Kevn, I just finished listening to the interview. It is great. You and Dr. Murray are addressing what I think are among the key questions facing anyone in the preservation, public history, public archaeology, cultural resource management fields. How much is enough and how accurate do you need any representation to be. How much is enough …
Kevn, I just finished listening to the interview. It is great. You and Dr. Murray are addressing what I think are among the key questions facing anyone in the preservation, public history, public archaeology, cultural resource management fields. How much is enough and how accurate do you need any representation to be. How much is enough referrs to how much of the battlefield do we need to preserve (maybe also how many Civil War battlefields do we need to preserve) and for those that we do preserve, whether all or a few, how authentic does that preservation need to be. Is it enough to have signage over looking the Beaver ponds along PlumRun that say-here is an image of how what you are looking at appeared on July 1-3,1863. Or, do we have an obligation to restore the site to what it actually looked like, as closely as we can. I tend to lean toward restoration but clearly not everyone does. The let nature take its course argument has appeal. This is a debate, specifically about the PlumRun Beavers, and about the nature of preservation and memorization in general, that I don't see going away any time soon.
Kevn, I just finished listening to the interview. It is great. You and Dr. Murray are addressing what I think are among the key questions facing anyone in the preservation, public history, public archaeology, cultural resource management fields. How much is enough and how accurate do you need any representation to be. How much is enough referrs to how much of the battlefield do we need to preserve (maybe also how many Civil War battlefields do we need to preserve) and for those that we do preserve, whether all or a few, how authentic does that preservation need to be. Is it enough to have signage over looking the Beaver ponds along PlumRun that say-here is an image of how what you are looking at appeared on July 1-3,1863. Or, do we have an obligation to restore the site to what it actually looked like, as closely as we can. I tend to lean toward restoration but clearly not everyone does. The let nature take its course argument has appeal. This is a debate, specifically about the PlumRun Beavers, and about the nature of preservation and memorization in general, that I don't see going away any time soon.
Anyway great interview.
Thanks for the feedback, Michael. Glad to hear that you enjoyed the discussion.