living with history on both sides of the Atlantic - Part 1 of 2

I’ve successfully held off composing another entry until the weekend, thereby preserving lots of time this week to find less meaningful ways to avoid work. But when I was actually buried in a book it did give me an idea for an entry.

The book I was reading was the inspiringly entitled “Literary and Cultural Spaces of Restoration London” – I know what you’re thinking – I promise I’ll tell you all about it next time I see you, just ask! But reading about the streets and alleyways of London rebuilt after the great fire in 1666 actually made me surprisingly homesick. Meg can tell you that there are few things I enjoy more in London than walking around the “City” (the financial district between St. Paul’s and the Tower). I began thinking about you the people who you pass as you walk along those streets and their relationship to the history that surrounds them, and to drive this home even more I had just been the dentists, where the hygienist quizzed me on my occupation and then responded with the almost inevitable line: “Well you are certainly in the right place to study history!” But is Williamsburg the “right” place to study history – even colonial American history – wouldn’t the street corner between the Bank of England and the Royal Exchange be a better spot and why doesn’t it see itself like that?

It shouldn’t be surprising really that I decide to start this series with a rumination on history and trans-Atlantic relationships with it. Many people make observations to me about this – from the aforesaid lady at the dental office, to the British people who tell me that I can’t be studying American history because America doesn’t have a history. But the question doesn’t cut so easily between Britain being skeptical of American heritage that “yanks” hold so dear – my mother, for example, is convinced (perhaps from over-exposure admittedly) that Americans do a much better job of portraying and understanding their past.

Personally I think the answer lies somewhere in the midst of all this and goes back to the role (rather than the importance) that history plays within a particular culture. It is a horrible cliché to say that in Britain history is somehow “all around you” because archaeologists would certainly argue that the same is true here in Virginia – and almost anyone would agree about Williamsburg. Wherever you go (or at least wherever I’ve been) in America you are surrounded by historical buildings and houses, and often historic interpreters to assist you in realizing it – Edenton, NC., New Madrid, MO, Indepence Rock, WY. (of “Oregon Trail” fame). The fact remains, however, that I was most struck in my reading about restoration London when the author talked about a sermon preached in the wake of the great fire at St. Helen’s Bishopgate church, the very Anglican church that my parents now attend when in London, crowded in on all sides by skyscrapers and over-priced sandwich shops. There are obviously more old buildings in England, a longer record of written history, but familiarity cannot fully explain how British people live with the past in such a matter-of-fact way. What distinguishes St.Helen’s Bishopsgate from Bruton Parish Church in Williamsburg is not age, aesthetic merit, or some subjective measure of historical importance, but the fact that one has a narrative and the other does not. Bruton Parish Church has a historical purpose and St.Helen’s just has a history.

To be continued....