Entering this week of my internship I found myself facing new challenges. Though at first daunting, I was able to use these small hurdles to learn more about research and the collections process. These efforts also helped me learn more about Orlando and its rich history.
At the start of my week, I narrowed down topics for my Reflections article. I continued doing research into my list of different ideas. After compiling them into a Word Document I found it easier to let go of some and settle on others. For one, the idea of connecting Glenda Hood and Mary I. Johnson through their association with the light rail was one that I ultimately let go of. The topic cast more of a negative light on their time of service to the city. Additionally, I initially thought I could connect this to the current system of Brightline but did not find enough information. Or, the information I did find provided mix reviews which only contributed to the lukewarm reception regarding light rails and high speed rails in Florida. Additionally, I began to run into road blocks when searching for further information.
I felt as if I had seen all the available online sources and struggled to find new information. But, very belatedly, I realized that I was interning at the hub of local Orlando History and that I could use the resources around me! With help from historians at the OCRHC I learned how best to use their online catalogue and find items that would be helpful to my research. Unfortunately, some of the items were present at the offsite location. Nonetheless, I still discovered a more efficient way of research as well as how to best use the resources most available to me. With this new tool, I revisited another idea on my original list, both women's interest in downtown. I realized this specific topic emphasized their work in a more favorable light. However, the topic still seemed too broad. At first, all I could find were general statements regarding how both cared about improving the area. I could not find specific initiatives or sentiments towards it. Despite this, I was still reluctant to let the idea go as I felt that it would be a good tie in to the OCRHC due to its location. Subsequently, I began looking for ways to narrow this topic.
With more exploration into newspaper articles and initiatives created by the two women I saw certain connections more clearly. For example, Glenda Hood and Mary Johnson served as commissioners around the same time. This helped me refine my search to events where they would have been working together as this overlap did not last their entire professional careers. I soon found their names present in campaigns for the beautification of Orlando under the motto Orlando... "The City, Beautiful." This motto had a history of its own, with campaigns in the early 20th century to create the famous epithet to describe Orlando. Focusing on the motto helped me find an article discussing the women's involvement with Lake Eola Park and upkeeping the area. From there I was inspired. I already had much of the information I needed but now I knew how to frame the list of facts that I had collected. When looking back at my notes what stood out was both of their connections to green spaces, parks, and shared open areas for the public. They both had a philosophy that it was good for not only the beautification of the city, but also for the use of residents. Thus, I finally decided to connect them through their efforts to improve Orlando under its motto. This theme influenced the tentative title for my article, "The Women Who Made Our City Beautiful: The Legacy of Glenda Hood and Mary I. Johnson." I am still working on editing the article but feel more confident about its direction.
Then, the offsite location also offered its own set of difficulties this week. While there I continued to catalogue items of Mary I. Johnson. However, now I had moved on to bigger objects that required more complex packing and descriptions. One area I struggled in was determining the material of certain items. Mary I. Johnson was the recipient of many awards, knick-knacks, commemorative items, plaques, and more. Within these items sometimes the materials were not easy to ascertain. For example, I remember seeing an ornate award that at first appeared to be glass. However, its texture was almost plastic like. I found myself debating between if it was actually glass or simple acrylic. Other times I could guess what material an item was made out of such as wood or brass, but the material would be tinted another color or be covered with an epoxy layer. This effect would make brass look like other cheaper metals such as aluminum and material like wood seem almost synthetic respectively. As I continued to work with items I learned the best way to distinguish between materials was through practice, research, and simply asking. With practice it became easier to tell which common metal alloy was used in certain items or to research what material would be typically used in other objects. Though, the best way to be sure of which material I was dealing with was to ask the experts around me. Asking my supervisors at the offsite allowed me to learn from their vast knowledge and ensure that I put forth the most accurate description.
Though, there are times when even the experts get stumped. There was one occasion when we all found ourselves searching for synonyms to describe a miniature figurine replica of the OCRHC. It wasn't exactly a figurine in the artistic definition, or a miniature. Neither was the object a replica or diorama. It was more of a decoration. In the end we settled for classifying it as a model (with some lingering doubts). This process showed that not everything about an item will always be known, but when it isn't, asking questions can provide an avenue into learning more of the details behind collections management and curation.
Comentarios