Kimberly Tucker
Dr. Conard
Professional Residency Colloquium
10/20/2011
The Public Historian, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Spring 2005). Special issue on “Disability and the Practice of Public
History,” Susan Burch and Katherine Ott, guest editors
The definition of the term disability encompasses more than just people who are physically
handicapped. It also includes those with emotional disabilities, learning disabilities, and other mental
disabilities. However, historical organizations have not always been accessible to those with disabilities
and many do not include the history of disability or disabled historical figures in their exhibits or
program offerings.
This issue of The Public Historian focuses on disability in terms of the history content and the
physical traits and characteristics of historical figures that are put on display in museum exhibitions and
other types of historical settings. In the introductory article, Katherine Ott argues that public historians
tend to ignore or demonize difference and diversity in the figures featured in exhibits or films. Instead of
celebrating diversity and portraying the reality and prominence of disability in our social and cultural
history, we present healthy, able-bodied, idealized figures in history museums because they are
perceived to be how America became a superpower and achieved her greatness. People with disabilities
and differences are missing from the history stories we present to the public. We have dropped the
people with disabilities from history (the elderly, disabled veterans, the sickly, etc.). Public historians
need to correct this and stop overlooking the disabled, their place in history, their contribution to
history, and the content about people with disabilities. We need a more inclusive public history. Until
then, museums will continue to alienate part of their audience – those with disabilities.
Steven Noll’s article on Southern mental institutions is an extremely interesting foray into the
subject of disability in museums and other historical organizations. The Southern landscape was littered
with institutions for the “feeble-minded” during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These
institutions were established to protect society from the intellectually disabled and re-train them. Little
is known about the lives of the patients or the work of the doctors in these institutions. However, some
mental institutions have begun to face their own history and bring that history to the public through
historic buildings, archives, and exhibit interpretations. Interpreting these institutions in a public setting
places them and their history within the larger historical context of the twentieth century in terms of
World War I, southern society, scientific thought, and the de-institutionalization revolution. Still, some
of these southern institutions (a few of which are opened to this day) embrace their institutional past
with a museum and archives, deny or ignore their past, or simply remain ambivalent.
In terms of disability, deaf people and other cognitively disabled people have also been silently
left out of the history presented in museums and exhibits. Due to communication difficulties, their
stories, their achievements, their sufferings, and their contributions to history are usually overlooked by
oral historians and are, therefore, omitted from the historical content used in museum exhibits. During
World War II, the Nazi state carried out policies against people with disabilities. The fact that any deaf
Jews survived the Holocaust is an amazing heroic feat. Yet, their experiences were marginalized. The
process of gathering the oral histories of deaf Holocaust survivors was an arduous and tedious one, but
it was also a process that produced an important contribution to the history of the Holocaust. By
including the stories of people with disabilities in museum exhibits, museum professionals can begin to
put their experiences in a correct and inspiring historical context. Additionally, in order to change
perceptions of disabilities and diseases, objects such as the AIDS quilt can be used in exhibits to bring
awareness and take away the stigma surrounding people with disabilities or AIDS.
In terms of access, most historical organizations have remodeled their facility in order to be
accessible to the physically handicapped. However, some historical institutions, especially small
museums and local museums, have yet to make their exhibits or programs accessible to the hearing
impaired or vision impaired. These museums might not have it in the budget to have a video tour, audio
tour, or even a volunteer to assist the visitor. As an emerging museum professional, it has become
obvious to me that museums need to take full advantage of the technology used to assist hearing and
vision impaired visitors. By creating tours and programs that give them the complete museum
experience, museums can open their doors to a previously marginalized audience. One particularly great
online resource, the Museum of Disability History, can assist museum professionals, educators, and
visitors. If they developed traveling exhibits, this online museum’s reach could greatly be extended.
Like the limitations of the programs museums offer their disabled visitors, museums should also
acknowledge the limited progress they have made in terms of incorporating disability in their exhibit
interpretations. While Lawrence Halprin’s FDR memorial directly addressed the issue of disability,
particularly the president’s disability, the site’s interpretation fails to effectively highlight inclusion,
FDR’s programs, or the limited progress that has been made on including disability in a larger historical
context.
The Oklahoma History Center has remodeled their entire institution in order to comply with the
American Disabilities Act and make their facility accessible to those with disabilities. The physically
handicapped can now comfortably enjoy visiting the museum. However, they will quickly notice that
none of the galleries have exhibits concerning disabled historical figures from Oklahoma or even the
history of disability in the state of Oklahoma. As an emerging museum professional, accurately
portraying historical events and people to the visiting public is a non-negotiable job requirement. While
giving the public the heroic stories and traditions they want to hear is important, public historians
should be challenging visitors with exhibits that present controversial topics and multiple perspectives,
which includes the history of disability. The state of Oklahoma recognizes cultural months, i.e. black
history month, Native American history month, and Hispanic history month. So, the Oklahoma History
Center could institute a month that focuses on highlighting the plights and achievements of disabled
historical figures.
In addition to including historical content on disability in museum exhibits, public historians
should also concentrate on making the exhibits accessible to those who are mentally disabled, hearing
impaired, have learning disabilities, or are English as a second language learners. The physically disabled
are only a small percentage of those who are categorized as “disabled.” So while museums have been
primarily concentrating on making their facilities accessible to this disabled group, they have a long way
to go in order to make their historical institutions accessible to other types of disabled visitors.