Need a reading response for each of the documents attached, no outside references needed, just do a response in 250 words for each chapter. I need this assignment to be completed by September 18, 2023 no later than 6 PM my time.CHAPT Collecting Hi t y collections preservation archives built environment National Register of Historic Places vernacular Gans-Huxtable debate wonder rooms/cabinets of curiosity Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) material culture Antiquities Act of 1906 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) repatriation accession and deaccession PROFESSIONALS WORKING IN museums, historic sites, libraries, archives, and his-toric preservation have to think about what to collect, preserve, or archive. While these terms can have multiple meanings, collections often refers to three-dimensional objects like those in museums; preservation refers to buildings, structures, and landscapes; and archives refers to two-dimensional paper records. While at times we will reference these distinctions in this chapter, we will also talk about "collections" as a term that encom- passes all three kinds ofitems as we explore a common set of questions that public historians face as they seek to build and maintain a wide variety of collections. In this broader sense, collections can include textual documents, artifacts, and even landscapes, such as groves of trees or battlefields. As an example of how diverse collections can be, consider the historic Reeder Citrus Ranch in Montclair, California. This site is most visible as a preserved historic house, but it is also an excellent representation of the small family-owned citrus ranches that dominated the inland regions of Southern California throughout the first half of the twentieth century. The collections that accompany the historic house include the outbuildings, farm equip- ment, furniture, and extensive paper collection of business records and documents, as well as the family's personal effects, photographs, and period appliances. The grounds, historic trees, and orchard round out the collection. Collections management challenges include A 57 h Montclair, California. Courtesy of the G . ·c Reeder Citrus Ra nc , eorge C h41 Hrston . • Photograp • • H ·tage Foundation. and Hazel H. Reeder err h er records, as well as historically co h fi niture, t e pap di . rrect a t . n of the house, t e ur . the orchard. The versity of the collecti· nd preserva 10 h • t us trees in on . d - tandard care for t e c1 r all historic homes that also struggle with s at in ustry s . sual for srn rneag R de r Citrus Ranch is not unu h li'ance on volunteers. Even though most f er ee 1 ff, and a eavy re . . • o thi operating budgets, srnal sta ' . d maJ·or institutions, it is important to keep in • s al . h 1 ge collections an h h • llltnd chapter de s wit ar bli h' storians work s are muc more m commo • . . f 1 s where pu c 1 n With that the maJonty o p ace h h 'th large national museums. d C' rrus Rane t an w1 the historic Ree er 1 al' . {collecting is that it is impossible to hold on to h fu d ental re ities o every, One oft e n am every document, material object, structure, or land . Kn • that we cannot save scape thing. owing k hoices about what we keep and what we do not. Befor . res that we must ma e c b li h • • e an reqw d archived someone has to e eve t e item is worth sa • item is collected, preserve ' or . . • f h' • • ving. d . that the item or the lives it represents is o istoncal importa Someone has to etermme . . • • • nee. al 11 . good place to start thinking about the dec1s10n-making pro Person co ections are a . . cess h . r. ssi'onal collecting We all make dec1S1ons every day about what we will t at goes mto pro1e • save, what we will toss, what we will collect, and what we no longer need. People who cannot make these choices may be classified as having a mental disorder and are featured on 1he Learning Channel's reality television program Hoarding: Buried Alive. How do we decide what photos to erase from our phones? Do we create a physical archive of letters, cards, and images, or is everything safe in a digital format? Do we keep evidence of our daily lives, or only the extraordinary moments? What would historians be able to discern about our lives based solely on the scraps and artifacts we have collected and saved over our lives? How accurately would it reflect our lives? Who will be able to access S8 A CHAPTER 4 that material a century fro~ now? Where could interviews with family member , friend neighbors, coworkers, or W:th ourselves fill in the gaps left by the material or digital record of ourselves: a.rl ~,eckers 1931 American Historical Association Address, "Everyman Bis Own Historian, .show~ u~ that these questions are not new. Becker suggested that the 5Jci]ls that people use m their lives are the same skills as those of the historian. We all hav imperfect memor.ies. Be~ker asked his audience how they would ever remember how much coal they had delivered m the past to determine how much they would need in the future. Referencing scraps _of paper, receipts, ledger books, and other forms of primary evidence, we can reconstruct a history of our own lives in ways that help us make meaning of the past in ways that are useful in the present. Certain assum~tion_s drive what we save personally and what professionals and society in general deem historically valuable. Should institutions keep objects that represent the ordinary daily lives of individuals, or only the extraordinary achievements of our society as a whole? Are the lives of illiterate workers, children, or prisoners worthy of historical inquiry, or do museums care more about the accomplishments of the rich and famous, the powerful and elite? If public historians have to choose what to collect' and what will be lost to the dustbin of history, how are we to determine which is which? Debating What to Keep from the Past Debates about what deserves to be saved consume the field of historic preservation. Qyite clearly it would be impossible, impractical, and even undesirable to preserve every old building or every aspect of the built environment (the man-made surroundings that serve human needs, including things like buildings, bridges, parks, cemeteries, and transportation infrastructure) just because it might be old. City planners and historic preservationists have to agree on clear criteria for what should be saved and what can be demolished to make room for new construction. But what is worth saving? The US federal government and many state governments have established criteria for having a property listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The property must be more than fifty years old and fit one or more of the following criteria: 1) associated with events that have made a significant con- tribution to the broad patterns of our history; or 2) associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; or 3) embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack in- dividual distinction; or 4) have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Trends in historic preservation follow other trends in history. The National Register's criteria for listing properties gives preference to the work of a master architect or a build- ing with high artistic value, and narrow interpretations of the definition of "significant" in their two criteria have limited preservation efforts for vernacular, or ordinary, archi- tecture and landscapes in the past. Mansions associated with the rich and powerful stand for centuries, while sweatshops and tenements associated with the laboring classes are demolished for new development. COLLECTING HISTORY 59 L J G accu cd the Landmarks Pr r . . l • t 1 {erbcrt • an l h h Vat10 ] 1975 urban c;oeto og1 . d . . n to pr crve on y t e omc of th n o n ' b' • their ec1 JO h c r· 'ti . f ew York of 1a 10 • only the tructures t at repres n 1th .. mi ion o 1 • Pre erving t th "llq t·ons of famous architect5. h al past exaggerates affiuence and gr c elite, th er a I •distort t e re ' . an
If resources are limited, should those making prese,.,, . cf th • f sweats op a or. • vat1 e misery o . t the most exemplary samples of great architect en d . . ak choices to represen , Ure eas1ons m e that represent a broad spectrum of the citys history? Should piece' er Preserve structures bl' kn 1 d • • s cf ·1 bl t the public and interpreted for pu ic owe ge, or is it acceptabl history be avai a e O 'bl h e to . rve spaces that will never be access1 e to t e public? Wh spend public money to prese h ose . h uld b d as we work to preserve evidence of t e past? While the interests s o e serve . . re are no definitive answers to these questions, looking back on pa.st practices can help us better understand how these questions have been answered over time, and how these questions might be answered in the future. From Private Collections to Public Display Public access to historic structures preserved with public funds is a modem question, as his- torically there was no assumption that great examples of architecture, art, or material objects should be accessible. The world's greatest collections, for example, now housed at famous museums and accessible to the public for free or for a relatively reasonable fee were at first private collections. Before the fifteenth century, the word museum was used to describe groups of objects more so than the buildings that housed and exhibited the collections as we know them today. Collections that started as private enterprises were housed in rooms called "cabi- nets," which displayed "curiosities" of the natural world, science, or