GLR Review March-April 2019

world of museum conservation and collections management. In the spirit of metaphor in Native storytelling, the object housing would be the kitchen, hearth, and therefore the heart of the mu- seum’s architectural spaces. The exhibition galleries would be the formal living room for welcoming guests. I’m not suggesting that the treatment of LGBT cultural his- tory follow this model. But museum objects can elicit a visceral response that words and images cannot. Being in their presence and pondering their significance might constitute an intimate and quiet reflection or a thrilling, powerful jolt that launches one’s imagination in new directions. As David K. Allison says about the objects on display in the 9/11 exhibition at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History: “Their power lives in their authenticity and their mute, unchanging simplicity.” How can one not be stirred seeing up close and first hand the original rainbow flag? panels of the AIDS quilt or the Shower of Stoles? authentic Supreme Court documents granting marriage equality? actual pink triangles from Nazi concentration camps? A national LGBT museum would harness the power of objects, documents, and digital records as physical and virtual evidence of our LGBT historical and cultural heritage. Justin Estoque, a museum professional for thirty years, managed the planning, design, construction, and opening of the Smithsonian’s Na- tional Museum of the American Indian. We Need a National LGBT History Museum J USTIN E STOQUE W ITH the skyrocketing growth of our digital world and the ever-accelerating rate at which news and infor- mation are disseminated, many people, especially the young, may have little knowledge of the early LGBT struggle or the trailblazers who fought for equal rights, respect, and dignity. A national LGBT museum would be a place of remembrance for our struggles to overcome injustices and of celebration for our successes in surmounting them. The accomplishments are well known—legal recognition, HIV health care, marriage equality, military service, and so on. But most of us are fuzzy about the critical details. A national LGBT museum could immerse visitors in the fears that dark- ened our daily lives when police and government officials would haul us away to prison for being our authentic selves. It could also place them on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court on the joyful day that marriage equality became the law of the land. Museum leaders agree that institutions of memory such as museums, historical monuments, and sacred sites are essential to the health of a society. Their studies show that most people agree with this proposition, even when they have no intention of vis- iting such sites. In times of war, enemies target not only military installations but also institutions of memory. They know why people flocked to museums right after September 11th. A na- tional LGBT museum as a place of remembrance could become a sanctuary to contemplate past injustices and transcendence over them—an ongoing process, to be sure. The iridescent threads of LGBTAmerica, including current stories as history continues to be made, deserve a place in the rich tapestry of our American narrative. A national LGBT mu- seum run with integrity and serious scholarship could command the authority that grants LGBT history and culture the place it deserves in our national heritage. We have yet to be recognized in an official way for our contributions to the arts, entertainment, public service, commerce, science, and other areas of endeavor. According to research by a number of organizations, muse- ums are the most trusted information source, rated higher than news media, academic research, and the U.S. government. A na- tional LGBT museum would serve as a physical forum, a plat- form for our diverse voices and separate experiences. A national LGBT museum could be a symbol of pride that is perpetual, and not just once a year. Our stories are more likely to be forgotten in a transient or virtual world, less authentic if told from plat- forms belonging to others, and sadly simplistic if missing our multiple perspectives. Although more museums are reaching beyond object collec- tions to create visitor experiences with meaningful messages, there remains a silent power in the object speaking from within a museum gallery. Planning consultations for the National Mu- seum of the American Indian gave birth to what was a paradigm shift back in the 1990s. The new paradigm led to a different vi- sion for collections, namely to create a respectful home, com- plete with fire, food, and light for tribal objects, not just a warehouse. This concept amounted to a minor tremor in the GUEST OPINION                                                                                                                 