Friday, August 31, 2007

War Museum: Morton MacMillan v Bercuson Bernier

The turning point that led to a commitment to rewrite a Canadian War Museum plaque to appease certain veterans -- the Wikipedification of the War Museum, it's being called -- seems to have been a Senate subcommittee report in June. The Senators were actually reluctant to meddle with the museum's text, but they did suggest the museum should consider alternatives. That seems to have spurred a reshuffling at the Museum's board, with advocates of surrender taking charge. Frederik Eaton became chair. Joe Guerts promptly resigned as executive director of the War Museum (see my earlier blog on Guerts below).

Part of the process that influenced the Senate subcommittee's recommendation was a commission to four historians to assess and report on the disputed text. The Senate report says the historians split two-two, all agreeing it was accurate but two feeling it should be changed due to "tone."

I'm always concerned by historians who profer expert advice and expect to remain secret. Every time a CBC historical program comes under attack and the CBC brass decide to fold up like a cheap suitcase, they declare they have consulted an expert historian, never named, to justify their surrender to pressure. The filmmakers never get a change to see or debate the opinion. (See my labels "Prairie Giant.")

If historical advice is expert, the expert should be prepared to stand on his or her expertise. Secret opinions, untestable, are not credible historical judgments.

So it's worth noting that the Senate report here identifies the four historians who examined the War Museum text: Serge Bernier (Department of National Defence), Desmond Morton (McGill), Margaret MacMillan (Oxford University) and David Bercuson (University of Calgary). Indeed, that is four experienced and credentialled historians, one actually working in a public museum.

Margaret MacMillan has been very public in condemning the change to the museum's text. I understand Desmond Morton has also publicly defended the integrity of the text as it stands. That would suggest the two experts who endorsed making the change were David Bercuson and Serge Bernier.
 
Follow @CmedMoore