Natural History Museum
Yesterday, we as a class walked through the history of LA. I personally learned a lot about the Tongva, the Mexican Perspective, the vibrancy of LA, and film production. It is interesting how we related Hollywood to be the jumpstart of LA and how the walkthrough emphasized the film industry. Therefore, I surprisingly found many connections between our tourists' stereotypical view of LA and the Natural History Museum's LA section. I also find it interesting that many stereotypical ideas of LA from our perspective were not shown in the museum. Feel free to share what you found interesting and emphasize sections and topics that specifically relate to what we have been discussing in class.
I really enjoyed the walk through the museum and agree that some stereotypes were emphasized more than others. Focusing on more recent years, I found it interesting how a very large focal point of the past 75 years has been media, more specifically Hollywood/the film industry. A couple of the artifacts that stood out to me include the pathé camera, Walt Disney’s Animation stand, and the car with the screen playing behind it. I think that a large part of what made Hollywood so successful was the “magic” behind it. A lot of the special effects like animation and filming techniques really wowed audiences, so I think that played a big role in its development.
ReplyDeleteHowever, Hollywood, as interesting as it is, was not my favorite part of the museum. The part I enjoyed the most happened to be at the very end of the exhibit, where we were able to listen to what LA meant to other people, as well as record what it meant to us. This one man described Los Angeles as a city of Lost Angels. He claimed that the reason we are so united and so divided at the same time is because we are all just struggling to find who we are. We are all trying to find our place in society and that that is what creates a sense of community. Additionally, a young woman states that the reason she appreciated LA so much is because of its cultural diversity. She references multiple ethnic enclaves and describes how each has impacted her life. Those were only 2 stored on a loop of about 10 on one speaker, and there were (I think) about 7 speakers total. None of the stories were the same, and that is what caught my attention. LA means something different to everyone who lives there, including all of us. This idea kind of goes back to the last 2 blog posts as well as how we have been discussing that there is no single story or dominant narrative. For me, this part of the museum really emphasized and solidified that point.
I personally enjoyed the altar. The amount of culture that was represented encapsulated what Los Angeles is. A diverse and inviting place where people of any race, gender, religion and sexual orientation can thrive in a community that supports each other. The diversity also provides the city with an immense amount of different backgrounds and perspectives; as a result, the city itself has its own personality of sorts with a melting pot of different cultures. I think that the variety of different cultures reinforces the idea of "many narratives" rather than the "dominant narrative."
ReplyDeleteI think it’s interesting that you mention that while we were correct in some senses in that we chose the introduction of Hollywood as the climax in the history of Los Angeles because of its prevalence in the Natural History Museum’s exhibit, there is also so much more making up this city’s long and storied history. In the end, that’s what makes Los Angeles so special - that it’s not a city made up of one particular thing and relying on one particular industry, but rather a city made up of all the different stories within it and of what its diversity makes it.
ReplyDeleteOn that note, I would have to say that the most special part of the exhibition for me was the mural at the end. Not only did it show the things that we might think of as the “stereotypical” Los Angeles - the movies, the tourism, the traffic - but it showed the smaller stories in between - the ones, again, that make Los Angeles what it is. The mural didn’t shy away from showing the difficult parts of this city’s history and attempted to include in all forms possible the diversity that makes up the city.
I found it interesting that the Natural History Museum's exhibit did not include the LA Riot, as it is such a big part of LA' s history. However, I did like how the museum included an exhibit about the Chinese massacre, as I found it important to include. I also enjoyed the altar, as when I watched the video at the end of the exhibit, I found that they drew inspiration from a multitude of minorities in LA. For instance, the creators of the altar visited a man in China town who talked about how his piece in the altar was related to Taoism, and I enjoyed learning about the store in Little Tokyo that was around for more than 100 years, but had to deal with Japanese interment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Lux observed. Los Angles was not built on one particular culture, story, or perspective but rather many different ones. Throughout the exhibit, I often found each display showcased a particular isolated event in L.A. history that was either part of a singular culture, story, or perspective. However, the Ofrenda at the end of the exhibit seemed to be a columniation of each isolated event which illustrated L.A.'s diverse qualities. There were instances of many different races, foods, traditions, customs, and so much more all in one piece. I found the progression of this exhibit quite different from anything I had ever experienced before. I felt as though it was intentionally set up to illustrate a steady progression of Los Angeles's constantly changing culture. I felt as though I was able to witness the over 200-year creation of what I know is my city.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to what Lux and Harry said, I think that it was interesting how our class gravitated towards Hollywood as the peak/climax of LA's history, when, in reality, there are so many moments and people and movements in LA that have contributed to LA's history and existence today. I sort of see a connection between the activity we did of naming stereotypes in LA with the activity where we all chose Hollywood as the climax of the "LA story" in that for both of those activities, we, as a class, were not using our own understandings or experiences in LA to shape our stories about LA, rather we let other people's perceptions and ideas about LA dominate what we know to be true through our own experiences...which is so weird that we did that.
ReplyDeleteOne aspect of the exhibit that I've been thinking a lot about since we left was the section near the end where you could sit and listen to other people's stories about LA or record your own. I'm interested in the contrast between that section and the rest of the exhibit. It felt to me that up until that last section of the exhibit the history of LA was being told to us as viewers by a carefully curated chronological layout- that there was more of a sense of "this is what happened" than "this is my story." I'm interested in how oral histories , like the stories of people I listened to in the last room of the exhibit, or the stories of people interviewed in Twilight: Los Angeles, can tell history in ways that simply researching an event, time period, or person cannot. I'd be curious to see what each of our own oral histories of LA sounds like and how, if at all, the story of our experiences growing up in LA would be different from simply looking at LA from a distance in the 17 years we've all lived here.
Similar to what Sophie said, I think people are attracted to Hollywood because of its "magic". I feel that the exhibit showed Hollywood's golden age in great detail but focused on other moments that shaped Los Angeles significantly less.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite part of the museum was the alter because it focused on many narratives instead of just one. The alter showed so many different cultures that are present in Los Angeles, and I believe that most people could relate to at least one thing in the alter. I feel that the alter shows the actual storylines of Los Angeles and not the stereotypical story of Hollywood and how it shaped Los Angeles.
I was most drawn to elements narrating the environmental history of Los Angeles. The exhibit highlighted the history of water and natural resources across time periods. I found the prominent display of the grizzly bear interesting; as I entered the main exhibit, I first noticed the stature of the bear and wondered about its history and relation to our history and founding. As my group discussed in our slideshow, we interpreted the bear as a symbol of colonial predation on minority groups; just as settlers hunted California grizzlies to extinction, Spanish colonizers attempted to eradicate indigenous and minority culture. In many ways, Angelenos' treatment of our environment mirrors our treatment of each other. Just as immigration, climate, freeways, and Hollywood play an integral role in the Angeleno identity, so does our environment.
ReplyDeleteFor me, I did not see Hollywood as the focal point of the exhibition. Rather, I walked out with an understanding of the history of L.A. as a whole with no clear exposition, climax, and resolution. One of my favorite parts was the section where you could listen to other's stories as well as record your own. I found this very incredibly eye opening and a perfect end to the exhibition; in a way it humanized the history that we had just witnessed. I remember someone saying "L.A. absolutely chaotic, and I love it. L.A. is my home." This stuck with me, and I think it is something we can all resonate with. I also enjoyed the room with the mural. I think it perfectly encompassed the emotion, loss, victory, and chaos of L.A.'s history from all perspectives.
ReplyDeleteI personally never thought that Hollywood was the peak of the Los Angeles story. I honestly don't think that there has been any sort of climax or peak yet. I remember in class how we all sort of gravitated toward Hollywood being this sort of defining moment in the history of LA. However, I think Hollywood is part of our foundation and our background. We keep talking about this "danger of a single story/narrative," and yet we were so quick to pick this very narrow and stereotypical idea of what LA is. I think it was interesting how we made it a point to explore all narratives when looking at LA's history, and no one brought up the idea that maybe LA's story is all of our own stories put together.
ReplyDeleteI know plenty of people have said this already, but I really loved the altar at the end of the exhibit. It shows the many stories that go into the making of LA. Los Angeles takes pride in its diversity and embracing our differences, but in that, I think there is something to say about our likeness and togetherness as well. In describing the installation, artist Rosanna Esparza Ahrens said, "This altar is intended to honor Los Angeles's cultural and environmental diversity. It instills the idea that Los Angeles is an enduring pueblo." Her mother adds, "Our communities are not isolated, we need to acknowledge our similarities and the need for connections to make Los Angeles a more livable and just city."
ReplyDeleteAs we moved through the Los Angeles exhibit, I was also surprised by the emphasis on entertainment, especially the way it was laid out chronologically. I noticed that it only became a prominent feature of the exhibit from the 1940s onward, which made me wonder why the curators suddenly decided to focus on film history during this period. Earlier on, the exhibit highlighted a wider array of industries within Los Angeles, from the garment manufacturing industry to the city’s ports. After the 1940s, the exhibit focused on Hollywood and the suburbanization of the city. So, I also left with a question: after the industrial booms of the nineteenth and early twentieth century, was entertainment Los Angeles’ greatest export? What became of the legions of industrial workers highlighted earlier in the region, and how have those industries changed? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only around 18 out of every 1000 people in Los Angeles works in entertainment-related occupations. The exhibit’s focus on Hollywood seemed unbalanced, and I’d definitely be interested to know more about the industrial history of Los Angeles.
Like Coco, I didn't see Hollywood as the central part of the exhibit. I think that they did devote a section of the exhibit to the film industry because it had a large impact on the economy and culture of Los Angeles, but I saw it as just another one of the pieces of the larger story the exhibit was telling. I thought the exhibit was unique in that there was no single "climax" or focal point– the mural and altar pieces seemed sort of like a climax from my view, but only because they encapsulated the endless histories and cultures of Los Angeles, so no one story was spotlighted more than the other. I also didn't spend too much time in the Hollywood piece of the exhibit, though, so I'd love to hear more about how people thought it was overrepresented.
ReplyDeleteI found it very interesting that during our exercise in class of mapping the Los Angeles area and telling the story of Los Angeles, Hollywood was a major focal point. At the museum Hollywood was neither the peak nor the main focal point of the exhibit. It was fascinating to see that there was not one event or one location that contributed to the development of Los Angeles most. Similarly said by others, I don't think that the development or peak of LA was solely based off of Hollywood and I think the exhibit did a great job of including all the pieces that contributed to the evolvement of LA.
ReplyDeleteOut of the entire exhibit, I think my two favorite areas were the alter and the audio depicting LA stories from different individuals. The alter did a beautiful job involving all cultures and bringing them together. It's vibrant color caught my eye from afar and then as I got closer I was amazed to see all the different elements that were different be incorporated together beautifully. I also loved the different stories told my people who saw LA through a different lens. I thought it was a really interesting way for people to find out how people feel about LA in this day and age.
Becoming Los Angeles, a permanent exhibit in the Natural History Museum, featured a variety of cultural artifacts, perspectives, and values that shaped modern day Los Angeles. I was interested in the rich automobile and film industries that have contributed to the city I know and love today. Personally I would not have listed the aforementioned industries when asked about LA's history, so it was important to broaden my perspective of LA history. I was also interested to see the relation between historical artifacts and how they related to the film industry. For example the weapons and gold mining memorabilia that are typically featured in old westerns. Building off of what Harry said I think the altar was an excellent culmination of some of LA's many cultures. I also enjoyed seeing many cultures included in a traditionally hispanic tradition.
ReplyDelete