Misrepresenting History

With all the excitement last month about the World Cup and the release of The Odyssey, you may not have heard about the controversy over the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History (NMAH).

Controversy? Over a museum? I can hear your sigh of relief at having managed to miss that one.

Unfortunately, having visited the museum shortly before the story broke, I don’t think it should pass unnoticed.

Here’s the background.

In March last year, President Trump signed an Executive Order accusing the Smithsonian of propagating a version of history that “deepens societal divides and fosters a sense of national shame.” You know, because of his heartfelt concern about “societal divides.” The Executive Order demanded action to restore “truth” in American history.

Then, while you were eating hot dogs and watching fireworks this 4th of July, the White House’s Domestic Policy Council fulfilled Trump’s demand by issuing a 162-page report titled “Saving America’s Story” (WH Report) accusing the Smithsonian of “ideological capture” and “eras[ing] our heritage.” Subsequently, as part of what was clearly a coordinated attack, the House Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency conducted hearings.

Yes, DOGE. Elon Musk may have left Washington, but the subcommittee still exists, in this instance claiming a congressional duty “to aid President Trump’s push to restore accuracy and an appreciation for America’s great history and heritage.”

I can feel your eyes glazing over. Another Executive Order; another pseudo-inquiry by allies of the Trump Administration. Given our many (many) more immediate concerns—the ongoing war in Iran, the continuing cover-up of the Epstein files, the parasite infesting our produce—why should we care about some museum?

First and foremost, because the truth still matters, and prominent historians have testified and otherwise tried to raise awareness that the Trump Administration is mischaracterizing both American history and the Smithsonian. Certainly, my own experience at the museum was nothing like what the WH Report described. The overall feeling was a celebration of America through an exploration of its complex and multilayered history. The NMAH’s special programming for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, In Pursuit of Life, Liberty, & Happiness, consisted of a museum-wide exhibition featuring 250 objects “representing moments that transformed the nation.” Glass cabinets on each side of the large lobby showcased 75 of those artifacts; the rest were dispersed throughout the museum’s varied exhibits.

The WH Report claims one of its “most significant findings” was that “a visitor to the Museum today will find no major exhibit dedicated to America’s Founding era, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, other Founding Fathers, the Continental Congress, the Pilgrims, the Puritans, or major moments of the American Revolution, such as Washington’s crossing of the Delaware.”

Washington crossing the Delaware? As in the famous painting by Emanuel Leutze? Is that what they’re mad about?

Certainly, we visitors got to see a lot about Washington in the museum’s permanent exhibit, The American Presidency. In addition, all summer the Smithsonian Castle has been the site of another special exhibit, American Aspirations, which uses more than 30 of the museum’s most famous artifacts to highlight the nation’s quest to achieve the ideals articulated in the Declaration of Independence, including the desk on which Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration and the candlestand by which George Washington penned his Farewell Address. The NMAH has also undertaken a multi-year effort to preserve an American Gunboat from the Revolutionary War, the Philadelphia, which was part of the battle over control of the Champlain Valley. So, contrary to what the WH Report would have you believe, the museum is not ignoring the Founders or Founding.

If anything, before the controversy erupted, I was somewhat surprised at how UN-“woke” the museum was. For example, in the exhibit America on the Move, a large display celebrated Route 66, one of the first major highways in the United States, which ran for 2400 miles from Chicago to Los Angeles. The display itself failed to acknowledge the challenges faced by African Americans traveling on Route 66. That acknowledgement—which was titled “Jim Crow on the Road” and included a photograph of a 1940 “Green-Book” travel guide listing roadside accommodations that would allow African Americans to remain “safe and comfortable during the era of segregation”—appeared in a much smaller, much less prominent display off to the side.

The NMAH’s ever evolving exhibit about the First Ladies seemed similarly one-sided. According to an informational card provided by the museum, the exhibit now purports to explore “the individual, social, and political accomplishments and interests” of the wives of the American presidents. Overall, however, the focus is still, mostly, gowns. And shoes. And handbags. Even my son noticed how fashion-heavy and substance-light it was.

Could the NMAH have included some information I personally consider problematic in its exhibits and teaching materials over the years? Yes, of course. The question is not whether the museum has handled every potentially controversial issue perfectly. The question is whether the White House should be dictating what history “counts” for partisan purposes.

On our visit to D.C., my son and I also visited the International Spy Museum, which has numerous fascinating displays about propaganda and authoritarianism. One of those displays pointed out that it wasn’t enough for Stalin to have Leon Trostky, one of the founders of communism and his political opponent, exiled and murdered; he also made sure to have Trotsky and others erased from the historical record. Now Putin is manipulating the facts and abolishing the memory of Stalinist terror, an important warning sign for us. As Dr. David Blight, past president of the Organization of American Historians, wrote in the New York Times: “When lies by smiling propagandists become official truths advanced by those who control government budgets, democratic culture dies.”

Trump has a problem: he doesn’t directly control the Smithsonian. So, in late July he issued another Executive Order requiring the installation of signs outside the NMAH alerting the public that the museum does not, in his view, accurately reflect American history. More dangerously, it instructs various agencies to “identify and utilize any and all available authorities to promote the policy” of the order. In the meantime, when I first opened the link to the WH Report, a pop up appeared with a photograph of President Trump, the White House logo, and the headline: “Welcome to the Golden Age!”

Who’s misrepresenting American history now?

Photo credit: National Museum of American History [https://n2t.net/ark:/65665/ng49ca746a2-5790-704b-e053-15f76fa0b4fa]‍ ‍