During the Second World War, Japan had a special relationship with Thailand. Some people describe Japan's role in Thailand as an invited ally to protect Thailand from French and British imperialism whereas others have described Japan's presence at this time as occupation. During the war, Japan built a railroad through Thailand into Burma (now Myanmar) to transport supplies and troops across Southeast Asia. Japan used British, Australian, Dutch, and American POWs to build the railroad. The pace was rushed, the terrain was incredibly dangerous, and disease and malnutrition ran rampant. About 100,000 people died in building the railroad. In the 1960s the movie Bridge Over River Kwai won an Oscar for its portrayal of the event.
We went to a museum about the building of the railroad and the treatment of the POWs and visited the cemetery where the British and Australian soldiers were buried. Then we went to the bridge and took a vintage 1940s train along the railway.
The museum exhibit was curated by an Australian scholar and it was interesting to look at the exhibit narrative. All of the display panels were written in British English and it was obvious from the language used to describe the POW experience that the target audience for the museum was European and American tourists. One key thing to think about if you take students to museums is to challenge them to look at the texts and artifacts like they would look at any text. There's an interpretation in the way that the curators select objects to display and the words they pick to use in the text. For example, does the exhibit describe Japan's role in Thailand as "occupation" or as "defense against British and French imperialism"? It's a telling difference that suggests a particular point of view about Japan during the war. Did you notice anything about the exhibit you visited at the MFA? Have you visited other museum exhibits where you noticed a certain point if view on display?
I keep posting horrible selfies because they're all I can post on my phone at this moment, but here's me on the bridge over river Kwai. (FYI, "Kwai" means river on Thai so the film title actually means bridge over river river!)
If you're familiar with the film, or at least the movie trailer, this was one of the more surreal moments of my trip. Walking over the Bridge on the River Kwai while someone played this music in the background.
Hi Professor!
ReplyDeleteI have been fascinated by your pictures and posts about your trip. I am learning so many new things about Thailand! I can imagine that young students would love to interact with their teachers on a blog like this, and see pictures of the actual places they are studying in class. In response to your questions, when I visited the MFA, I thought a lot about the point of view that was being displayed in the exhibit. I focused on the "Art of the Americas" exhibit. One of the things I noted was that this exhibit highlighted American heroes, such as famous presidents or people who won battles. It also highlighted how the wealthy people lived in certain time periods. Many of the paintings showed people in rich clothing, and there were even full dining room sets and parlors on display that were from wealthy mansions. These artifacts portrayed the life and style characteristics of successful entrepreneurs. It was interesting to me that this was the main style of living that was displayed. Most of the exhibit painted America in a very positive light. In addition, the exhibit focused on colonial Boston. This makes sense because the museum is in Boston, and so the audience is mostly people who want to come and admire art that celebrates Boston's history. Overall, I noticed that while the exhibit displayed a wide range of historical moments, it did not tell the whole story of American history. Instead, it seemed to glorify certain aspects of it. As a teacher, I think it would be important to discuss with your students how different kinds of people would have lived in these time periods, in different areas of the country. You would have to point out to young students that not everyone was wealthy enough to live in a house like the one on display. This is just one example of how different perspectives tell different stories about history. It is crucial that we teach our students how to gather information from all different points of view, so we are not focusing on just one perspective of history.
I'm looking forward to hearing more about your trip in class!
Best,
Kristen
Fantastic post, Kristen! I loved hearing about your MFA experience and look forward to hearing more. I know I didn't mention thinking about exhibit perspective prior to your museum visit, but I'm so pleased that you were able to make the connection!
DeleteHello Professor!
ReplyDeleteI am really enjoying reading about your trip, and I just had to comment on this particular post because I love learning about WWII. It is so interesting to learn a bit more about Thailand's involvement during this time, because I had never thought of Thailand as having a connection to World War II. Now that I am reading it though, it absolutely makes sense seeing as their relationship and proximity to Japan would involve them. It is so interesting to note that different people have different ideas on whether Japan was protecting Thailand or occupying it during this time. I have heard of the film "Bridge Over the River Kwai", but this is the first I had heard about the real life events that inspired the story. It is so cool that you got to be there while you learned about some of the things that went on there.
While I was at the MFA, I explored some of the Art of America sections, and it did seem to me that many of the paintings portrayed America in only one way. The paintings of settings showed beautiful landscapes with rivers and mountains, and the portraits showed well-dressed people and families. The art seemed to be a concrete example of the American Dream. In addition to that, there were few examples of struggle, and the examples that were present were war paintings showing the defeated Americans powering on triumphantly. I have always been told that America paints a much better picture for itself than its history would tell, but I think it was most disconcerting that I did not even notice that happening while I was looking at the art. Only when I read this blog post did I begin to think back to what I had really seen on display, and recognize that there was only one representation of America: a glorified one. Perhaps I am all too immune to the effects of nationalism that I expect to see only positive ideals of American history. I do believe that teachers have a responsibility to teach students about all different perspectives in history, and I hope to be able to do that effectively myself one day.
I hope you had a great trip!
Maggie Dowd
Maggie, I used to work in a museum devoted to WWII (FDR Library) and I have to say that I have never really considered the events that occurred in Thailand and Burma. It just reminds me that there's always so much more to learn. I have to say that it was really neat, though, to be at the site and I have a greater appreciation and understanding of what happened in the region during the war. I still have a lot to learn.
DeleteI have to admit that I haven't been to the new America's wing at the MFA and I'm intrigued by your comments about the paintings. You make great observations. Was there any indication in the exhibit as to why those paintings were chosen? Do you think the exhibit had a reason for excluding paintings of the non-elite? Would those images have existed in the same medium? (I suspect the answer is "yes" but I'd need to know a little more about the paintings featured in the exhibit.) I look forward to continuing this discussion!