One of the exhibits that I hope to create when I work in a museum is an exhibit on World War II in popular culture. The exhibit would mainly include films depicting the war, whether on the battlefield or on the home front. However, movies created after the event only scratch the surface of understanding the war. I would also include movies produced shortly before or during the war. While it is important to depict how people remember the war, I think it is equally essential to illustrate people’s thinking and feelings during the war. One can truly understand an event by knowing people’s thoughts and actions. One example of this is in the movie Casablanca (1942). There is a scene where some Nazi soldiers sing their national anthem loudly. The primarily French patrons of the club look on, terrified. However, Humphrey Bogart’s character allows the band to play the French national anthem. As they do this, the French patrons, including others, sing it proudly, eventually drowning out the soldiers.¹ This scene shows the mentality of the Allies in the war. They saw their numbers were more significant than the Axis, convincing them they could win. Including these films of the time would give visitors a greater understanding of the event rather than just learning from later films. I would also include digital storytelling in the exhibit. I would include a way for people to tell their stories about these objects and movies of popular culture depicting or from World War II on a website page for the exhibit. They can tell their stories or stories told to them by another family member or friend that center around a popular cultural object. People would have to create videos or audio to tell their stories. This could also be used in a classroom setting where a teacher could make it an assignment for students to create stories using the platform. Like Kelly Schrum says in “A Tale of Two Goldfish Bowls,” “DST challenged students to think in new ways, to ask questions, and to interrogate the sources and ideas they were reading, researching and developing.”² The teacher could have the students pick an object, research and analyze it, and then present their project using digital storytelling, further developing their historical thinking skills.

1. Casablanca, directed by Michael Curtiz, Warner Bros., 1943, 1 hr., 42 min, Video. ↩︎
2. Kelly Schrum, “A Tale of Two Goldfish Bowls . . . Or What’s Right with Digital Storytelling,” in Hacking the Academy: A Book Crowdsourced in One Week, ed. D. Cohen and T. Scheinfeldt (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2012), 89-97. ↩︎

I decided to watch The Monuments Men (2014) for the film review. It is one of my favorite films about the Second World War, but I have not watched it in a while. I chose this movie for the review because I wanted to watch it with a historical lens and think about how it could be used in a learning setting. The film was produced by Columbia Pictures with George Clooney (who stars in the movie) and Grant Heslou. Looking for information about the film, I found that it was based on The Monuments Men: Allied Heroes, Nazi Thieves and the Greatest Treasure Hunt in History (2009), written by Robert M. Edsel and Bret Witter. I watched the film using Amazon.

The film follows seven men who work in the arts and are tasked by the United States government with tracking down the art that the Nazis stole. They face difficulties and triumphs as they traverse the European continent, looking for these important cultural objects. This task presents one of the film’s central themes: preserving history, art, and culture. The film shows how these objects are essential to human history and how if they lose them, it destroys that history and culture. This theme plays along with another theme in the movie: the fight between good and evil (also a prevalent theme throughout many films). The film presents these men as heroes who are tracking down the objects that the Nazis steal. There are different moments during the film that present this theme. One particular scene shows Nazi soldiers burning the artwork after the war ends in Europe. The movie shows how what the Nazis are doing is wrong and, therefore, evil because it is crucial to preserve these cultural objects. This brings up the issue of historical accuracy. While based on a true story, of course, the rules of Hollywood influenced different moments in the movie. Some moments in films based on a true story are often played up to make it more enjoyable while removing some of the accuracy. George Clooney himself even brings this up. However, he does say they tried to make the movie as accurate as possible. In an interview for Entertainment Weekly, he states, “Listen, the good news is, 80 percent of the story is still completely true and accurate, and almost all of the scenes happened . . . We follow all the rules, we just made the characters more interesting, I think.”¹ While the main story is true with the elements about them searching for the art and the goals of the Nazis, they made changes to the characters to make them more interesting for audiences.

There are a couple of critical moments that play along with the major themes of the film. The first moment, which happened at 17:38, shows Claire, a French curator, coming home to find Nazi General Stahl waiting for her. He tells her that he found out that she is a part of the resistance along with her brother. As a threat, he informs her that they have taken her brother prisoner and that if she does not comply, the same will happen to her. He leaves, and Claire looks worried. This moment shows that struggle in the fight of good versus evil. While Claire is working to bring an end to the war and the atrocities the Nazis are committing, she and the audience is reminded that it is not easy and can be filled with heartache and fear. Another critical moment, at 1:13:38, is when the Monuments Men find where the art is hidden in different caves in Germany. This moment plays with both significant film themes, with a triumph in the fight against evil and the success in preserving these objects.

When considering how the film could be used in a teaching and learning environment, it would be essential to show it in conjunction with the book it is based on. This film shows a moment in World War II history that is rarely discussed. However, students would benefit from reading the book before watching the movie. I would want students to watch this film with a critical and historical lens and understand the advantages and disadvantages of historical films in terms of accuracy. Reading this book and other articles and texts about the event would give students the tools to do that. I would also ask them questions about accuracy and debate about the usefulness of historical films. With this, I want students to ask questions about the elements of the film and the choices in what the filmmakers chose to include and omit from the book.

1. “George Clooney talks ‘The Monuments Men’,” Entertainment Weekly, accessed June 24, 2024, https://ew.com/article/2013/08/12/george-clooney-monuments-men-2/. ↩︎

I am mostly done with the research for my project. Most of my research on propaganda in World War II era popular culture was completed during other projects. However, I still have some research to do. While I have researched the movies and comic books of that era, I still have to learn more about the radio programs, posters, and other forms of media during that time.  I also had to collect and decide on the different forms of images I wanted to include in the game. This is one major challenge I am encountering since I can make various choices. I want to choose the best possible images, which will require a little time and careful decisions. However, there is one image that I know I want to include in the game. The first issue of Captain America came out during the war, and the cover is an excellent example of how propaganda was used in these comic books. On the cover, the titular hero is shown punching Adolf Hitler in the face. I wanted to include this image for a couple of reasons. For one, it’s a very in-your-face image that can be an easy beginning question for the game. The image also has other propagandistic aspects that the game can point to and ask questions about. I hope that the historical information I included in the exhibit and on the website will help users answer whether it is the easiest or hardest question.

After reading this week’s selections, I returned to my initial project pitch and considered what I wanted museum visitors and students to get out of the game. One of the positives of using digital tools to promote historical thinking is giving students new ways to think through sources and challenge their thinking about history. In History in the Making, Ward discusses how most history teaching using textbooks was done to help promote patriotism in students. I feel that traditional exhibits work in the same way. These exhibits usually show a more stagnant, boring, and, most of the time, patriotic history. Using digital tools instead of these textbooks and traditional exhibits helps challenge how students and visitors think about history, especially challenging the idea of patriotism, which I hope my game will do. With this, I feel I must expand on my initial idea. My main focus for the project is to create a game focused on the propaganda in popular culture during World War II. In my pitch, I said I could include historical background information for people who want to learn more before playing the game. I did not prioritize that aspect because I expected my primary audience would be people visiting the physical exhibit that the game is connected to. However, after reading the selections, especially Narratives and Counternarratives, I realized that they, too, may need the background information to help them think historically about the propaganda in the pictures to complete the game. They might not remember everything they learned in the exhibit or need a refresher. The background information also challenges users’ preconceived notions about U.S. history they learned in school. It would also help teachers use it for their students to teach a more well-rounded history rather than the “stagnant” history from textbooks and allow them to broaden their historical thinking. While I thought about including the historical background information in my initial pitch, I now feel that it has to be included with the game and perhaps even expanded to give users the ability to think critically and use what they learned to play the game.

After reading the selections this week, I found a common link between most of them. One of the main elements of historical thinking that have remained at the heart of history teaching for decades is using textbooks in the classroom. In Lindamen, Dana, and Ward’s introduction to History Lessons, they state, “One of the few constants in history courses both in the U.S. and abroad is the use of textbooks to teach national history. These national histories are typically written by national authors with a national audience in mind, leading to a sort of insularity on any given historical topic.” Those textbooks are also seen as never-changing and contain set-in-stone facts, leading to problems with students retaining information or learning critical historical thinking skills. Ward in History in the Making states, “Young people . . . look at the subject of history as boring, mundane, and unnecessary. Part of the problem, I believe, is that many young people do not understand how history is researched and written about, nor do they see or understand the impact past decisions have on their lives today . . . All too often, I meet people who believe that history is written in stone and that it never changes.” Since textbooks are the primary tool used to teach history, students take what is said in those textbooks as set-in-stone facts. However, there are ways to change how these students think and learn about history, and this starts with the teachers themselves. Sam Wineburg, in his article Crazy for History,states, “Change will occur only by intervening at the policy level to ensure that those who teach history know it themselves.” Teachers cannot correctly teach history and historical thinking to their students because, according to Wineburg, “they lack adequate subject matter knowledge.” If the teachers have the proper knowledge and skills in historical thinking, their students will be able to build those skills for themselves. The digital realm has already provided opportunities for teachers to give their students those skills. Allison Robinson used digital tools to allow her students to develop and use their historical thinking skills. When redesigning her undergraduate course, she decided instead of a research paper to allow her students to work with digital tools and create a project using them. She “taught them to conduct original historical research using material culture with readings, class discussions, museum visits, object-handling experience, and office hour appointments. It was up to them to use primary and secondary source research to determine the historical significance of their objects.” The digital realm allowed these students to practice using historical thinking skills. Robinson believes the project helped her students develop and use their historical thinking skills. She states, “The class encouraged students to experiment with unfamiliar methodologies and new sources, challenging their historical thinking. They learned that critically engaging with their peers, historians, and the general public required creativity, careful research, and confidence in the final product.”

My initial ideas for the final project are something that I began working on last semester. In my Museum Studies class, I created a mock exhibit displaying World War II comic books depicting propaganda and its themes. One of the elements I wanted to include was an interactive game that visitors could play towards the end of the exhibit. It would be a top-down screen showing different pictures ranging from comic book scenes, movie stills, posters, etc. They would have to figure out the propaganda element in that picture and pick from a multiple choice. It would be a fun game for people and a way to test what they learned from the exhibit. However, not everyone can play the game on a hectic day at the museum. This is why I also want to make a digital version of the game on a website for those people who did not get a chance to play to have access. It is also an educational resource for teachers who might want to use it for their lessons. For that, I will include background historical information to prepare students before they play the game. Given the nature and controversy surrounding the topic, I think high schoolers would be the age range appropriate for the project. What I hope students and museum visitors gain from the game is an understanding of the history of propaganda in the United States within its popular culture.

After reading the selections and watching the videos, I realized that how I conducted historical research and analysis is the core of studying history. However, while it is a core part of history, it is not an easy concept to grasp. In his article, “Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts,” Sam Wineburg states, “Historical thinking, in its deepest forms, is neither a natural process nor something that springs automatically from psychological development . . . This is one of the reasons why it is much easier to learn names, dates, and stories than it is to change the fundamental structures that we use to grasp the meaning of the past.” This quote made me realize how important it is to teach historical thinking. It is not something that is innate. It is something that takes practice and skill to use critical thinking, analysis, and how to use and read historical sources. This realization made me wonder how I could apply these concepts to exhibits and resources for visitors. My thought process led me to three questions that I hope the future readings and assignments help me answer.

How can I effectively transfer the concepts and ideas from classroom teaching to the context of museum exhibits?

The readings and videos mainly focused on classroom settings rather than other areas, so I wonder how to apply and adapt those concepts in ways that would benefit museum visitors. I think that there would be a way to take lessons that can be used in a classroom setting and apply those to the exhibits that I would create, though I am not sure how to go about it. Based on the readings, I feel like there is not that much difference between the two settings. In the History Classrooms article from Sam Wineburg, studies on different classroom settings did not show much difference in students’ struggles in historical thinking. This makes me think there would be no difference when translated to museum settings and the ideas that I will learn in future readings will work in exhibits.

Can museum visitors gain historical thinking skills from exhibits alone?

From what I gathered from the readings and videos, historical thinking is something that is taught and learned. I wonder if this learning would be possible in a museum setting. How will visitors analyze, question, and interpret historical material in exhibits? I cannot assume every visitor already has those skills when walking into an exhibit. Based on the readings and videos, I believe the exhibit would have to apply the necessary materials to help visitors gain or increase those skills. Maybe it involves the labels included, different visual markers, interactive components, or a combination of all three.

How can museum visitors critically analyze historical information present in an exhibit?

Similar to the last question, I am not sure if visitors would necessarily be able to critically analyze historical information by just being told facts. Again, I feel that extra material, like interactive components, has to be provided to help spur that skill so visitors have an impactful visit.