"An Affair (with history) to Remember"

When I was an undergrad at York I began as only a Fine Arts Cultural Studies major. In my first two years of studies I enjoyed taking all of the “artsy” classes, particularly when it came to photography. But when in my third year I could not get into many of the art classes I wanted to, I ended up taking the year to meet all the requirements needed outside of the fine arts. I started with a few Ukrainian culture courses and one history course. I still remember sitting in the classroom the first day of Eastern Europe, Since 1918; the history course I had decided to take. The professor laid out his expectations and I remember being quite worried that I would not be able to do well, as I had not taken a history course since grade nine. However, I stuck it out and it ended up being one my favourite classes, not to mention it motivated me to add history as a minor. Basically, from that day on I was hooked…

What I find fascinating and what keeps me inspired all the time, is how passionate history professors are about their work. The amount of knowledge they possess on any given topic is what keeps me coming back, so to speak. In many of my history classes it never felt like I was in school. Rather it felt like I was sitting in on story time, not in a lecture. I also enjoyed the debates that would develop as a result. You think you have a good take on a historical subject, then someone throws out a different viewpoint and you cannot help but stop consider it, which I think teaches you to be more objective. Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code is a good example of that. In this novel, the author put forth a very controversial alternative to a history that has been otherwise considered fairly concrete. It prompted scholars to revisit this history and generated a craze of documentaries and books that either considered this new alternative or refused it. If nothing else, debating the various perspectives definitely keeps things interesting and it opens your mind up to new possibilities.

The challenge is in transferring your passion for history over to the general public, who might otherwise find it somewhat uninteresting. However, I think that one of the students in my class got it right when she said, you have to draw people in with emotion first not facts. This is why I think Dan Brown's novel was such a success. I too believe that in order to draw in the general public to experience the wonderful world of history, we need to reel them in with emotion and then we can teach them about the facts. And I am continuously learning about the problems and issues surrounding the work of public historians.

My hope is that one day I will inspire others with the historical subjects I am passionate about, in the same way that I have been inspired by the work of my professors and students alike. Do not forget, I was a fine arts major who never imagined would be taking history. But here I am, and I could not be happier.

Photograph:

The Haunted Land: Facing Europe's Ghosts After Communism By Tina Rosenberg (one of the books I had to read in the course, Eastern Europe, Since 1918).

Commemoration and Controversial Subjects

Recently we had a discussion in one of my classes about commemoration, celebration and nation building and a few questions came to mind. How do you represent controversial subjects in public history? Whose perspective do you ultimately take? How do you deal with these types of issues if you are working in a museum or writing a text for a monument or plaque? Is it possible to represent both sides of any historical subject in these sorts of mediums? Obviously these are very loaded questions, for which I do not have the answers. However, I would like to consider some of these issues, using an example I have studied and am very interested in.

Joseph Stalin was the leader of the Soviet Union for over two decades. If there is a subject I think that is absolutely loaded with controversy, it is everything to do with this man. What I would therefore like to consider is the ways in which you would commemorate/represent this historical figure in public history.

To begin, I would like to point out some of the conflicting factors that surround this subject. First of all, Stalin and the Soviet Union are still within living memory for so many people. Therefore, we have to consider the audience, a good portion of which could have lived under the Soviet Union, or even during Stalinist rule. The second problem is that there are those who recognize that Stalin committed immeasurable atrocities, from executing people of the communist party to the formation of the Gulag system; he is basically responsible for the deaths of millions upon millions of his own people. Then there are those who argue that despite all this, he accomplished much when he was in power and some even now remember life to have been somewhat better when the Soviet Union existed, in particular, when Stalin was in power. One of the accomplishment’s that will forever be linked with Stalin is the industrialization of a primarily agricultural society. What is so remarkable about this transition is that he accomplished it more rapidly than any other country in the world ever has. Unfortunately, the cost of that success was the loss of millions of lives.

Visible throughout Soviet culture, during Stalin’s long reign of power, were many monuments erected in his honour. These monuments were considered a part of the Stalin cult that prevailed. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, many of these monuments were taken down. I only know of one which remains erected in Georgia, Stalin’s birthplace (although I am sure more exist). Other measures were taken, such as having Stalin removed from photographs.

These actions seem logical because of the atrocities he committed, which were largely concealed from the world. Why then are people considering re-erecting monuments of this tyrant? Part of the reason is that the quality of life in areas of the former USSR is poor. People in living memory of those times are remembering that things were better – they had free education, were guaranteed a job and so on. I recently read some articles stipulating that they want to reinstate monuments in Stalin’s honour commemorating things such as his contribution in the Second World War, as a way of connecting with a powerful past. This is something that often occurs when a society is trying to nation build. They look to a past, to a time when they were powerful, and try to revive it.

However, I wonder about the power a monument’s message carries? What meaning is produced by simply erecting another monument of Stalin? Then again what point were they sending by tearing one down?

It all depends on your perspective. Erecting a monument of Stalin, could represent power and growth, for those who believe that the end justified the means. It could also represent fear and murder, for all those who were victims of his tyranny. In tearing one down, you could be representing the end of that reign of terror, or you could be signifying the denial of its history. It all depends on your perspective, on your link to this history. Were you a loyal communist who prospered in those times? Or were you someone who was sent to the Gulag? And no matter which person you are, Stalin represents something very different. However, this is an extreme case that is difficult to grasp because on the one hand he did help the Allies win the Second World War. On the other hand, he went as far as to starve millions of Ukrainians during the Holodomor. For me, what cannot be argued is that Stalin played a huge role in the history of the twentieth century, and we cannot ignore it nor can you erase it.

All of these problems in representing Soviet history were something I encountered when I enrolled in an independent study course during my undergraduate studies. I was given the opportunity to produce a work of art based on any subject I wanted to pursue. I chose to research the paradox that surrounds Stalin’s rule of the Soviet Union. I understood that there were those people who believed he had accomplished a great deal, particularly with his industrialization project. Neither could I ignore the subservient voices of the survivors who bravely told stories of the absolute horror they experienced during those very same times.

The way that I approached the subject was to juxtapose the two views together in the form of a photomontage. I displayed images of industrial work and juxtaposed it with text that described the atrocities committed by Stalin and the communist party. I chose to contrast images with words, because the industrial success was a dominating physical element. What I felt was somewhat less evident were the crimes against humanity committed in order to achieve this creation, because so much of it was denied and hidden within the realm of the Soviet Union. Mostly what exist now are the testimonials of survivors, which are simply words that can always be disputed. In the end, I hoped that my art would showcase that the end did not justify the means. However, I tried to leave it up for interpretation.

Therefore, I wonder if this sort of approach would work, if you were to represent Stalin. Would it help to juxtapose both his accomplishments and his crimes? Would it work in the way that it worked for me in my art? I do not know. In the end, how do you represent Stalin or any historical figure (Hitler, Mao Tse-tung) for that matter? Do you reject the production of monuments in honour of these historical figures? They are a part of history, but because of what monuments tend to represent (heroism and a place where we remember the dead); the creation of a new Stalin monument would be very contoversial indeed.

Photographs:

1) Soviet Montage by Kalyna Klymkiw

2) Stalin monument

3) A Stalin monument being destroyed

Further Reading:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-11-06-voa48.cfm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4926284.stm

Eerie or Historic

In the spirit of ghouls and ghosts, this year for Halloween I carved my pumpkins into rundown homes and cottages to represent a haunted village. This got me thinking about how people tend to relate to things that are old (historic) with ghosts and hauntings, and how museums and historic sites tend to maximize on the tourist opportunities around the Halloween season.

Let me provide you with some examples.

Black Creek Pioneer Village maximizes on this holiday by having Halloween inspired events at their living history museum located in Toronto:
http://www.trca.on.ca/Website/TRCA/ParksAndCulture/Graphics.nsf/Graphics/bcpv_whatson_pdfs/$file/2008HowlingHootenanny_Web72.pdf
http://allhallowseve.ca/.

The Royal Ontario Museum also had Halloween inspired events this year: http://www.rom.on.ca/news/releases/public.php?mediakey=jhmn8cj6ms.

There are also other tourist attractions, where one can get their fix for things scary and ghoulish all year round. For example, there are Ghost Walks offered within Ontario. Some places include Hamilton, Ancaster, and Niagara-on-the-Lake: http://www.ghostwalks.com/. There are also Haunted Walks offered in Ottawa and Kingston: http://www.hauntedwalk.com/.

While surfing channels on my television, I have often come across episodes of Creepy Canada, a television show that supposedly is devoted to telling the eerie stories of ghost sighting and haunted landmarks found within Canada. http://www.tv.com/creepy-canada/show/33052/summary.html

If you search in Google books “Canadian Ghost Stories” (http://books.google.ca/books?um=1&q=canadian+ghost+stories) an abundance of sources will appear. Many of the stories found within these books are often attached to museums and historic buildings. These books are usually found well stocked in book stores and souvenir shops throughout Canada. And I cannot deny that I own one such book called, "Ontario Ghost Stories" (I purchased it when I went camping many years ago, in order to read it by the campfire).

In the process of telling these scary stories, no matter whether it is in a museum, at a ghost walk, on the television, or in a book, you will come across some aspect of history.

I find all of this very interesting, because it seems that society has a fascination with things that are scary. I rarely meet people who do not enjoy a good horror flick or dressing up for Halloween. However, what I am particularly interested in is why we have a fascination with attaching the scary to the historic and how this concept is used for tourism purposes. Consider how many of us have at one time or another imagined that a historic building is haunted? But let’s be honest, how legitimate can these stories of woman in a white dress appearing in the window of an old building, really be? How historically accurate are these stories? I think that because there is such a wealth of stories out there, that they have become less unique and, in a sense, far less believable.

Despite this, these sorts of attractions, like the ones at Black Creek Pioneer Village, still remain popular and I think that the people who have organized events based around Halloween are simply taking the opportunity to market their sites. They understand what people enjoy and what people are entertained by and in the process they get to tell a bit about history to a public that might be otherwise uninterested. It is a way of motivating the public to learn something about local history and in order to connect with people that are not particularly interested in history can take some creativity. I will admit that I have often wanted to attend some of these events, because I myself find them enticing and unique, which is why I thought this subject might be something interesting to consider.

Side Note: Do you ever wonder if some of those stories are true, not that I am admitting to believing in such things ;). However, if you were to ask me, I might tell you that I once lived in a house that was built on the site of a very old building and it had its share of eerie occurrences. All I am going to say is imagine waking up to all your dresser doors open to their fullest, knowing very well you did not open them that way and neither did anyone else in the house…it makes you wonder…

On that note ;), I hope everyone had a safe and happy Halloween!

Imagining History or Historical Imagination

Recently we had a discussion in one of my classes about the Prince Edward Island National Park and the infamous Green Gables.

There were two things I was obsessed with as a child. The first was the Phantom of the Opera. At a very young, age I knew every word to every song off the CD and could even hit the high note at the end of the song: The Phantom of the Opera (seriously!). And this was all before I even went to see the musical. The second was Anne of Green Gables, although through the films not the books I am sorry to say. As a child, I remember being very excited to visit Green Gables, which if you look on the Parks Canada website is a National Historic Site within the Prince Edward Island National Park.

It is funny, because I remember approaching Green Gables, noticing that there were aspects of it that were different from the way I ‘remembered’ it (again simply from my memory of the films). Once I entered the house, I could not understand why things were not as they had been represented in the films. I honestly remember making comments such as, “this isn’t what Anne’s room looked like” and “the living room was not set up this way” etc.

Despite these technicalities, which merely an only child with a huge imagination and a freakish attention to detail would notice, I still enjoyed visiting Green Gables. I was a child nonetheless, and I liked the idea of pretending for the day that I was immersed in another time, with other characters, who I felt I knew like I knew my closet friends. My childish innocence and imagination allowed me to enjoy it.

However, some have argued that this historic site is not representative of history in the typical sense, because the building that is now referred to as Green Gables was altered in order to embrace the characteristics of the house found within L.M. Montgomery’s fictional novels. This house did inspire the Green Gables known to us in those stories; however the actual house never had green gables (they needed to paint them in order for it to match to the ideal). Thus, the natural landscape that was there was altered to conform to a history that was not even based on a factual story, but a fictional one (at least that is what is argued).

L.M. Montgomery created characters and a story that gave a sense of who the author was, as well as what life was like for people in the maritime provinces of Canada during the period represented in the stories. In essence then, the park is meant to be an imaginative place as well as function as a place to memorialize a woman, her books and her characters, while also representing the time period in which these stories were set. In other words, we are forgetting that the park is a celebration of a wonderful author, who captured a particular era through her novels and became famous throughout Canada and the world because of it.

Let us consider something for a second. If you go to an art gallery there are many paintings that have captured various periods in history. Art historians consider this a wonderful window into the past. How is this any different from what has been done in the Prince Edward Island National Park? Green Gables (and the books for that matter) are like the painting; it is giving us a window into L.M. Montgomery’s creative mind (an important historical figure), and it is doing so in order to tell her story as well as portray a particular period. Therefore, it is simply presenting history in a different form. The house in the Prince Edward Island National Park is the house that inspired one of the most important pieces of literature in Canadian history, and in order to tell that story, it needed to be altered.

In one of my history classes on the First World War from a Canadian perspective, one of our first readings was to look at L.M. Montgomery’s, Rilla of Ingleside (the eighth instalment of the Anne series). We had a few other readings for that week that focused on how Canadians reacted to the possibility of war and its declaration in August 1914. If I remember correctly, the other readings focused on how people in urban centres reacted to the news. There was a sense in those readings that people were aware that war was coming, and that huge amounts of people gathered in the streets in anticipation. In Rilla of Ingleside, we get more of a sense of how rural Canadians reacted to the prospect of war. They seemed indifferent to the idea that the assassination of some Duke could have anything to do with them across the ocean. And many were shocked when they finally found out that war had been declared, and that they were going to be a part of it. At the end of the class discussion, the professor asked us which one of these readings we felt best represented the Canadian reaction to the war in August 1914. The general consensus was that Rilla of Ingleside best represented it as most of the population lived in rural communities. The professor went on further to tell us that it is noted that when Rilla of Ingleside was first published in 1921, the publishers deemed it a very accurate account of what it had been like for Canadians in the First World War. And this is a fictional novel we are speaking about. This just proves how important these novels are in the history of Canada.

As Public Historians we are constantly going to struggle with representing history as accurately as possible, while preserving as much as we can. However, in this case I think that the history has been captured. The story or theme is based on L.M. Montgomery and her novels, like Rilla of Ingleside, which is considered to be a fairly accurate portrayal of what it was like for Canadians in the First World War. Therefore, the fact that the house that inspired Montgomery has been altered has, in a sense, given us a glimpse into her imagination (a concept she promoted in her protagonist, Anne). This is no different than the artist who chooses to portray a particular episode in history through an artistic medium (think of Pablo Picasso’s Guernica). The canvas and house are one in the same; they are the settings that have been transformed in order to preserve a moment in time.

Photograph: Take a guess who that is...;)

Ah, Digital History…

I would like to write a follow up to my previous entry where I expressed the connection I have to books, and the difficulty I was having relating to the internet as a source for historical research.

Throughout this program, I will be exploring new ways of thinking about public history and my opinions may change from time to time. And in this posting I would like to share some exciting news that has helped me identify more with digital history, because I have found an example that I can relate to.

I recently had an email forwarded to me from the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and it was one that, as I said, had me very excited. It stated that the Canadian Government was going to support the Ukrainian Canadian Congress in launching a website project on the famine in Ukraine (Holodomor), where all sorts of information could be accessed, including: art works, photographs, books and articles on the subject. Visit: http://www.ucc.ca/media_releases/2008-09-18/index.htm

When I read about this digital project, all I could think about was the accessibility of this information for not only Ukrainians, but for so many others who have little or no knowledge of this genocide. (The Canadian Government recently recognized the famine as an act of genocide and declared there to be a day of remembrance. Visit: http://www.ucc.ca/media_releases/2008-05-30/index.htm )

As I have mentioned before, throughout my undergraduate career my research was concentrated around the Holodomor, and what I found to be disturbing was that so many people were completely unaware that this tragedy had even occurred. Scholars have estimated that anywhere from 3 million to 10 million people were killed during the famine between the years of 1932-1933. Honestly, with such a high death toll, how could so little be known about it? As a person of Ukrainian descent, this troubled me greatly. For this reason, in my undergraduate art classes (painting, photography, and performance studies) I sometimes used the Holodomor as my subject matter. It gave me a chance to educate myself and others on the subject.

This digital project is therefore an incredible opportunity for Ukrainian Canadians to teach and preserve the memory of the famine in Ukraine, and it is being accomplished through one of the most accessible mediums – the Internet.

The prospect of this website has made me truly appreciate the value of the internet, for in using this technology we will be able reach a much greater audience, educating people on subjects that many know little or nothing about. And that is a very good thing!

Photograph: Poster of the Famine in Ukraine

ВІЧНАЯ ПАМЯТЬ

Books? Internet?

When I was reading, Scarcity or Abundance? Preserving the Past in a Digital Era, by Roy Rosenzweig, I began to think about some of the reasons why not all historians are interested in learning about the digital world, which led me to ask myself some questions (many of which were brought up in class today, but I wanted to write about it in any case).
I wondered why it is so difficult for historians to accept the idea that we may be able to preserve all sorts of information on the World Wide Web. That our research could become easily accessible simply by signing onto the internet.

When I think of doing research, I picture libraries and archives, full of dusty old books. I picture sitting through the night in old buildings that one can image are haunted (well at least I do). There is a certain image I associate with conducting historical research that I think actually inspires historians. Those settings almost make us want to do our research. It is not easy work, actually it can be quite tedious, but I know I have enjoyed sitting for hours looking through books at the library or at home. I can get caught up sitting on the floor with tons of books surrounding me and in a way it makes me feel important because I realize I am looking at something of great significance.

Conducting research on my computer does not give me that same feeling. Writing I can do on my computer, because I can write my thoughts and ideas quickly on the topic at hand. But to do research also on my computer almost makes me feel confined and claustrophobic. Like I am attached to this piece of machinery and I feel at times very fidgety. Not being able to physically hold the book, but look at it through the window of my computer, just doesn’t do it for me.

I can understand why the idea of putting all of the world’s information on the net would be an exciting notion. But with doing research through the internet, will historians produce better quality work? Because won’t the attachment to things old be lost because we are looking at it through a modern medium, making it more difficult for historians to produce inspired work?

The reason I have thought of this, is because this past year I read two novels, The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova and The Thirteenth Tale by Diane Setterfield. The reason I chose to read these books was because it involved characters doing research in old dusty archives and libraries late at night, and I wanted to be drawn into that world; to be in Europe in historic buildings, looking at old smelly books. The libraries of the two universities I have attended were not in historic buildings and I always wished they were. Still, just being in a library where there are shelves and shelves of books, holding them, sifting through them, got me excited. I would take out 20 books at a time to research my essays and would sit for hours by my electric fireplace (again wishing it was a wood burning one, but what can you do?), holding a cup of tea in my hand, with a lamp over my head, the snow falling outside, wind howling, and me reading.

In the program I am in now, most of my readings are online and I am finding it somewhat difficult. For my Digital History class it makes sense to read about the internet on the internet. Even my Public History class itself. But when it comes to taking a history class on a particular war or period, I like the idea of going to the library and sitting with an actual book.

In any case, what I am trying to say is that I can understand why historians are having a difficult time thinking that one day they will be doing all their research on the internet, at least I know I do. Many historians probably got into the profession in order to immerse themselves in all things old as a way of having a break, in a sense, from our present day modern society.

However, the reality of it is somewhat different. More and more people are depending on the internet, and I am going to say, it is still in combination with books. Books still play a very important role in our society, but so does the internet. As historians I think we care about reaching as many people as we can, and the way to do that these days is through the internet. Therefore, I think we need to find a balance between the old and the new.

Here is some food for thought (I thought about this after my class today).

When I interviewed the famine survivor I conducted the interview in Ukrainian. If I had known no Ukrainian and would have had to hire an interpreter, I would not have had the same experience. There was a connection between me and the person I interviewed because I could personally communicate with them (even if my Ukrainian language was not at the same level).

I think that when dealing with technology, it is better to somewhat understand the language, then to be completely uneducated in it. It will make your experience as a historian in this day and age a more successful one.

Besides, the more languages you know the better – isn’t that what they say?

Question: I have decided to edit my question for this posting. Since many of us in our Public History class have shown a definate love for books, I would like to hear what sort of books you would recommend?

I highly recommend the two books I mention in my posting.

Історія і Танці ~ History and Dance

I was in the process of reading, The Presence of the Past: Popular Uses of History in American Life by Roy Rosenzweig and David Thelen, when I cam across something very familiar to me. In the chapter “The Presence of the Past: Patterns of Popular Historymaking” it begins by outlining how people experience history in their daily lives. One example, found on page 17, discusses a girl who was involved in African American dance. The claim she makes is that “Dance gives her a ‘better sense of where I come from.” “Her dancing and her study of the ‘history behind it’ not only give her a sense of ‘something that was done by my ancestors’ but also ‘can contribute to the African American community.’”

I can completely relate to this! Since I was five years old I have been a part of a Ukrainian dance company. I actually just celebrated my twentieth year dancing with them. For many years, throughout high school and into the first years of my undergraduate studies it was my life. I always did well in school, but was also very committed to dancing. It inspired me and made me feel a great attachment to my Ukrainian background and to Ukraine itself, even though I was born in Canada. Being a part of this dance group also meant that I interacted with people that were in most cases Ukrainian. In some instances, I was dancing with boys and girls that were the sons and daughters of people my mother and father use to dance with. And I can definitely relate to the fact that dancing made me have a better understanding of my history. It made me feel proud and gave me an emotional attachment to that history that I am not sure I would have otherwise had.

My dance group had many opportunities to participate within the Ukrainian community. One of these events was the commemoration of the famine in Ukraine or Holodomor in 1993. I was very young, but I remember watching the older dancers rehearse the interpretive dance based on this historical tragedy, and I felt moved and instantly attached to it. I played a small part for that performance, however it stuck with me. Our instructor was always really good at educating us on the history of what we were portraying, and this was no exception. This performance and what I had learned about this tragedy would later come out in my studies in University.

It began in my second year, when I was beginning to get frustrated with my chosen direction. I needed to find something that inspired me, that I felt I had a connection with, because I was not connecting with my studies in school. It began with a painting depicting the Holodomor. Then in my third year I took a history class to learn more about the history of Eastern Europe, with the idea that I would be able to write my research paper on the famine in Ukraine. And things just escalated from there. It became my main area of research in my studies in history, as well as my subject matter in my art. I felt a connection to it. I was even given the incredible opportunity of interviewing a famine survivor, which was one of the most rewarding experiences of my life (visit: http://www.infoukes.com/newpathway/28-2006_Page_8-1.htm ). And I truly believe that a great deal of what influenced me to pursue a history that meant so much to me was thanks to my dancing.

I still dance and it still inspires me, not to mention it keeps me in shape. ;)

Photograph: Self Portrait by Kalyna Klymkiw

For those of you reading my post, I invite you all to try and remember what it was that inspired you to become interested in history, and even public history for that matter.

Передмова ~ Introduction

You are probably wondering why there are some strange looking characters on my blog page. They are Ukrainian words, which are followed by their English translations. Until the age of 5, I did not know the English language. I now consider it to be my first language, as I use it the most. However, I am still very much involved in my Ukrainian heritage. I therefore consider myself a Ukrainian-Canadian. I know that many people have trouble understanding such a description. I was born in Canada, therefore I should be considered a Canadian.

There are so many things I love about Canada, having traveled to almost every province within this great country, visiting National and Provincial Parks, heritage sites, and beautiful landmarks. And it has probably contributed to my interest in Public History. But there is this other part of me. I have spent my life, in Canada, going to Ukrainian schools, camps, churches, festivals, dance classes, have many Ukrainian friends and now my research interests are even in Ukrainian history. My life experiences are found within both of these cultures. I am however eager to learn more about Canadian history, which is why I am very excited to be taking the Public History program at UWO.

But enough about me.

As far as blogging goes, I have never done this before. This is something most people write at the beginning of their blogs, which is why I chose to mention it later. I want to make you aware that I am not entirely sure of what to expect or what is expected of me in this process. I will do my best to make it as interesting as possible. It feels a bit strange to be writing all of this, knowing many other people will read it. What will they think? I suppose I will find out...

Well now that I have written much more than I expected, I would like to conclude by welcoming you to my blog! I want to wish everyone a wonderful year!

Photograph: Demonstration in Toronto during the Orange Revolution.

Question: Considering what you know about me so far, can anyone guess why I chose an orange template for my blog? Hint: It has to do with recent history...