In a 2021 opinion survey, only 36% of Americans aged 18 to 24 reported feeling “very” proud to be American. Another third expressed either a little or no pride at all in their country. A decade earlier, Pew Research had already flagged this decline. Back in 2003, about 80% of millennials described themselves as “very patriotic,” but this figure dropped to 70% by 2011.
A key role of the National Museum involves nurturing a sense of pride and gratitude among its audience. While preserving historical truths is vital, museums can also foster these positive feelings.
Visitors to the Smithsonian ideally should leave with a sense of pride, gratitude, and patriotism. However, currently, if you were to check the Smithsonian Museum of American History website, you’d find that the first exhibit highlighted is the Greensboro Lunch Counter, marking an event from 65 years ago. This introduction offers a recounting of complex events from America’s past.
It’s interesting that the curator could have put forth a different first impression. For instance, they could have spotlighted America’s triumphs, such as the victories achieved post-Cold War or the allure of religious freedom that drew countless immigrants from Europe in the early 20th century. Foundational documents inspiring democratic reformers globally for 250 years could have been highlighted too, yet they opted not to.
Alongside the lunch counter photo, three additional objects from the museum’s collection are displayed. One is the table where a woman from Seneca Falls penned the Declaration of Rights in 1848. Another is a badge from a volunteer African American fire company in Charleston dating back to 1861. The last is a sign from a Washington, DC Community Center, established in 1988 for pregnant Latino immigrants. The objects tell a narrative centered around struggles against oppression, painting American history as an often-suppressed story.
This seems to set the tone for how curators introduce the institution and America itself, utilizing elements that might create a more condemning first impression.
Contrasting Concepts
Upon entering the museum through the mall side, you’ll encounter a large display window with a red banner stating, “Fight the virus, not the people,” accompanied by a Cantonese script. Above this banner, smaller signs implore viewers to “Stop Asian Hatred,” “Stop Racism,” and “We Want Justice.”
This banner references a movement in San Francisco’s Chinatown following the Covid-19 outbreak, where the community felt targeted. The curator expresses regret that “Asian Americans have frequently been scapegoated and subjected to violence in the past.”
So, visitors from various places are greeted with messages emphasizing racial danger in America. Even in affluent cities like San Francisco, Asian Americans face risks. This exhibition conveys the precarious position of certain ethnic groups in a society influenced by racism.
Continuing on, the 2020 Smithsonian National Youth Summit centered on “teen resistance to systemic racism,” while the 2021 theme shifted to “gender equity.” The museum’s education page offers resources to address and nurture more accurate narratives around immigration, emphasizing a revision of the historically narrow stories typically told.
- “Race is a social construct.”
- “Discussions around national identity, security, and patriotism have historically been aimed at various groups at different times in the U.S.”
- “Laws and policies have been established to either limit or encourage transitions, often excluding certain populations.”
- “Cultural diversity in the United States shares similarities with other post-colonial societies but is also unique in significant ways.”
The layout of these themes is also strikingly gentle. Security discussions are intertwined with various reasons, beyond just the persecution of marginalized groups. Large exhibits continually remind visitors about past injustices. In the Revolutionary War section, there’s a quote from a liberated black writer from 1774 directed at independence supporters.
A short distance away, we’re told that celebrating America’s founding may be problematic since the revolutionary promises weren’t fulfilled for everyone, particularly women who had minimal political rights. This narrative leads to a deeper dive into issues of slavery and 19th-century religious dynamics.
Despite the museum containing several remarkable exhibits, including depictions of soldiers’ daunting conditions and notable first ladies’ dresses, it seems somewhat overloaded with identity-focused narratives. Even discussing the celebrated Broadway hit “Hamilton” can’t escape this framework of identity.
“Become Us” presents an alternative narrative, shifting focus from tales of American exceptionalism and greatness to consider unkept promises and issues of inequality. While the curators might argue they are realists rather than relativists, there’s a definite assertion of truths in their storytelling approach.
Indeed, the National Museum has a commendable mission, akin to military museums showcasing how soldiers maintain our safety. Here, curators are responsible for preserving cultural wealth.
The trend of filling public spaces with historical narratives is a relatively new development. However, those in academia have experienced shifts in this direction for some time. Over recent decades, there’s been a notable change in how the humanities are viewed as newer generations of professors and curators bring different perspectives to the forefront.
Unfortunately, this shift has sparked resistance. A significant portion of museum and educational leaders appears resistant to alternative viewpoints, particularly those that might present a more favorable take on American history. Dissenting opinions risk being dismissed as naïve or worse.
The Responsibility of the State
Yet, I think it’s essential for the National Museum to present a balanced view of the nation, fostering feelings of pride and gratitude. Ideally, visitors should walk away with a sense of warmth related to their country. This tricky blend of resentment and sentiment, however, seems to prevail in how many believe American history should be approached.
Former President Trump emphasized this notion in his July 4, 2020, speech at Mount Rushmore, stating, “Every American heart should swell with pride.” He framed 1776 as a pivotal moment in the “unstopping march of freedom,” linking recent unrest to a tide of indoctrination within cultural institutions.
“Our children are taught to hate their country in school and believe that the men and women who built it are villains, not heroes…”
Trump’s response to these trends was not just a counter-argument but a series of affirmations listing American icons and their contributions. These elements surely deserve incorporation into the Smithsonian’s collection.
While the museum displays some of these iconic figures, others might seem to undermine or dismiss their significance. The overall presentation can feel at odds with this narrative of American pride and achievement.
Ultimately, there’s a sense that America’s miraculous story risks being overshadowed in the quest to highlight its flaws and contradictions.
If citizens lack pride and dedication to their nation, societal progress falters. People desire to believe in the virtue of their homeland, yet histories of shame can diminish that conviction. The interplay of cultural critiques might play a role in appreciating this shift.
While the National Museum holds an admirable purpose, it stands parallel to military institutions in preserving the essence of national identity. If directives from the President could push the Smithsonian to celebrate America’s greatness, it would likely face significant backlash.
Yet people could embrace this approach. After all, something positive could emerge from highlighting the incredible stories embedded within America’s past.
