Karen Brundidge

Kelly Johnson

Professor Gretchen Schafft        

Anthropology of Memory, ANTH-640-001

December 1, 2010        

Frederick Douglass National Historic Site:

A Critical Analysis

 “Well the nation may forget, it may shut its eyes to the past, and frown upon any who may do otherwise, but the colored people of this country are bound to keep the past in lively memory till justice shall be done them.” -Frederick Douglass, 1888 (Blight 1161)

The Frederick Douglass National Historic Site is a place where one has the opportunity to view this historical figure’s home environment as well as a large portion of his actual possessions.  Frederick Douglass (        -         ), began his life as a slave. After escaping slavery and eventually becoming free, he became a great abolitionist and orator, publisher, government official and diplomat.  He amassed remarkable wealth for a black, ex-slave living in the 1800’s. His Cedar Hill home, located in the Anacostia area of Washington, DC, is where he lived during the last seventeen years of his life was acquired by the National Park Service (NPS) in 1962. Douglass lived during the most negative era in American history when humans were bought, sold, brutally treated and forced into labor for the financial benefit of others. This history, coupled with the fact that he spent his adult life fighting for the human rights, makes the FDNHS a place where this story should be told. His public and private life contained controversial episodes. Both are factors which make any remembrance of him open for various sub narratives.         The purpose of this paper is to problematize the interpretive presentation of  Frederick Douglass at the FDNHS. We will discuss how the memory of  Frederick Douglass is evoked throughout each of three sections of our study. After a brief explanation of the importance of historical memory to Frederick Douglass himself, we will take a critical look at the site where his life is memorialized. First, we will look at the process by which the home came to be owned by the National Park Service and how it was developed over the years. Second and most importantly, we will critically assess the current experience at the Frederick Douglass NHS house and visitor center. Finally, because we were fortunate to obtain draft plans for the refurbishment, we will also discuss the future plans in time for the 100th anniversary of Frederick Douglass’ birth.  As we observe the National Park Service’s presentation of the physical structure of the house, its contents, and the visitor center which was added in 1980. We will consider what is and is not at the museum and why or why not with a focus on the visitor’s experience at the site and how memory is used throughout.

Frederick Douglass was a man whose life was essentially defined by memory. As of result of recounting his former life as a slave in his three published autobiographical narratives, he was able achieve far beyond that which his tragic beginnings would seem to make feasible.  He became a highly desired speaker for abolitionist purposes based on the retelling of his memories of his life as a slave. He was “a creature of memory” and he understood that winning battles of  policy or justice in the present often required an effective use of the past and that blacks had a special need for a usable past. (Blight 1158) He asserted that the power of memory is to inform, to inspire and to compel action.  Sociologist, Jeffery K. Olick states that “images of the past are neither dictated by the past nor wholly invented in the present but result from an ongoing dialogue in which earlier images shape and constrain what can be done with them in successive presents.” ( Olick 264) Douglass understood that the historical memory of any transforming or controversial event emerges from cultural and political competition, from the choice to confront the past and to debate and manipulate its meaning. (Blight 1159) Development of the Frederick Douglass National Historic Site:

When Frederick Douglass died in 1895, legalistic errors in his will determined that the Cedar Hill property was to be sold with assets divided among Douglass’s heirs. His widow Helen Pitts Douglass, an abolitionist herself, who recognized the importance of preserving the memory of her late husband, bought out the children’s interests. Her goal was to “give a square of ground on which to erect a monument to the memory of Mr. Douglass” of its hoped for design she added, “It will not be to represent a slave or broken chains, but a monument to represent achievement and to be and inspiration for the colored people who come here to pay their loving tribute to his memory.” (Woods 17) Mrs. Douglass hoped to shape and control the memory of  her deceased husband both literally and figuratively by having a replica of a fully erect and dignified  figure. Such a monument was never erected on the grounds, but the house itself has become a memorial site.  It was her vision that it be so. “The house is to be kept as it is for a ‘memorial hall’ of the earliest efforts in the cause for freedom. The portraits of the earliest workers and martyrs in the great cause are here” she said in an interview by a Washington Post writer in 1897. Indeed Mrs. Douglass sought to tie his memory to other important figures in the abolitionist movement and even place her husband at the center of the movement.

When Mrs. Douglass died in 1903, she left the house to the Frederick Douglass Memorial and Historical Association. When that organization could not pay off debt associated with the house they turned it over to the National Association of Colored Women’s Clubs (NACWC), who raised enough money to pay off the loan in 1917. By 1961 the NACWC could no longer afford the upkeep of  the property and they offered to donate the home to the  United States. ( Hinds, 23) .  In 1962 the 87th Congress passed a bill to pay $25,000 for repairs at that time and the property was acquired by the park service and is still owned by the US government.

The difference between the reports and hearings leading up to these the bills passed just seven years apart is a demonstration of how the legacy and memory of Frederick Douglass is  used for present purposes. Records show that several speakers argued for this acquisition, and as a testament to the effectiveness of Douglass’s story, several pages are lifted from his slave narrative and placed in the report as justification for its inclusion in the United States Park System.(S2399) However, the property was allowed to deteriorate until 1969 when a bill was passed to “appropriate “not more that $450,000 to carry out the purposes of this act” which was to repair the building, construct a visitor center and restore the grounds.  

In the hearings for the 1969 bill Congressman Taylor, (NC) gave a speech about the life of Frederick Douglass and the importance of preserving this historic property. By then, the Voting Rights Act of 1964 had been enacted and the Civil Rights Movement was entering into a more militant stage. The language in the reports recalls Douglass in  more gentle terms, a man who “worked ‘through the system’ and not around it to achieve his objective”  in contrast with many African American  activists of the times who were openly fighting against the “system”.  The report mentions the cultural and educational benefits to refurbishment and that it will be a “first rate memorial to this outstanding American” (HR 5968: 2). During the hearing for the bill to establish the Frederick Douglass Home in 1969, Rev. Samuel K. Frazier, Jr. was more forceful;

The renovation of Cedar Hill “value will not be immediately determined but only as the  personal pride and dignity which the story of Frederick Douglass’ life will create in the lives of thousands of black children is manifested in future decades as civic pride and responsibility.  We have our white heroes and two astronauts who walked on the moon who have been added to the pantheon.  Frederick Douglass is a hero too, and we need black heroes.”

 The end of the turbulent decade of the 1960’s required that some positive attention be paid to black historical figures.

In 2003, when requesting funding for the most recent restoration completed in 2007, Speaker Dennis Hastert said:

“I Believe all Americans-from the rural plains to the inner cities-need to have a better appreciation for our nation’s history and particularly our country’s forefathers.  And on these grounds, Mr. Douglass showed that by believing in yourself, setting goals, and working hard-anyone can effect a permanent positive change for themselves and society….and he set his sights on making America a better place for all people particularly African Americans.”(Jet 34)

Hastert uses the memory of Douglass to an inclusive affect and his wording recalls the popular cultures self-help ethos and slogans found in many books during the early 2000’s. When Rev. James Coates spoke in support of restoring Cedar Hill in 1969 he said, “ Having one of the highest dropout rates in the city, the Anacostia area could profit greatly from the message of this man who endured pain and persecution to learn.” Similar to the way that Martin Luther King, Jr.’s name has been invoked in governmental hearings to prevent teen pregnancy, stop black on black violence, and promote school attendance (Polletta 211-215), Frederick Douglass’ memory is invoked to serve current purposes.

 In 1968, in preparation to request government funding for restoration, the National Park Service produced two extensive Historic Site Reports which detail the history, structure and entire contents of the Cedar Hill Property. (Toogood, Hinds) It is due to this research that the Frederick Douglass NHS is extremely accurate in its reproduction. The property underwent extensive renovations and was opened as the Frederick Douglass National Historic Site in 1972.  

The Visitor Experience:

The site attracts about 40,000 determined visitors per year compared with National Mall’s 25 million visitors per year. Due to its location, the Frederick Douglass NHS is not a monument that one happens upon because of  its proximity to other popular monuments in the nation’s capital. Its visitors are intentionally seeking to come to this historic site as it is quite far off the beaten path.  It is situated in an African American populated, residential area of Washington perceived to have high crime (although lately the surrounding neighborhood has a lower crime rate than in the past) and is not easily accessible using public transportation which many tourist rely on.

Recent interviews with National Park Service (NPS) rangers, Padraic Benson and Ebonee Davis as well as the current park service documents cite three interpretive themes at the Frederick Douglass NHS. All are nestled within one universal concept which is that “the life and ideals of  Douglass, centered in our nations 19th century struggle for civil rights and social justice continue to challenge and inspire us today.” From that universal theme, the three interpretive themes are brought into view: The Man, the Place, and the Vision. (Interpretive Planning Services 10)  Absent from their plan is “The Time.” This theme should include a magnification of the slavery, reconstruction and emergent Jim Crow experience of African Americans. It would provide better context to what Frederick Douglass and other abolitionist were fighting for and against.

Part of the reason for the omission is the museums almost exclusive focus on the house itself and on Douglass’ own life during his years as a successful statesman. Unlike a monument or museum in which the curator or artist presents the public with a display of artifacts or an installation of his or her own design, conceptually, the home of Frederick Douglass is a unique type of memorial in that it is his actual home. It has been preserved and restored with great accuracy according to the many photos and documents available, with its contents placed just as they were at the time its owners were alive. It has been noted that the placement of items upstairs involves somewhat more conjecture than that of the downstairs because non-family was not routinely allowed into that part of the house unless they were overnight guest.  Accuracy in the other parts of the property is verifiably correct.  The visitor center is a more typical museum and will be discussed later.

With such attention to detail, how is it then, that three autumn visits to the house turned up three very different experiences of  this site?  The memory of Frederick Douglass that viewers leave with is as varied as those who visit. All visitors do not get to tour the house and no one is allowed into the house without a tour guide. Tours are scheduled five or six times per day depending on the time of year and slots are reserved for only $1.50 each online.  Walk-ins are allowed for free if space permits.  Tour groups are made up of no more that 15 people and each is conducted by one of the NPS rangers. This naturally limits the accessibility of the site’s most authentic experience which is the home tour. Visitors, after climbing the 85 stairs to the front porch, gather at the front of the house. From that point on, the tour varies depending on a number of factors.  The NPS ranger/tour guide verbally interprets all that is seen, which creates an unavoidable subjectivity as they guide the visitor from room to room focusing on a different aspect of Douglass’ life in each room. Not surprisingly this leads to a different experience of the man on each visit.

The rangers are adept at altering the information to meet the needs and interest of the group. We observed that one tour lasted only 20 minutes, another 35, and another 50 minutes. The topics that the rangers expanded on varied depending on the questions asked by visitors. Interviews with two park rangers revealed that they may give a tour focused almost entirely on the architecture and restoration process, the antique furniture pieces or the art adorning the walls.  Ranger Benson described a recent visitor who prodded  him to detail  Frederick Douglass’ beliefs as a Christian and therefore religion became the dominating aspect of that group’s experience.  Some visitors want to hear more about how Frederick Douglass lived in the house,  others have no knowledge of him and want a history lesson.  School aged children are fascinated by the old-fashioned appliances. Though each of three official interpretive themes is always touched on, the degree and explanation of such changes with every tour.

There are, however, some topics concerning Frederick Douglass that never were addressed or only lightly touched on.  Since this was the house that Douglass owned at the end of his life he was relatively wealthy and his home was loaded with valuable and beautiful items that betray the inhumanity he suffered in his youth.  The entire topic of slavery was barely discussed on any of the three tours we attended. By not spending enough time describing the impossible circumstances of his past and the depths from which Douglass rose, the rangers do a disservice to his memory.  Some visitors might leave the space feeling as if they had only gone on an antique home tour owned by a very respectable black man of the eighteenth century.  But they may not learn anything about the context of his enslaved past and the human rights that he spent his adult life fighting for.  It is a glaring omission. They also do not  mention that while he lived here, the large majority of other blacks living at the time were experiencing the emergence of Jim Crow and increased lynching. All three tours did mention how he played violin for his guest and gave his grandchildren “horsey back rides.” One of the guides put so much emphasis on “our Renaissance man,” his musical abilities, and entertaining of dignitaries that we hardly learned what his life’s work was all about.

On each tour a question was asked by at least on group member about his marriage to a white woman only two years older than his own daughter.  The rangers were prepared for the question; all said that  Douglass lived the principle that guided his life, that color did not define or separate members of the human family, which is also how the topic is treated on the official website of the Frederick Douglass NHS ( http://www.nps.gov/history/museum/exhibits/douglass/ ) All three rangers went on to shift the focus and describe how Helen Pitts Douglass made the preservation of this home possible. None mentioned that he was known to have had several extra-marital romantic interests. An example of how sub narratives always find and outlet is the fiction entitled Douglass’ Women: A Novel, by Jewell Parker Rhodes, where she writes a about his life from the perspective of Anna Murray Douglass, the black first wife of 44 years who sold her personal property to finance his escape from the south.

The site’s visitor center is dismal.  The physical structure is an uninviting , cave-like building built into the hill and covered over with vegetation.  It is clear that its architects designed it to not visually compete with the site’s centerpiece which is the  home itself which is commendable in the intent but depressing in its execution.   

The walls of the center are of grey concrete slabs. A skylight in the ceiling is so high and small that it had little chance of brightening the space even on a sunny day.  The largest wall space is dedicated to a display of a few dozen plaques  inscribed with quotes by Douglass a timeline, family photo display, a few small artifacts such as a walking stick.  On another wall are about a dozen blown up copies of front pages of the Douglass newsletter, The North Star.  During the times we visited, a 4 foot by 2 foot  glass display case exhibited original letters to and a journal by Helen Pitts Douglass, photos and postcards from some of their travels and a few small items belonging to Douglass. There is a well-stocked bookstore with an impressive variety of reading by and about Douglass. The center also contains  a screening room which plays a seventeen minute biographical film (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31fc_sCfios ). The film is outdated and of a very poor production quality by today’s standards.  It is directed to an audience of low elementary grade level.  The center itself is ineffectual and unfortunately, due to limitations of capacity all do not get the opportunity to tour the house, therefore  the visitor center is the only experience some people get. The interpretation of Douglass’ life in the visitor center is not compelling.

Future Plans:

Fortunately, the NPS has recognized the poor and outdated quality of the visitor center and is in the process of preparing to redesign it in time for the bicentennial of the birth of Frederick Douglass NHS in 2018. The Long Range Interpretive Site Plan (Interpretive Planning Services) states that “the current facilities at the site are inadequate to tell his story at the rich level it deserves” and has an aggressive plan for a completely redesigned and expanded version of the visitor center in order to enhance the experience there.  Some highlights are:

• “Mini-videos “ that focus on different phases of Douglass’ life, planned as intimate experiences to be explored by just a few visitors at a time.

• A computer interactive map/timeline, a geographical virtual tour encompassing Douglass’ life with layers of information about the places and events he experienced and how he impacted and influenced by them.

• Reconstruct a façade and/or interior of Douglass’ grandmother’s cabin to show Douglass’ extremely humble origins perhaps as an immersion environment

        .   All of the above, if done with the same extreme attention to detail as placement of contents in the house at Cedar Hill, address some of the problems mentioned in this report and make a visit more meaningful and balanced. Of the many memorials, monuments and museums in our nation’s capital city, there are few that are solely dedicated to African American history. The Frederick Douglass National Historic Site is vitally important because it is one of the few that even recognizes a historical African American person.  For that reason it is an appropriate place where an alternative story could be told but sadly the museum planners miss the  opportunity. The attention of the public is squandered and they are instead presented with a home tour with varying colorful tales of an interesting, refined gentleman but nothing of the horrors he fought hard to end

Works Cited

Accessed via Database (identical to Print version)

         “An Act to provide for the establishment of the Frederick Douglass home as a part of the                 park system in the National CapitaLand for other purposes,” approved September                 5, 1962 (HR 5968) 91st  Congress, 1st Session, (February 4, 1969) Available from                        LexisNexis Congressional; Accessed: 11/10/10

Accessed via Web(identical to print)

        Blight, David W. “For Something Beyond The Battlefield” Frederick Douglass and the    

        Struggle  for the Memory of the Civil War. Journal of American History, Vol. 75,         No. 4 (1989): 1156-1178

Accessed via database

        “GOP Leaders Pledge Aid for Frederick Douglass’ Home.” Jet. Chicago 26, May 2003.                         ProQuest. Accessed 11/10/2010

Accessed via Print

        Hinds, James R. Frederick Douglass Home Cedar Hill, Historic Structures Report Part II                 (Historical Data)  US Department of the Interior, National Park Service,                                 11 Jan. 1968

Accessed via Print  

        Interpretive Planning Services. Frederick Douglass National Historic Site, Long Range

                Interpretive Plan TEAM DRAFT. Prepared for Task Order No. T1180090007.                         Harpers Ferry. 14 Jun. 2010

Accessed from an Anthology

        Olick, Jeffery K.  “What does It Mean to Normalize the Past?; Official Memory in                         German Politics since 1989” States of Memory 2003. Ed. Jeffery K. Olick.                         Durham: Duke University Press, 2003. 264-288. Print

Accessed from an Anthology

        Polletta, Francesca. “Legacy and Liabilities of an Insurgent Past; Remembering Martin                         Luther King Jr. on the House and Senate Floor” States of Memory 2003. Ed.                         Jeffery K. Olick. Durham: Duke University Press, 2003. 193-226. Print

Accessed in Print

        Rhodes,  Jewell, Parker, Douglass’ Women: A Novel. New York: Washington Square                         Press 2002. Print

Accessed via database

        “To Provide For The Establishment Of The Frederick Douglass National Memorial In                         The District Of Columbia”  Hearing S2399. Session 87-2. Subcommittee on                         Public Lands of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs  United States                         Congressional Senate.  May 24, 1962 LexisNexis Congressional. Accessed:                        11/4/10

Accessed via database

        Toogood, Anna Coxe. “Frederick Douglass Home Cedar Hill, Historic Grounds Report                         Historical Data Section”  Division of History. US Department of the Interior,                         National Park Service, Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, May                         1968.  National Park Service History E-Library. Accessed: 10/14/10

Accessed via database (identical Print version)

        Woods, T.A. “Mr. Douglass’ Widow What She Is Like and Why She Wedded Him ” The                         Washington Post 30 May 1897: 17. ProQuest Historical Newspapers. Web (1877-                        1994)