Abstract

Preserving historic buildings can have many purposes, including honoring proud moments in our history as well as acknowledging and redressing shameful ones. The preservation of Antebellum buildings, buildings with an architectural style from the pre-Civil War era that often features symmetrical brick or white-washed façades and columns in a Greek revival style, has been as especially fraught issue. In the present work, we contribute to this conversation by examining the psychological costs of preserving Antebellum buildings such as restored or preserved Plantations. In two studies (Ns=166 and 165, respectively), Black participants rated Antebellum but not New American architecture more negatively than White participants. They reported liking Antebellum architecture less and feeling less welcome in it. Further, Black (but not White) participants spontaneously mentioned racism/slavery when viewing Antebellum architecture. Interestingly, this pattern was also found for modern-built Antebellum architecture. This suggests it is not Antebellum buildings per se but Antebellum architecture and the ideologies it evokes that may be problematic. Next, we examined potential moderators of this effect. In Study 3, Black participants (N=81) read about an Antebellum museum with one of two missions, one devoted to reconstructing the museum for historical accuracy, common to historical museums, and the other to addressing and informing visitors about the era’s slavery. Participants also saw pictures of either a predominantly White or Black Board of Visitors. We found that only in the addressing slavery condition with a predominantly Black board did these Black participants report liking and feeling welcome in the museum. Importantly, they felt that museum would have more influence from and be more empowering for the Black community. The present findings have implications for interventions aimed at increasing Black Americans’ engagement with and sense of ownership in public spaces associated with Antebellum architecture. They suggest that reclaiming—and not only redeeming—spaces with such histories is important.

Highlights

  • Preserving historic buildings can have many purposes, including honoring proud moments in our history as well as acknowledging and redressing shameful ones

  • Exploratory analyses using Tukey’s Studentized Range Test (“Tukey”) to determine which differences were significant and which controls for Type 1 experiment-wise error rates, revealed that Black participant did not feel less belonging in the Modern New American condition but did feel less belonging in the Antebellum conditions

  • Tukey tests revealed that Black participants did not feel less belonging in the Modern New American condition but did feel less belonging in the Antebellum conditions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Preserving historic buildings can have many purposes, including honoring proud moments in our history as well as acknowledging and redressing shameful ones. Opinions on what to do with Antebellum buildings and monuments range from burning down historical plantations and buildings (Young, 2019) to removing statues and markers (Broadwater, 2017; Durkin, 2018) to renaming them (Mattingly, 2018) to providing reparations for descendants of enslaved people (Hassan, 2019) to adding markers clarifying the nature of such buildings and monuments (Dimeo, 2017; cf., Allais et al, 2018; Upton, 2015) to replacing old monuments and markers with monuments that honor people who were enslaved or descended from enslaved people (Deppen, 2018; Finley, 2019; cf., Upton, 2015) This debate has found its way into academia. It conveys the relative devaluing of historic Black communities

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call