• Take 1Historians of Technology Watching Chernobyl
• The Editors

Chernobyl, Public History, Musealization, Technoscience

In a 1978 editorial to the new journal The Public Historian, founding editor G. Wesley Johnson (1932−2018) considered the nature of academic historical research, speculating on how history could serve society in his lifetime: "Historical skills and method are needed now outside of the academy." He continued to write, "it is desirable for the historian to relate to the needs of the community, whether that is defined as government, business, or institutions such as museums or historical societies."¹ While Johnson thought history written for the public's benefit was the hallmark of Public History, today the term covers a diverse spectrum of activities and ambitions rather than a fixed set of goals. Publicly engaged scholarship can find expression in, for example, archival work, preservation practice, or museum curatorship. Indeed, the public debate about technology is taking place in many different venues besides museums—and historians should be part of it.

Exhibition reviews have been a constant companion of Technology and Culture since the 1960s.² And starting in 2014, in its "Beyond Words" feature, the journal has engaged with a broad spectrum of audio-visual sources (from films to databases and public history websites), building on the journal's periodic reviews of history of technology related documentary films. The increased visibility of other projects including oral history campaigns, designation of historic sites, the creation of digital repositories, the engagement with archival sciences or the opportunities offered by social media formats, have created an even wider public sphere. These media contribute to a larger public recognition for scholarly work in the history of technology, and history in general. They also offer possibilities for scholars willing to enter the arena and contribute to the debate. [End Page 1149]

Reflections on audiences, non-traditional outlets for scholarship, and the public understanding of the history of technology are common grounds for the Technology and Culture readership and SHOT community. In the October 2010 issue of the journal, Colin Divall argued that the history of technology community should strengthen its ties with professionals outside academia.³ His essay reinvigorated the recurring themes during the journal's previous editorial transition, with the subsequent launch of "Beyond Words." Its founding editor Hanna Rose Shell, proposed that "feature documentaries, television programs, archival film collections, and interactive (web-based) media have the potential for particular kinds of innovation in the study of technology." "Beyond Words" engaged with a range of new media sources, investigating the history of technology through social media, exploring the role of data visualization in historical practice, and engaging industrial film repositories as sources for innovative new historical approaches. The section also engaged with researchers, who, for example, transformed their scholarly practice through filmmaking.⁴ The new Public History section will build on the insight: new media are important both as a subject of critical reflection but also as a way to communicate scholarly findings to broader audiences than just scholars. Furthermore, media materials are crucial in undergraduate teaching.

One of the SHOT community's ongoing concerns is extending Technology and Culture's coverage beyond its historically rooted North American and European foci. The journal's current articles and topics reflect the intellectual creativity attained by moving beyond themes covering the Global North. Today internationalization is an evident and sustained practice within SHOT. The Public History section will reinforce these trends. Thus far, the journal's exhibition reviews tended to reflect curatorship in countries with a high number of museums of technology. Consequently, combining them with the view offered by other media, including the audio-visual subjects featured in "Beyond Worlds" is an opportunity to move beyond the geographic bias in review practice.

The Public History section will run twice a year, in the April and October issues. Reviews will comprise but not be limited to formats such as films, industrial heritage sites, parks, archives, libraries, exhibitions, oral history projects, digital repositories, websites, and social media. Rather than discussing individual cases, the section integrates a curated set of review essays on a common theme. The editors welcome readers' suggestions for potential projects or sites to be further explored. The...

• 以1名技术史学家观看切尔诺贝利
• 编者

切尔诺贝利，公共历史，伊斯兰化，科技

在1978年对新杂志《公共历史学家》的社论中，创始编辑G. Wesley Johnson（1932-2018）考虑了学术历史研究的性质，推测历史如何为他的一生服务于社会：“现在需要历史技能和方法在学院之外。” 他继续写道：“历史学家希望与社区的需求相关，无论是被定义为政府，企业还是诸如博物馆或历史学会之类的机构。” ^1个约翰逊认为为公众造福的历史是公共历史的标志，而今天，该术语涵盖了各种各样的活动和野心，而不是固定的目标。公众参与的奖学金可以在档案工作，保存实践或博物馆策展等方面找到表达。确实，除了博物馆之外，有关技术的公开辩论也在许多不同的场所进行，历史学家也应参与其中。

自1960年代以来，展览回顾一直是技术和文化的永恒伴侣。²从2014年开始，该杂志以其“超越文字”功能，利用了该期刊对技术相关纪录片的历史进行的定期审查，参与了广泛的视听资源（从电影到数据库以及公共历史网站） 。其他项目的知名度不断提高，包括口述历史战役，历史古迹的指定，数字存储库的创建，档案科学的介入或社交媒体格式提供的机会，已经建立了更广阔的公共领域。这些媒体为公众在技术史和一般历史上的学术著作提供了更大的认可。它们也为愿意进入舞台并为辩论做出贡献的学者提供了可能性。[结束页1149]

对听众的思考，非传统的学术渠道以及公众对技术历史的理解，是技术和文化读者群体和SHOT社区的共同基础。在2010年10月的期刊中，科林·迪维尔（Colin Divall）认为，技术界的历史应加强与学术界以外专业人士的联系。³他的论文在期刊的前期编辑过渡以及随后的“超越单词”的发布过程中重新激发了反复出现的主题。它的创始编辑汉娜·罗斯·壳（Hanna Rose Shell）提出，“专题纪录片，电视节目，档案电影收藏和交互式（基于网络的）媒体在技术研究中具有进行某些创新的潜力。” “言外之意”与一系列新媒体资源互动，通过社交媒体调查技术历史，探索数据可视化在历史实践中的作用，并使工业电影资料库成为创新性新历史方法的资源。该部门还与研究人员接触，例如通过电影制作改变了他们的学术实践。⁴新的“公共历史”部分将基于这一见解：新媒体不仅是批判性反思的主题，而且是将学术研究成果传达给更广泛的受众的重要途径，而不仅仅是学者。此外，媒体材料对于本科教学至关重要。

SHOT社区持续关注的问题之一是将技术和文化的覆盖范围扩展到其历史悠久的北美和欧洲焦点。该杂志当前的文章和主题反映了超越涵盖全球北方的主题而获得的知识创造力。如今，国际化已成为SHOT内部显而易见且持续的实践。公共历史部分将加强这些趋势。迄今为止，该杂志的展览评论倾向于反映在拥有大量技术博物馆的国家中的策展人。因此，将它们与包括“超越世界”中的视听主题在内的其他媒体所提供的观点相结合，是摆脱评论实践中地理偏见的机会。

《公共历史》部分每年四月和十月发行两次。评论将包括但不限于电影，工业遗址，公园，档案馆，图书馆，展览，口述历史项目，数字资料库，网站和社交媒体等格式。该部分没有讨论个别案例，而是整合了一组针对共同主题的精选评论文章。编辑欢迎读者提出对潜在项目或站点进行进一步探索的建议。那个...