Association for Living History, Farm and Agricultural Museums (ALHFAM) and the Midwest Open Air Coordinating Council (MOACC) began holding regular regional and national conferences to exchange ideas, papers, research, and resources.

This period also saw the evolution of many organizations and sites from hobbyist to “para-professional” status with such an emphasis on accuracy that they became major contributors to and resources for historic films and documentaries.

By the year 2000, new interests were initiated with the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial, the Pike Bicentennial, and the forthcoming bicentennial of the War of 1812 and the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War. Each has created new interests and new groups of enthusiastic interpreters.

Where is the field today?
Per Fernand Braudel’s quote at the beginning of this article, the field is an amalgamation of three movements. Some costumed interpretation is static, seeming to be non-moving. Those programs have not grown or evolved beyond the rudimentary aspects of putting on “olde timey” clothing and doing demonstrations. Their programming and events rarely change and the same themes can be seen from site to site. Many do not even know the term interpretation or its meaning.

Others have moved slowly, not wanting to give up traditional programs and events, yet still enthusiastic about new material and historic resources. Fresh and better materials and costumes have been put into place, but the programming maintains the same formats that have been used for decades.

4H Heritage member Bre Villard interprets at Bent’s Old Fort National Historic Site. Photo by Barb Engles.

4H Heritage member Bre Villard interprets at Bent’s Old Fort National Historic Site. Photo by Barb Engles.

Yet many are on fire, moving rapidly, training and retraining and wanting to set new standards and improve their presentations. Regular conferences and professional publications provide new perceptions in the field. From “interpretainment” to historic interpretation, quality living history creates a believability factor for its audiences while entertaining them. New concepts are being developed to better meet the needs of an ever-changing audience—living heritage staged presentations, more intermedium resources to give a better picture of the whole of the story, better and more accurate depictions of multiple perspectives of a historic event, and breaking from the box of a white Eurocentric vision to include the voices of all the people involved in a historical account.

Finally, and importantly, our audience has changed. Today’s studies demonstrate that our visitors want accuracy and authenticity over entertainment in programming. Their visit to a historic site, museum, or special presentation is not just for amusement. They come to learn, and to learn accurate material from living history interpreters that they can rely upon to provide authentic representations of the past with a “human face.” Visitors want believability and someone to talk to from an earlier period. They look for education and the human story.

Costumed interpretation has gone through many evolutions—some great, some terribly bad—but it continues to provide a source of interest to the public and opportunities to bring the past to life.

Soon we will see more changes, new themes, and new ideas. Already there are groups portraying the 1960s and the Vietnam War. All too soon  someone will talk about “reenacting” the events of September 11, 2001, and how those really weird people of  2009 lived in the “olden days.”

For More Information
Anderson, J. (1984). Time Machines: The World of Living History. Nashville: American Association for State and Local History.

Ecroyd, D. (1990). Living History. Eastern National Park Foundation.

Falk, J. & Dierkling, L. (2000). Learning from Museums: Visitor Experiences and the Making of Meaning. Walnut Creek: Alta Mira Press.

Krugler, J. (1991). Behind the public presentations: research and scholarship at living history museums of early America. William and Mary Quarterly, 3(48), 347-386.

Kuegler, D. (2005). Living History im amerikanischen Westen, Verlag fuer Amerikanistik. Germany.

Leon, W. & Piatt, M. (1989). Living history museums. In W. Leon and R. Rozenweig (Eds.), History Museums in the United States, A Critical Assessment (pp. 64-97). Urbana and Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Moscardo, G. & Pearce, P. (1986). Historic theme parks: an Australian experience in authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research, 13, 467-479.

Saxe, D. (2009). Living heritage: an experimental model mixing heritage and entertainment. Journal of Interpretation Research, 14(1).

Stover, K. (1989). Is it REAL history yet? An update on living history museums. Journal of American Culture, 12(2), 13-17.

Sussman, V. (1989). From Williamsburg to Conner Prairie: living history museums bring bygone days to life but not always accurately. U.S. News and World Report, 107(4), 58-62.

Wilkening, S. & Donnis, E. (2008). Authenticity? It means everything. AASLH History News, Autumn, 18-23.

Living Museums of the West’s John C.F. Luzader has been involved in living history programs since 1961 throughout the United States, Canada, and Europe. John is the 1997 NAI Master of Interpretation, a member of ALHFAM, N-SSA, and MOMCC,  and the director of the Cultural Interpretation and Living History section of NAI. Unless otherwise noted all photographs are the property of and in the collections of the author.

 

Roller Coasters vs. Brass Doorknockers

01 Nov

legacy-NovDec09by Paul Caputo

As a child, I visited Williamsburg, Virginia, with my family. Prior to the trip, I spent months anticipating a day at an amusement park called Busch Gardens. I was consumed with and petrified by a roller coaster called the Loch Ness Monster, which featured multiple loops and a 114-foot drop. I studied photos of the roller coaster in a Busch Gardens brochure and wondered if I would have the courage to get into one of those metal, yellow cars when the time came to do so. (I would, and it was great.)

My 10-year-old brain had blocked out the fact that Busch Gardens would only be one part of a vacation that included several other sites. So you can imagine my surprise when, on the first day of the trip, I found myself not on the greatest roller coaster ever, but watching a living history interpreter in period costume demonstrate how Colonial-era Americans made brass doorknockers.

Once I stopped comparing the relative adrenaline rushes associated with the Loch Ness Monster and brass doorknockers, I appreciated the immersive historical experience of Colonial Williamsburg. I may not have understood all of the history I was seeing, but I left (in spite of myself) with an appreciation of how different my life was compared to what it might have been 200 years earlier. I learned something about the origins of my country and the people who made it what it was.

What I did not appreciate at the time was all of the discussions that go on behind closed doors at sites like Colonial Williamsburg. I did not think about how easy it would have been for poorly researched or inexpertly presented first-person interpretation to warp a visitor’s sense of what life was like in the Colonial era. It never occurred to me that management might have chosen to use interpreters in contemporary dress to educate visitors in the third person. Once I bought into the experience, I never questioned that what I was seeing was anything but purely authentic or that there was any other way to present it.

At a site like Colonial Williamsburg, I am confident that the living history presentations were then and continue to be of the highest quality. However, whether it is because of poor planning or a lack of resources, that may not be the case at every site. This issue of Legacy discusses some of the many factors that go into creating and providing effective, genuine historical experiences, and explores the whys and hows of different methods of doing so.