Friday September 25th as a class we all went to the Ronald Reagan Library and we seen many different artifacts from his presidency. It was our job to determine what was trying to be said and weather it was being interpreted correctly.
For the first item in the collection, I had pick the Love letters Reagan had wrote to his wife while they were married. I had decided to pick these particular letters
because the museum had presented himself well as them both to be a romantic couple almost like the ideal couple. That although the two were still married that they loved each other as if they are still first time loves all throughout their marriage. It’s almost like I and others would want and strive to have a marriage like there’s. These particular set of letters do not relate entirely to his time in office, however these do relate to his life before and throughout his presidential term.
The second item in the collection, was not so much something from Reagan himself but from his wife. I had picked the showcase of Mrs. Reagan’s “Just Say No!” campaign to stop the consumption of drugs in young kids. I had pick this particular showcase as well as picked something Mrs. Reagan had done because the president I believe is only as good as his first-lady. According to the museum she seems to be on the same level as he. The museum presents the two of them as a super strong couple being able to accomplish almost anything, as if they are the power couple. Once again this collection doesn’t directly represent Reagan and his presidency, however it does show and represent just what type of movements and actions both him and his wife was taking to fix matters needed to be fixed.
The third item in the collection had been the Get Well Canes people had sent to the president as he was recovering from the shot he had taken. I had picked these particular items because just from the sheer fact that Reagan was able to take a bullet and almost come off unscathed is remarkable. That is what I believe exactly how the museum had wanted to painted him. They had painted him like
as if he was a superhuman or a war hero who just came back from battle. They present him like as if he could overcome anything and could do anything. I just found it really interesting the many different canes were sent to him because they weren’t like just the basic ones they were all like decorative and unique. The timeline in which this happened was actually during his presidency in 1981, where the shooter was caught moments after the shots being fired and was identified as John Hinckley Jr.
The fourth item I had chosen to further look in depth was a map on The Geographical Election of Ronald Regan in 1984. I had decided to pick this specific map because I found it really interesting the way the museum had decided to interpret it. Although Reagan was identified as a Republican and the Republican party is always associated with the color red, however on the map he is identified with the color blue. Which blue is commonly associated with the Democratic party, Although politics should not be about the most likeable the Democrats are considered more the a party for the common man. Thus being I think the museum had purposely chosen the color blue not only to maybe fool some that aren’t aware of his party affiliation, but also the chose the color blue to present more of a calmer state of mind and a likable state.
The last and final depiction I had decided to pick was a statue of Reagan and one of his constituents conducting a meeting. I had decided to pick this depiction of him conducting the meeting because the way the statues are depicted it is like the
two shown are having a complex and intellectual conversation. Shown by both the hand motions and the way the constituent is pondering his request the conversation seems to be going well. The funny thing about it all is that the museum decides to have the statues set up like that but not more than like ten feet away the actual picture of the event is shown and the two are having a casual conversation. The statues are being shown to have more complexity and depth then what there was, they try to present the President as if he’s some type of philosopher as he gives his “great” ideas.
Now the way in which the curator had decided to form all these exhibits and articles can almost be perceived as a lie, a lie in the sense that it is extending the truth way more than it should. Take for example upon me walking through the museum, knowing nothing of Reagan, I was personally charmed by everything that was depicted. I sincerely felt that he was a very well rounded individual and that I should get off my butt and do something with myself. Now had it not been for my professor explaining just what exactly is the Library’s motives and what they were doing I would have fallen into the trap and believe he was almost like a God.
That is not to say that I don’t think he was a great person I do not know enough about him to formulate an opinion of him. I just couldn’t help but to look at all the young kids that would walk past me as they are in such amazement while they stare at Reagan. I have just one concern about it all, people especially young children should be able to formulate their own thoughts on subjects in which is
presented to them and decided what is right and wrong. Now although this might not been as server of a situation but take a hypothetical situation. Take into account if there was a Nazi Germany museum and they was depicting how great fascism was. If children go into it all blindly they would start to believe Nazism was actually good. Then we would have all these young people falling into a life in which might not be ideal.
As a whole what we should do before walking to facilities such as these is search and so a little of digging around and have a sort of background information that way when walking to a museum we know what we are looking at. Then when stumbling upon some thing in which we might not know if its factual we should when we get a chance dig further into the object and determine the validity of such objects.
That is why I believe it is always our responsibility not only as people but as a society that we try to represent information and ideas in the most non bias way as possible that way people and individuals would be able to formulate their own ideas when coming up to places such as these. For that these places always tell a one sides story in which they believe is the right one and we’re suppose to just accept it for what it is. When we go to museums what we really should be doing is digging and looking for what is factual and what is not don’t just simply believe blindly.
My capstone project will be focused on non-native invasive species on Santa Rosa Island. There are many invasive species on the island, most of which get dropped there as seeds from visitors shoes or gear and will often take root near Ports of Entry. These invasive species then compete with natives for space and nutrients to thrive, diminishing the natives populations greatly. I will work on creating a Plant Identification Chart for others to easily identify invasive species. I will also catalog plants using a GPS unit to map out a 20m zone around Ports of Entry as well as sample 500m transects along dirt roads and trails to see how much coverage invasive species are taking up. Ultimately the goal of this project will be to effectively map out the locations of these invasive species and create a management plan to potentially begin restoration. I hypothesize that invasive species will higher in coverage near Ports of Entry than Dirt Roads and Trails further inland.
