I Went To The Titanic Exhibit

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

sThey have an exhibit of artifacts they found in the Titanic and have it on display at the Tropicana Hotel here in Las Vegas. I won free ticket on a radio call in and went to see the exhibit today.

I don’t know what I expected, but the exhibit was actually very moving and sad. There was jewelry, money, plates and silverware from all three classes on board, clothing, luggage, postcards, pieces of the ship…

Certain things just seemed very sad to me…there was a door handle to a cabin, and I just thought of the last person to close that door. There was a leather wallet that someone put into their pocket expecting to use when they got to New York. A hair brush bought at an expensive store in Paris.

The tickets that you got were boarding passes from real passengers with their story. Here are three from the tickets we got:

Mrs. Helen Churchill Candee, From Washington DC, traveling alone. After several months in Europe doing research for her latest book Tapestry, Helen was rushing home to attend to her son Howard who had been seriously injured in an airplane crash. A practical and freethinking woman, Helen had written a book titled “How A Woman May Earn A Living” which gave advice to women on how to get along without a man to support them.

Mr. Arthur Larmed Ryerson, his wife, two daughters, son and a maid. The family had traveled to Europe to find suitable husbands for the older girls. Shortly after arriving in Europe, however, the Ryerson’s received horrible news. One of their sons had been killed in an automobile accident. The family hurried back on the first ship available in order to attend his funeral on April 19, 1912. Mrs. Ryerson was so devastated that she remained in her cabin for much of the journey.

Mr. Isador Straus, wife Rosalie, Ellen Bird (maid)and John Farthing (manservant). The Strauses had traveled Europe with their daughter Beatrice and were returning home. Beatrice did not return with her parents. The Strauses owned Macy’s Department Store in New York City.

The exhibit was done with great respect, and I guess I was just surprised to feel as strongly as I did while walking through it. At the end of the exhibit was a sheet of ice, saltwater ice, like the real iceberg. You were to put your hand on the ice and feel how cold it was. It said that most of the people who jumped off the ship did not drown, they died of hypothermia. And feeling the ice at the end of the exhibit was something that made you feel how it felt to have had to jump into that cold ocean on that clear night.

2

I assume this exhibit consisted of artifacts salvaged from the wreckage recently?

I am perhaps influenced too strongly by Robert Bollard who discovered the Titanic, but I don’t think I approve of the salvagers who claimed ownership of it since he didn’t, and have taken away items, while damaging the remains of the ship. Perhaps this is illogical, as I don’t seem to have the same aversion to other ‘grave site’ relics like mummies, tomb contents etc - but perhaps this is because this is such a relatively recent event. Or perhaps I should reconsider how comfortable I feel about older relics. I know there is the claim that if we don’t take them they will be lost forever, but the video footage perhaps is as much historical evidence we need of the event? Not sure, interested in others’ views.

Back on your OT, I have seen some relics from surviviors of the event, such as a pair of evening shoes, and I think I know the feeling you are talking about - these shoes were delicate embroidered mules, and had been put on that evening for an entirely different night - and it surprised me how deeply I was affected just looking at them.

3

Whether or not to recover artifacts such as those in tha display from a site such as the wreckage of the Titanic is a hard question to consider ethically. I belong to and head a local historical society. We know to leave things “in situ” as much as we can, and to never disturb archeological sites of any kind. But when it’s a choice between artifacts deteriorating or being lost if left somewhere, or brought back for viewing by the public so that the history of their era and/or event can be appreciated – I think I’d go with the latter, Girl From Mars. Especially if the artifacts are in a museum, under carefully controlled conditions.

Is this exhibit a travelling roadshow type of thing? If not done through a museum, I don’t think I’d feel comfortable with it.

4

I saw a Titanic exhibit some years ago in St. Petersburg, Florida. One of the interesting artifacts recovered was a chest belonging to someone who had gone on a long trip. It was believed that the person had died on his trip wherever, and the chest of his belongings was being sent back home aboard the Titanic.

5

The Titanic sank within living memory. The era of which it was a part is well documented. We aren’t talking about reconstructing a “lost” civilization here. This is no different from digging up a cemetery and rooting through the graves of all who died in the early 20th century.
I’m no happier with the looting of older tombs, for that matter.

6

Although I see why this could be considered grave robbing, I think there are exceptions. The trinkets of the people that died are being used to educate and teach the history to a new generation.

7

The Titanic isn’t a grave, it’s a crash site. I don’t see it as “desecration” to remove artifacts from the ocean’s floor.

8

Well, given that there is evidence that the bodies of those that died fell to the ocean floor and decomposed on the site, I think it is fair to call it a gravesite as well.

Having read some of the comments above, surely that would depend on why they were taken, and for what purpose? I can rationalise items being taken for historial interest, to find out the reason for the ‘crash’ etc, but the information I have read (such as this cite) about more recent removals has been primarily as a money-making venture, not for the furtherance of knowledge. And I have to say, that feels a little too close to desecration of a grave for me.

9

Girl From Mars’ really gives the whole enterprise a real 18th Century “Mummy Unwrapping Party” vibe.

10

Should read “Girl From Mars’ cite…”

11

when the exhibit was in philly, it was at the franklin institute.

i was torn about seeing it. i am against pulling things up. then again if you don’t, they are lost forever and people won’t understand the time and history.

i ended up with a free ticket and went. they did a fantastic job putting the exhibit together. you went from first class all the way down to the coal furnace area. the rooms were just spectacular.

the last room was very cold and had the block of ice in it.

before the exhibit left i ended up going again with friends and their young sons. seeing the boys go through the exhibit did a lot to ease my mind about bringing things off site.

they were totally fasinated by everything. esp. that there were kids their own age on the ship. they wanted to know more about how people can find ships underwater.

there may be kids out there that see this exhibit and goes into marine arch. because of it.

12

I’ve also seen the exhibit at the Franklin Institute along with the whole fourth grade of my kids school. I remember being fascinated by the wreck as a child and now my daughter is even more fascinated than I was.

She was a Titanic fanatic even before the exhibit which made it even more wonderful for her to see in person. She has a book filled with newspaper clippings from the sinking and to be able to bring her to see these items cant be matched by any story she could ever read.

The exhibit was very tasteful and it made you feel like you were almost on the ship itself and being acquainted with all the personalities that were lost. By the way, there’s even a really cool recreation of the grand staircase thats pretty much breathtaking.

I don’t see what the fuss is about. The original reporting and pictures and art can be judged as voyeuristic

13

Personally, I’d made a distinction between “consecrated ground” and a site where people happened to die and their bodies were not recovered. One was a place where the remains where intentionally laid to rest and the other is wherever circumstances dictated.

So, personally, I don’t feel it’s desecrating a tomb or robbing a grave. Neither the bodies or the artifacts were placed there with intent. I feel no emotional distress at seeing artifacts removed from the Titanic. And if somehow the bodies were recoverable, I’d like to see them recovered and placed in proper graves.

That’s my feelings on the subject anyway.

14

One thing I read was that a pocket watch was recovered from the wreckage. It was found to have belonged to a man whose daughter survived. She kept that watch with her until the day she died, when it was bequethed to a museum.

I don’t have a problem with artifacts, provided they stick with the debris field between the bow and the stern and just leave the ship itself alone. RMS Titanic INC actually destroyed the crow’s nest trying to recover the ship’s telegraph or whatever.

15

It was the bell. They basically just ripped the thing off when it wouldn’t come loose, destroying the crow’s nest in the process.

I, too, have mixed feelings. I’d feel better about it if it wasn’t a for-profit venture. If the proceeds were used to fund other underwater archaeological projects, that’d be a Good Thing, but as it is now, it seems sort of pointless. We’re not learning anything we didn’t already know. It’s just a form of “celebrity worship”, like seeing James Dean’s death car.

16

I saw it with the family in Columbus a few weeks ago. Very moving piece of work. Skeevy in a historical way but not in a desecrational sort of way. I’m with the ‘crash site’ crowd on that. If we were to venerate every spot where people died tragically we’d be living in orbit.

17

That’s true. However, in this case it isn’t like we are clearing a crash site to make room for an orphanage.

18

I saw it in Detroit—I assume it was the same exhibit. It was pretty cool. IIRC, my ticket person died.

19

I saw some of the artifacts back in '97.

I remember one story that came from the artifacts about a guy who had started in Buffalo NY and headed west. He went around the world and heading home on the Titanic. He didn’t make it.

It seems to me that many such stories are lost forever if you don’t recover the artifacts.

I also disagree with the “where ever a person dies is sacred ground” idea. Some places, yes but not a crash site.

20

I may be wrong about this, but I would suspect that the stories we hear about survivors and victims come from painstaking research done by those historians and family members through historical records, photos and family histories. I doubt they come from seeing the 1st class china or a bottle of champagne.

The launch of the Titanic was such a documented event that a huge amount of information exists such as the blueprints for the construction of the ship, original casts for china, detailed notes about the woodwork, furniture and joinery etc (which was used to duplicate items and scenery for the movie). It’s also not like large amounts of early 20 Century clothing, footware, luggage and chamber pots etc aren’t available on land to document the time.

No, I must agree with Robert Ballard that Titanic’s remains should be treated with the dignity shown the battleship Arizona in Pearl Harbor, which I think few people would deny is a gravesite.
Happy to