As the Magistrat indicated, JFK spoke at this church in 1963. Several passages:

For we live in an age of interdependence as well as independence–an age of internationalism as well as nationalism. In 1848 many countries were indifferent to the goals of the Frankfurt Assembly. It was, they said, a German problem. Today there are no exclusively German problems, or American problems, or even European problems. There are world problems–and our two countries and continents are inextricably bound together in the tasks of peace as well as War.

…This is in the interest of us all. For war in Europe, as we learned twice in 40 years, destroys peace in America. A threat to the freedom of Europe is a threat to the freedom of America. That is why no administration-no administration–in Washington can fail to respond to such a threat–not merely from good will but from necessity. And that is why we look forward to a united Europe in an Atlantic partnership–an entity of interdependent parts, sharing equally both burdens and decisions, and linked together in the tasks of defense as well as the arts of peace.

This is no fantasy. It will be achieved by concrete steps to solve the problems that face us all: military, economic, and political. Partnership is not a posture but a process-a continuous process that grows stronger each year as we devote ourselves to common tasks.

….To realize this vision, we must seek a world of peace–a world in which peoples dwell together in mutual respect and work together in mutual regard–a world where peace is not a mere interlude between wars, but an incentive to the creative energies of humanity. We will not find such a peace today, or even tomorrow. The obstacles to hope are large and menacing. Yet the goal of a peaceful world–today and tomorrow-must shape our decisions and inspire our purposes.

So we are all idealists. We are all visionaries. Let it not be said of this Atlantic generation that we left ideals and visions to the past, nor purpose and determination to our adversaries. We have come too far, we have sacrificed too much, to disdain the future now. And we shall ever remember what Goethe told us–that the “highest wisdom, the best that mankind ever knew” was the realization that “he only earns his freedom and existence who daily conquers them anew.”

London Plane Trees, carefully manicured. I believe the word is “Pollarded.”

I think about my life in the classroom and these two early mornings with wordle capture it pretty well.

Some days I’ve got an awesome set of activities that I’ve gathered and collated to ensure engagement and progress on the quarter’s big project and it’s a disaster (frame one). Other days I come in and say something like, “hey what’d y’all think about the reading?” and a magical conversation occurs (frame two).

I get it — you create your own luck through preparation and consistency — but a good portion of the time you’re being carried along by whatever energy the world has put out that day and you’re just trying to steer things as best you can.

For two years, I did the “tell the story of the United States in one minute.”

For the past two years, I’ve done the “pick a piece of popular culture and explain how it opens up the American past.”

I am tempted to build my opening unit around this missive from the Trump administration to the Smithsonian.

(NYT Coverage here.)

I would assess the letter together and have the students assess the vision of the American past expressed here. I’d ask them to define some of these terms and then debate them:

Non-ideological
Divisive
Unifying
American exceptionalism
Partisan

And I’d like the kids to take apart many sentences, notably:

… empowers museum staff to embrace a revitalized curatorial vision rooted in the strength, breadth, and achievements of the American story.

…This initiative aims to ensure alignment with the President’s directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions.

The deliverables: A short essay response to this letter — how you agree, how you disagree, what you own experiences learning American history have consisted of so far — and a debate, where we’d dig into the different ways of approaching history and what is (and is not) possible.

In a perfect world, I’d bring some guests in to listen and to ask questions as we go, a mix of museum people, historians, politicians, and activists.

Here: This is a clever framing and a politically astute contest topic.