Opening the Archive and Fighting Politicized Memory

     This week, my group spent time finalizing our case selections and writing labels for the artifacts that needed descriptions. While writing labels, I found myself reflecting further on each artifact and asking myself how a viewer might interpret them. This process forced me to look through the eyes of my audience and think about how much the artifacts speak for themselves. For example, newspaper articles with eye-catching headlines are fairly straightforward, and we felt that adding our own descriptions could take away from the historical value of the artifacts. The images, on the other hand, required descriptions since the average viewer would not be as familiar with the history of women at Kenyon and the people in the photos as we did - simply because most people viewing our case will not have spent time in the archives learning about the topic. It was difficult to walk the line between providing sufficient descriptions so that the viewers could understand what they would be looking at while also holding space for them to form their own opinions about the material. Interestingly, the challenge of viewing our case from an outsider's perspective brought me joy, for I could imagine the impact that the artifacts we brought to the canon might have on our audiences. 

    In Chapter 2 of The Struggle for the People's King, Hajar Yazdiha investigates how collective memory can be used as a strategic tool in political battles. Depending on political leaning, race, class, gender, etc., people have different interpretations of the meanings behind collective memories. This can lead to conflict between groups, as we see in the implementation of MLK's memory for both white conservative Christian groups and civil rights groups. While both sides relate in their use of MLK to appeal to audiences and spread their message, they tell vastly different stories of who he was and what he stood for. Yazdiha argues that power systems entrenched in our society determine which interpretations of collective memories are broadly accepted and which are dismissed. In this case, a whitewashed version of MLK's legacy has persisted due to the power held by the dominant (white, Christian) groups who push that narrative.

    The arguments that Yazdiha proposes about systems of power and collective memory relate to how Kenyon presents its history in an attempt to create a positive collective memory. It is no secret that the administration and student body of Kenyon consisted completely of men until 1969; however, what the college has kept hidden in the archive is how female students were treated when they first arrived on campus. Kenyon's administration has the power to control which aspects of its history are shown to the public and which are kept hidden, ultimately controlling the historical narrative that turns into collective memory. By failing to address the mistreatment of female students in the past, the college is failing female students of the present. As Yazdiha states, "strategic linkages to the past are interrelated and have consequences for each other" (40). The consequences of the college's assembling of a collective memory that does not include the struggles of female students could include pushback from the community if they learn the truth of the college's history. In celebrating its bicentennial, Kenyon has the opportunity to circle back to and add to the narrative that it has created, bringing to light more information about the less positive aspects of its history. Our display case is one example of how the collective memory can be broadened to work against male-dominated power systems in place at the college by giving a look into the lives of female students of the past who paved the way for Kenyon students today. 

Yazdiha, Hajar. The Struggle for the People's King: How Politics Transforms the Memory of the Civil Rights Movement. Princeton University Press, 2023.