Belated essay for 10/9/12

   Glassberg gives a couple of reasons for the increase in the number of historical activities over the last few years. The first is that as cultural identities and sensitivities have increased over the last half century, so has the need for each group to find and preserve its own history. Glassberg also notes that towns and cities are increasingly more prone to dedicated portions of their budget to establishing and sustaining various historical institutions that will be likely to draw in revenue from tourists.
   To some extent, I think that we can point towards the technology boom of recent times for this increase in historical activities. I don't think we can claim that technology is solely responsible for this trend; people were looking for a past to associate themselves with long before the Internet became hugely popular, and even before historical documentaries and TV specials became commonplace. Still, the impact of resources such as the Internet can never be underestimated. I think that the difference between the before and after periods is that while historical places and institutions were always around, it is only in recent times that they been become easily accessible through technology sources. Presenting the past to people in the form of television or simply on a laptop screen makes it far easier for people to become interested in doing something like going to a museum or historic site. For example, in one of the chapters we read out of Public History, the author discussed how widely used the 9/11 remembrance site became. Being able to contribute to a virtual museum is easier than physically going to the museum with your memories and objects. It's also easier for people to form a connection and feel like they are a part of something by directly posting their thoughts to a blog where they can see the immediate responses of others than by contributing to an exhibit in a museum. A similar event that points towards the increasing prevalence of technology-based resources is the reaction to Ken Burns' "The Civil War" (or even some other of his documentaries). It seems like there was a much more widespread and active response to that series of videos than to say a series of exhibits.
   Simply put, I think that the reason that historical activities have increased is in large part due to the ways in which current technology engages people. However, today's technology, namely the Internet, practically enables anyone to be a historian themselves. While it might seem that this puts professionals in danger of loosing a career, it really doesn't have quite that impact. Historians will continue to be people who are guide the path that historical thought takes- that is a role which I think they will continue to have as long as there is an interest in the field. The difference in today's world (as well as in future), is that there will be historians who specialize in making historical topics available to people via the realm of video and Internet.