Rob Cantrell
Amst 205
October 27, 1995
PROJECT 2: Analysis of
"AMERICAN ENCOUNTERS"
I chose to examine and critique the exhibit "American Encounters",
located at Smithsonian Institute's National Museum of American History,
in Washington, D.C. Three years ago, I took a course here at U of MD
called AMST 201 (Introduction to American Studies). As part of our
studies, we were also asked to visit this exhibit and give an analysis.
Having remembered that, I decided to review this exhibit again. I felt I
would I have a better understanding of the exhibit, and I also wanted to
see if three years would change my perspective of what I originally saw.
The exhibit was a rather interesting collection of artifacts, pictures,
videos and stories. I felt the exhibition was very well organized. With
chronological charts and captioned displays, it was easy to follow along
and understand the central theme presented. Though some of the artifacts
were somewhat boring, everything remained within the theme and they
helped to visualize the cultural differences before and after the
intrusions.
Shown below are two of the objects:
According to the exhibit, this bowl was made by the Kha p'on Indians
around the year 1500 in New Mexico.
This object, called Spider from Mars, is a wall hanging made by
Irvin Trujillo in 1990.
After reading some of the other students' critiques of "American
Encounters", I noticed a lot of variations on the purpose of this exhibit.
For example, Mark Boyd writes, "I believe that the museum is
trying to further the education of the people of the United States by
showing them how our country has broken into many diverse cultures, and
how some cultures have never faded." Other people also wrote that
they felt the exhibit was simply a history of the Native Americans. I
disagree with these assessments...I believe the purpose of the exhibit
goes further than this. The main focus of the exhibit, I believe, is
to describe the volatile history of Native Americans, and later
Hispanics, in the region now known as New Mexico. Through the artifacts,
the curators attempt to display the effects of forceful intrusion by
foreigners into their lives, and their self-determination to keep their
identities and cultural history. Additionally, they reveal their view
that this struggle for people to maintain their self-identity is ongoing
even to this day.
This view of maintaining one's self-identity ties directly into John
Michael Vlach's discussion in The Afro-American Tradition in
Decorative Arts. In this book, he argues that people,
such as the Afro-Americans in the nineteenth century, tried to find
alternative ways of preserving and maintaining their history and culture
when traditional methods are either prohibited or unavailable.
Similarly, the curators in "American Encounters"e examines two
sets of people...the Pueblo Indians and the people of Chimayo, New Mexico.
In both cases, outside intruders disrupted their religions, educations,
and even community layouts. Like the Afro-Americans discussed in Vlach's
book, these people used their craftmaking to maintain a link into their
heritage. Even though many were converted to Catholics, most continued
to practice their native religions as well. One example of the mixing of
cultures is evidenced in a traditional table setting which contained a
modern soda can.
While I felt this was an excellent way of displaying how these people integrated American culture
into their own, Andrew Hales viewed this as "... further
evidence of this lack of historical artifacts." I don't feel Andrew
got the point...the exhibit was not emphasizing the Coke cans among the
traditional table setting, but rather, it was emphasizing the
traditional table setting among the Coke cans. The distinction is that
even though they live in twentieth century America, they still value their
heritage.
Another part of the exhibit is a good example of what Thomas Schlereth
labeled as his sixth fallacy of history, "History is Money".
Tourism in this region has become a big business for these people, and
they have capitalized on this. The selling of their crafts, such as
baskets, pottery, and jewelry has become one of their primary source for
income. However, this can cause problems. A prime example would be the
community layouts. Because of pressure to attract tourist and make money,
some communities were designed in a specific way that some historians
believed resembled historical communities. However, some of the
designs were flawed, and they did not reflect original layouts.
One of the final points made in the exhibit is that every one, to some
degree, goes through this process of self-determination and
self-identity. Though it is mentioned several times, the curators never
presented evidence to back up their assertion. I do agree for the most
part that most people do attempt to keep their heritage, however, I feel
that the curators need to enforce their statement with other examples.
Making a global statement that applies to everyone simply cannot go unproven.
There were alot of mixed reactions among classmates on the effectiveness
and quality of the
exhibit. While many did not like the exhibit, David Pester gave a
positive review. He writes, "...I think the museum exhibition American
Encounters is very good." My assessment is very similar.
Overall, I felt the exhibit was very informative and well presented. The
overall theme was precise, and all the artifacts fit in nicely within the
message that was conveyed. The first time I saw the exhibit, three years
ago, all I came away with was that it was about some Indians and
Hispanics who were trying to coexist in New Mexico. However, after
reading Thomas Schlereth's article and Michael Vlach's book, I was able
to identify the underlying message that the curators were trying to present.
To see a brief summary of the exhibit, visit the American
Encounters' Page.