New York Historical Society

     On Wednesday, May 22, 2013, I went with my class to the New York Historical Society. It was my first time there and it was a honestly cool experience. Although, our trip to the MET was interesting, I feel this trip made me feel more engaged in learning about history, specifically about WWII. A major part of the reason as to why my experience in this exhibit was more fun and enticing was the layout and how everything was presented. Right when I walked in, there was a timeline wall and little table with an old radio in which a broadcast from back then was heard, as oppose to walking into a silent and dull atmosphere. The space of this exhibit wasn’t as spacious as the MET. However, I think it was enough space to allow individuals to move around and it was also due to the inward walls and architecture that is not seen in typical square rooms. I believe this time, the space allowed people to interact with everything they saw, instead of whispering to everyone around them. The total atmosphere in one word would be interactive. There was always something for guests to do, whether it was picking up a telephone and hearing a narrator discuss history or a story, pressing buttons or even watching videos. This made me want to keep walking through the entire exhibit with a sincere curiosity and explore more rather than walking around just to take notes.

     So I think the major thing that stuck out to me was the Travelers aid to resemble NYC. It was an exciting sight; there was a Statue of Liberty, bright flickering lights with one that stated, “cocktails”, and there was also the wonder wheel from Coney Island. It felt like home, even though we were already in New York City. This section was something that we consider the heart of this state. I picked up the phone and chose from the song selection which featured, “I’ll be Seeing You” by Frank Sinatra and Tommy Dorsey Orchestra or “Oklahoma” by Alfred Drake and chorus. Another thing that caught my attention was the wall that was black and blue and full of boats and had a city skyline in the background. It was about The Battle of the Atlantic and strategies the allies used to win the war. One strategy was turning out the lights all over the city, even from the Statue of Liberty to prevent German U-boat captains from spotting ship silhouettes at night. Coney Island also went pitch black. Now, imagine that! It’s pretty hard to think about this city known for its lights turning dark; and quite scary too.  One last thing that I found interesting was the section of the exhibition which had a wall with individuals who made a difference and made contributions throughout the war. Some people include, President FDR, Edwin Len, Jacob Lawrence, Masako Mary Yamada and Sam Fuller. It demonstrated how the military and navy was more integrated with people of different ethnicities as oppose to previous wars of the past.

     Before we went to the New York Historical Society, I remember my professor mentioning that the founders of this museum wanted to give off a positive portrayal of WWII, but it really did not sink in until my visit was over. I kept saying, I” like this museum better”. And, I realized it was because there wasn’t anything to dwell over or any graphic images that presented pain or ore that would linger in my head. I think the museum made me momentarily forget about the actual violence that is malevolent associated with any war. The New York Historical Society definitely wanted guests to feel supportive or just acknowledge that the time period in which the war occurred was not a total dark time in history. I feel the exhibition we saw at the MET about the Civil War felt as if they were just presenting facts and served as a reality of what really happened which made people cringe; it displayed things that maybe people don’t want to think about. On the other hand, the NYHS to me was more celebratory, showcasing how a nation overcame a hardship. It can be said that when we are presented information, we must take into account that there are always two sides to the story.

My trip to the MET

     Last Tuesday, I was actually excited to participate in a class field trip with my class to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It’s been quite a while since I have done so and it may have been my first time at the MET, as far as I can remember. As I first entered the Photography and the American Civil War exhibition, I felt thoroughly interested and curious to learn about details of the war I was still not aware of. The rooms were quite spacious, which was pretty convenient because although, there were a lot of people, it wasn’t too tight and allowed me to move around comfortably.  I believe the spatial design of the exhibition served a purpose to encourage communication between people viewing the artifacts. Obviously, there wouldn’t be loud chatter among individuals to discuss the artifacts because it would be disturbing to others trying to concentrate. But, I think the exhibition made people turn to each other and, say “wow”, or “look at this”. I know I did just that a few times. Moreover, I strongly believe the architecture of the exhibition was a way to establish a personal connection between the viewers and artifacts of history because people can imagine the open and empty space in their head filled with the people in the pictures or the war itself. I found that walking through the exhibition was very thought-provoking to me, as I was asking myself questions like, “how did the photographer feel taking these pictures?” or “why are everyone’s face in these photos are serious?”

     There are a lot of things that individuals can discuss about the Civil War exhibition. One thing that was showcased more times than once in the first room I walked in was President Abraham Lincoln. He was on pins and even a chessboard as part of a sense or patriotism and support during the election. There was a portrait of him without a beard, which was relatively weird. But, more importantly, there are other things that stood out to me more that made me wonder or cringe. A connection I made between two artifacts that were rooms apart were among the 1860s “Civil War Portrait Lockets” and 1863 “The Children of the Battlefield”.  Lockets were tinytypes set in brass and gold plates cases which featured portraits of family. They served as a powerful tool to help the subject and family survive or fear that that they may not live through battles. On the other hand, “The Children of the Battlefield”, one soldier was found dead with only a locket that had a portrait of three small children. Papers all over made an attempt to find out whose father were he. As a result, it came to the attention of Philinda Humston who has three children and hasn’t heard of her husband since the battle at Gettysburg in October 1866. It definitely showed me how lockets were powerful in many ways. It stood for something personal and for something that was used publically to discover families that were perhaps torn apart. Something I found interesting during that time period, was an artifact titled, “Union Private with Musket and Pistol, 1861-65”. Almost every portrait seen with soldiers on either side of the Civil War was seen with a type of weapon. It stated, “Evidence suggest given a choice, most soldiers preferred presenting themselves armed with more than one weapon.” The photography studios were readily equipped with these supplies. I believe that this is because as a solider they must have felt a sense of pride and a weapon served as their security. Lastly, the artifacts I feel are self-explanatory and provoked disturbance in a way  are “The Scorged Black” and portraits of soldiers with significant injuries that were used for medical purposes. I was most intrigued by their faces because they seemed serious and stern and I was wondering why not a lot of soldiers’ faces did not express agony and discomfort.

     Overall, I think the exhibition was interesting. It contained a lot of artifacts that showed different aspects of the war. I think photography was an interesting medium to observe the war because like many say, pictures tell a thousand words. They represent stories within themselves. I think we can appreciate photography even more because we can see the great lengths that photographers like Mathew B. Brady, did to capture a captivating image; whether it was carrying a ton of equipment everywhere or even putting themselves in danger. I wish this exhibition could’ve had more of those telescopes where you see through it and the image is 3D and its right in front of you. I found that to be really cool and a great way to see something up close.