Throughout this semester, I have learned a lot about what it means to be a public historian and the different ways in which to best serve the community we represent. The book that reached out to me the most was Beyond Preservation: Using Public History to Revitalize Inner Cities by Andrew Hurley, a professor that I have worked under during my time at UMSL. The central argument of Hurley’s book is that public historians can best improve the connections, representation, and development of local histories by engaging the very community on a grass-roots level that they are trying to represent. Rather than looking from the top down, Hurley argues that the biggest contributions come from the bottom up; the best and only way to build direct empathy is to start with the foundation of the community.
Hurley carefully articulates his argument by taking a close look at North Saint Louis and other inner-city projects that have been successful by participating in grassroots efforts. In Saint Louis, Hurley explains the long and complex history of impoverished neighborhoods that have resulted in racial discord, conflicting perspectives of the past, violent crime, and the lack of government support. These issues are real and intense, and a lot of historians work hard to figure out ways to address them all. However, Hurley argues that rather than trying to solve everything, public historians should attempt to solve what they are able to and encourage the community to continue the work after the projects are finished. For example, by getting locals to gather their own material culture that represents their history, Hurley is directly tying the preservation of these neighborhoods to the personal lives of those who live there. By getting locals involved in community building, Hurley argues that the changes that are made are longer lasting, and these changes continue to occur after the public historians have moved on.
History has long served as a window into the problems of inner cities, highlighting issues rather than addressing them. By following Hurley’s advice, public historians can make actual, lasting changes rather than simple commentary or reporting. Hurley points out that there is a desire in local communities to make changes by participating in public history projects. When looking at Saint Louis, Hurley shows that local communities in impoverished neighborhoods were more than happy to engage in the preservation of their historic landscapes, adding meaning and empathy in an official capacity. When reaching out to locals to gather oral histories, Hurley found that there were far more people who wanted to contribute to the project than expected. By doing this they are forming an intense connection with the tangible world around them, tying the success and improvement of these neighborhoods to their own lives. It is for this reason, according to Hurley, that changes that are made this way tend to last and encourage future developments. Rather than simply preserving local history, we as public historians must celebrate it and encourage local communities to celebrate it with us.
After reading this book I realized that I have an opportunity to make these changes in my own career. Currently, I work as a graduate teacher’s assistant at UMSL where I teach intro-level history courses to new students. Before graduate school, I had worked as a supplemental instructor for history and a tutor, so I felt confident that I have the qualifications to help others. The issue, however, is that I was only worried about how students were doing in the class, and how they understood the material. This book has made me realize that I need to encourage my students to make direct connections with the material—their own history—in order to better foster interest in the field. So far in my career as an instructor, I have tried to get students interested in the material and encourage them to develop critical thinking skills, but I haven’t gone beyond that. Now that I have seen just how effective grassroots, local efforts are in celebrating history I now know that I want to try and incorporate it into my own work. I now know that I need to encourage them to make their own connections and interests to get the most out of their experience with history.
Rather than simply looking at the course materials, I want my students to feel the same intense passion I have for public history. I want them to find their own area of interest and refine that as they continue their education and professional lives. According to Hurley, in order to do this, I need to get them to start small, within their own communities so they can build their own empathy with history. By doing this, not only am I helping them in the moment, but I hope that I can foster a desire to continue working within their communities, even if it isn’t within the field of history. For too long I have limited my scope on history, and now I realize—thanks to Hurley—that I need to use history as a foundation to encourage local participation in order to foster change. Even if they move away from history, my hope is that by having an experience with local history these students will continue to work to improve their own neighborhoods like those that Hurley examined in North Saint Louis.
Hurley has helped me to open my eyes and broaden my horizons as both an instructor and an author. Rather than limiting my own professional work to history, I should extend my passion and interest to the interests of my students so that I can at least attempt to make permanent changes for them. Instead of simply focusing on classroom materials and grades, I want to have my students leave the class with a newfound sense of confidence and involvement within their communities. While I am nervous about just how to go about this, I know that as long as I can encourage my students to go beyond the classroom and to engage with their own communities by forming empathetic connections and long-lasting commitment to improvements, then I am following in Hurley’s footsteps.

Leave a comment