Interpreting The LDS Church History Museum, Part 1
This is adapted from an excerpt of a larger paper I wrote for my public history internship course last year. Sorry in advance for the sub par photography:
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Michael J. Ettema’s article “History Museums and the Culture of Materialism”[1] examines the varying philosophies of education at museums. He contrasts the formalist approach, which emphasizes dates, facts, and the self evident nature of artifacts with the analytical approach which emphasizes contexts, causes, and effects of historical events. Ettema sees problems in each approach with formalists neglecting larger contexts for historical artifacts and analytics neglecting artifacts for larger themes. Ettema argues that a synthesis of these two approaches that emphasizes artifacts as symbols of larger themes and assigns them meaning based on shared values best exploits the educational potential of museum exhibits. These principles find expression in the exhibits of the LDS Church History Museum.
The Museum website as well as the Museum’s informational pamphlet and other similar materials are meant for direct consumption by the general public. These public documents emphasize the educational nature of the Museum’s resources but do not overtly inform the patron that they are meant to strengthen the patron’s testimony or entice non-LDS to find out more about the Church. These purposes are more subtly expressed throughout the various exhibits.
To get a sense for how these exhibits use history to construct Mormon identity and values, I recently toured the exhibits looking specifically for these themes. The permanent exhibit on the ground level, called “A Covenant Restored” uses representations of the founding and development of the Church (largely focusing on the 19th century Utah Church) to instill in museum patrons the importance of making and keeping Church covenants and obeying the commandments. The exhibit constantly connects the artifacts and stories presented with covenant keeping. The exhibit uses objects as diverse as the sign from Joseph Smith’s store in Nauvoo, Illinois to emphasize Church covenants. “From his office at the red brick store in Nauvoo, Joseph Smith directed the affairs of the Church and taught many revealed truths, including the covenants made through temple ordinances.” Not simply representing Joseph Smith’s commercial enterprises (the formalist approach) nor seeking to use the sign to explain the nature of commerce in Nauvoo (the analytical approach), the museum casts the store sign as a symbol of making and keeping temple covenants.
The last two brief segments of the exhibit extend the scope of the artifacts past 19th century Utah to the 20th century “international Church” by emphasizing missionary work and “international” artistic expression. This final section, entitled “A World Wide Church: Artistic Expressions of Faith” features art work from different countries of the world. Surprisingly, and with very few exceptions, the artwork consistently features many of the same traditional symbols of the 19th century era. A Tongan tapestry depicts the Salt Lake Temple and the Tabernacle…
and Panamanian embroidery depicts the Salt Lake Temple, the Aaronic Priesthood restoration, and the Relief Society Theme “Charity Never Faileth” (in English no less)…
A pair of Indonesian paintings depict Joseph Smith receiving the Plates and the Salt Lake Temple…
One Taiwanese tapestry shows President David O. McKay dressed in traditional Taiwanese garments.
In this portion of the exhibit, by displaying common symbols of the restoration rendered in the cultural media of various countries, the exhibit actually serves to deemphasize cultural and national differences in favor of forging a shared symbolic heritage and the common gospel-centered culture of covenant making.
[1] Found in Jo Blatti. Past Meets Present: Essays about Historic Interpretation and Public Audiences (Washington D. C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1987), 62-85.
I don’t have much to add to your analysis, but I quite like the batik temple. I understand we have Richard Oman to thank for that (among the numerous other folk-art pieces).
…and what is up with Nauvoo angel’s head?
Comment by J. Stapley — February 8, 2010 @ 3:08 pm
Thanks, J. Indeed Richard has been instrumental in acquiring many important pieces the world over. I believe he is retired now. Hopefully the vision of whoever replaces him or assumes his responsibilities will at least equal his in terms of collection.
Comment by Jared T — February 8, 2010 @ 3:24 pm
Interesting work—and fitting nicely with Emily’s recent posts.
Comment by Edje Jeter — February 9, 2010 @ 10:28 am
Thanks for this, Jared. Seems like there’s some interesting research possibilities here.
Comment by Christopher — February 9, 2010 @ 10:37 am
Thanks Ed and Chris. There are indeed some interesting possibilities. There is a new exhibit that has taken the place of the Relief Society exhibit that was there when I did this little tour, so hopefully that part will be illuminating when I put it up.
Comment by Jared T — February 9, 2010 @ 10:54 am
I love museums. But I am also cautious of what I see and read inside them. Often the histories or interpretations can be way off for many reasons, even when the curator is acting in good faith. There is a lot of subjective thoughts in putting together an exhibit.
Comment by Bob — February 9, 2010 @ 11:47 am
Nice work, Jared. Between you and Emily, I think there’s been some great strides recently toward opening up new lines of inquiry.
Comment by Ryan T — February 9, 2010 @ 2:10 pm
Thanks Ryan. There’s definitely a lot there. I know there was a Sunstone presentation of some kind on historic sites last summer, but I don’t have any idea about what it was about.
Bob, that’s very true, and that aspect of public history is not very well known in any setting, not just among LDS. Which, of course, makes Emily’s recent posts valuable as an insider’s view on that discussion.
Comment by Jared T — February 9, 2010 @ 2:46 pm
Jared,
I took four upper division classes in Archaeology from the same guy; a man who worked forty years for the Smithsonian Institution as a Field Archaeologist. Even the Smithsonian blows it a lot of the time on their exhibits.
Comment by Bob — February 9, 2010 @ 5:39 pm
Bob, Thanks. I’m coming to reread some of this. I’m interested in your perspective on what it means to “blow it” in a museum exhibit and if you perceive that the Museum exhibit I feature here “blew it” on something. This is not an accusatory question, I’m just trying to get a good handle on what you’re expressing. Thanks.
Comment by Jared T — February 9, 2010 @ 6:23 pm
#10: Jared,
Sadly, it has been a long time since I have been in the Church Museum. I can not speak about these exhibits. Some museum mistakes are small (like having a soldier with the wrong kind of gun, or on his right side when it was known he was left handed). Dioramas are some of the worst.
My professor had a glass case in front of his office. It had twenty household items from 1900, with a $300 reward to any student who could ID them all. I guess he still has his money.
I am sure you see good faith mistakes in History as I saw in my study of Anthropology. I started out a History major, But fell in love (like Emily) with the hands on stuff. That why I love museums.
Comment by Bob — February 9, 2010 @ 10:54 pm
Thanks for the interesting Post. I was quite fascinated by reviews the pictures posted. This make mewant to spend more time visiting Museums, besides reading books. (Smile) I am continuing to learn more about Fine Arts, and it has been good learning experience so far. Again, my thanks for your interesting Post.
Chester Lee Hawkins
Comment by chester lee hawkins — July 20, 2010 @ 10:20 pm
Thanks for the interesting Post. I was quite fascinated by my reviewing the pictures posted. This makes me to want to spend more time visiting Museums, besides reading books. (Smile) I am continuing to learn more about Fine Arts, and it has been good learning experience so far. Again, my thanks for your interesting Post.
Chester Lee Hawkins
Comment by chester lee hawkins — July 20, 2010 @ 10:23 pm