In 2015 a member of the Ho-Chunk Nation recorded the following oral history while standing at the foot of a two-story-tall statue portraying a Native American:

This oral history is one of the first recordings logged for a critical public history project called Hear, Here: Voices of Downtown La Crosse.1 Hear, Here seeks to bring previously overlooked or unheard stories to light as a way of enhancing traditional narratives of the region that highlight Protestantism, prosperity, and whiteness, and ignore indigeneity, race, and cultural difference. Launched in 2015, Hear, Here is a place-based oral history project brought to life through Hear, Here signs scattered throughout downtown La Crosse, Wisconsin. Each sign is placed where a story happened and the public can access each story by dialing a toll-free number. Once the stories are heard, callers are encouraged to stay on the line to add their own story about that site or any other site in Downtown La Crosse. In this way the stories become user-generated and the project comes to represent both the living and lived history of the community. The only requisite for a Hear, Here story is that it be told by the person who experienced it.

Figure 8.1: Hear, Here sign beside “Hiawatha” statue in Riverside Park. Photo courtesy University Communications, UW–La Crosse.

Of the sixty-nine stories collected over the four-year-long project, “The Big Indian” is the focus of more recorded narratives and voicemail comments than any other site in the eight-block downtown area. The reason many want to comment on the statue becomes obvious when we consider its place and meaning in the community. The statue is twenty-five feet tall. It is placed in a popular downtown park situated at the convergence of three rivers, ground the Ho-Chunk consider sacred. The statue also stands beside three major tourist draws—a steamboat attraction, the visitor’s information center, and an international garden.

Figure 8.2: Hear, Here downtown La Crosse map of stories. Image courtesy of Marc Manke, Graphic Designer.

Officially called “Hiawatha,” it has been controversial since its inception in 1958. The city created it as a tourist attraction to entice motorists off a scenic highway to spend money in the downtown area. The representation of “Hiawatha” includes a cartoon-like conglomeration of visual stereotypes regarding Native American people—prominent nose, high cheekbones, strong jawline, pigtails, feathered hair ornament, peace pipe, fringed buckskin pants, moccasins, and exposed chest. The name “Hiawatha” comes from a Haudenosaunee chief from a territory around Lake Ontario made famous in the non-Native community by the 1855 Henry Longfellow poem, “Song of Hiawatha.” The reasons for the controversy are many: its location, its purpose, its name, its visual representation. The statue does not represent Native Americans within the region, and was based on fictional caricatures.

The mission of Hear, Here is to create a culture of conversation around places. The “Hiawatha” statue generated a number of stories through Hear, Here, and resulted in a renewed groundswell of activism from various community groups that ultimately worked together to change local policy. While the controversy over the statue spans six decades and came to a head three times, the final push to retire the statue happened concurrently with the stories collected via Hear, Here.2

Without the tireless work of students and community members both in and out of the classroom to create a successful digital public history project, it would have been difficult for Hear, Here to join the conversation and affect change. This chapter will explain: 1) how the project functions; 2) the execution of Hear, Here in the university classroom; and 3) the larger social justice work a project like Hear, Here contributes to through a case study of the campaign to retire “The Colossus of Kitsch.”

A Look Under the Hood of Hear, Here

The three main digital aspects of Hear, Here are the phone system, the website, and student collaboration via Google Drive.

Interactive Voice Response System

From the user’s perspective, Hear, Here’s phone system is a toll-free number on street-level signs. The toll-free number includes a story and location number for each sign. When a person calls and enters the numbers, they hear a story of the place on which they stand. The caller can choose to stay on the line and leave a message. Because this is a toll-free number, there is no cost to the user, unless they pay for their phone calls by the minute. We have tried to make the work as democratic as possible, using the simplest front-end technology invented in the late nineteenth century and used for generations—a phone number. There is no need for a smart-phone, and there are no QR codes to scan or apps to download. As long as a person has the now ubiquitous cell phone they can access the project in real time on the streets of La Crosse.

On the back end, the phone system is an Interactive Voice Response system (IVR) called EZ Route, hosted by CenturyLink. An IVR system is most commonly found in large companies to direct calls to a specific department or individual. Hear, Here is backed by the same technology, but employed in a more user-friendly way. While many IVR systems are used to triage callers and restrict access to the decreasing number of human agents, Hear, Here uses the technology to increase human connection. We use a system designed to eliminate humans to amplify and expose users to voices from a wide range of people.

This IVR system works via a phone tree. Hear, Here’s phone tree is based on the initial toll-free number, then on a location and story numbers. There are nine numbers on a standard keypad. In order to create the capacity for eighty-one stories, we developed a single-level phone tree that is 9x9. Adding deeper levels to the phone tree allows us to include more than one story at some locations. Here we use the IVR business technology to give access to specific stories on certain days and other stories on other days, just like a business phone system might be set up differently for the weekends and evenings than during business hours.

We use standardized welcoming messages—“Please select your location number” and “Please select the number of the story you would like to hear”—and concluding messages—“Would you like to tell your own story about this location or any other location in the downtown? If so stay on the line and leave us your name, phone number, and story.” Otherwise, we include no contextual information for the stories. Rather, each story stands on its own merits, and one must listen to several stories to notice a pattern or narrative. Therefore, the users and not the content creators frame the stories.

IVR technology provides another benefit: we are able to track the days and times of the calls, the call volume for the months, the area codes for each call, and the length of calls. This allows us to see that certain seasons create change in people’s use of the project: call volumes diminish in the colder Wisconsin months of November through February, and they pick up in March and are especially strong from July through October. The average call time is 1 minute and 50 seconds.

We can also track whether or not promotion and events increase the use of the system. For example, our two major launch events that included thematic tours increased the regular call volume by factors of two and four respectively, and also contributed to a more robust call-in month overall.3 Interestingly, the years in which we scheduled large launches for new stories, call volume increased not only for April, the month of the launch, but also for May and June. There is a clear benefit in reminding the public that this is an ongoing user-generated project.

IVR also allows us to track the area codes of calls. As of March 2019, people in 49 states and Canada have called the system. Between April 2015 and March 2019, we received a total of 9,612 calls to the system; of those, 52 percent are local calls and 48 percent non-local. Tracking the number of non-Wisconsin calls each month indicates that for the first two years, 2015 and 2016, primarily local residents used the system. This pattern shifted in 2017 during an eight-month stretch in which there were more out-of-state calls to the system. This spike was likely due to our membership in “Explore La Crosse,” the local visitors’ bureau, that promoted Hear, Here and distributed flyers about the project.

The EZ Route system is not without its problems, but it is easy to program, it fit our budget, and it provided the lowest barrier to access. One of our biggest issues is that EZ Route only records audio in VOX, a low-quality audio file, and only for 180 seconds at a time. EZ Route is also a lesser-known product of a large company. It took a long time to coordinate access, and it is currently only available in America. When we began the project in 2014, EZ Route was the most affordable IVR system.4 However, technology is ever-evolving and our latest Hear, Here project in London, Ontario, utilizes Amazon Web Service’s IVR product Connect.5 This is a less costly option that affords higher quality recordings of any length, and can be used worldwide. It is, however, more complicated to program.6

Hear, Here’s Homepage

Our website consolidates and backs up all our stories, and provides a central portal for our marketing. It appears on our signs, Facebook page, and promotional materials. The website includes an interactive map that shows the location of each story with the audio, links to the transcript, and a photo gallery. It also provides more information about the project, including five external reviews, all media stories, another way to submit a story, information on how to add your community, and K-12 education programming. Our Google Analytics demonstrate that the website is an important component, with 59 percent of users accessing the website from outside of the United States.7

We employ a media agency to maintain our website and there are ongoing costs for any changes and updates. Best practice is to overhaul the site at least once in the first three years and probably two or three times over ten years.8 As per our agreement with the media agency, we developed all the wording, content, and images for the website. We also input all the stories, associated photographs, and news media coverage. The agency handles web development and maintenance.

Collaboration in Google Docs

Google Drive holds a Hear, Here masterfile: it acts as a working file that allows everyone associated with the project to contribute to the work as well as edit working documents that will eventually appear to the public. Google Drive holds all the work from audio files, web content, and newspaper editorials. Its collaborative platform allows for a democratic process in content creation, especially in the classroom.9 However, all digital technology has the potential to fail, and is subject to funding and personnel changes. To mitigate issues of sustainability and longevity, we have an agreement with Murphy Library Archives at University of Wisconsin-La Crosse (UW-L) to hold hard copies of all materials generated for Hear, Here.10

Teaching Hear, Here in a University Classroom

Teaching Hear, Here means teaching the fundamentals of social history, oral history, and public history, and demonstrating how a combination of these elements can lead to activism and social change. We begin with the fundamentals of social history: the idea that anyone and everyone can contribute to the history of their community, city, state, and nation. I then have students read about the methodology and importance of oral history, focusing on the philosophy of Marxist historian Paul Thompson, who encourages the collection of stories from historically underrepresented and marginalized people.11 Students then read articles about the impact of other radical public history projects that incorporate oral history, such as the Montreal Life Stories Project and the Cleveland Homeless Oral History Project.12 These projects demonstrate that once challenging stories are placed in the mainstream, they generate conversations about the state of the community, what it has been, and where it is going.

Beyond the historiography, a crucial element of teaching this class is to do it in a community setting. I lead the Hear, Here classes in the boardroom of Downtown Mainstreet, Inc. (DMI), a local business association office and one of our community partners. Having the class at an off-campus and downtown location contributes to students seeing this not just as a school project but as work in a field that would benefit the community. The downtown location of the class also embeds the class into the space we research and serve.

The students in these classes do two types of interviews. For the first interview, students found narrators of excellent downtown-based stories that we heard about in our larger analysis of downtown. This series of interviews includes stories about a fight to move a monument of the Ten Commandments out of a public park, a campaign to save and move an 1850s home turned garage out of a construction zone, and the story of a student who was offered work at a strip club. This first set of interviews, along with the required background archival research about each story, teaches students best interview practices and helps them get comfortable with their role as project creators.

For the second set of interviews, students sought stories from historically underrepresented and marginalized groups. In order to build trust with these community members in advance of class, I contacted communities of color in La Crosse, as well as organizations working with people facing homelessness. For example, I attended events put on by the Office of Multicultural Student Services and Campus Climate at UW-L, Human Rights Commission events, and meetings at the city; I also helped organize events in conjunction with all three organizations. I further worked with organizations who provide services for marginalized people to combat poverty. This laid the groundwork for in-class meetings with representatives from service organizations that do work on behalf of the vulnerable. These meetings were supplemented by readings from academic journals and books about topics such as white privilege, Marxist interpretations of gentrification, and the systemic issues surrounding homelessness.13 Through these in-class meetings, students got to know the individuals within the community who could help them find narrators.

The stories that came out of the second set of interviews are profound. Some of the stories students collected are difficult to hear but they lead to important changes in people’s lives, and in the communities of color that many of our narrators work in, with, and for. One story is told by Antoiwana Williams describing her experience of being called the N-word on the day of her graduation. Another story is told by ChongCher Lee about the significance of a photograph of the Ban Vinai Refugee Camp in Thailand where he lived after fleeing Laos. Yet another story is told by Martin Peeples, a formerly homeless man who once slept in the garden behind the Catholic cathedral. Most of the stories collected are like these three; they are stories of struggle, survival, hope, memory, difficult times and lessons learned, community and sharing, and protecting one another.

For some students, their involvement with Hear, Here acted as a gateway into activism. One student in particular, Jennifer DeRocher, became interested in anti-racism, attended the White Privilege Conference, and ultimately produced a capstone project based on the interview that she conducted about the false arrest of Shaundel Spivey due to his critique of the police. As I have discussed elsewhere, this particular story drew fire from some local business people, politicians, and city officials who wanted the story taken down. Later the signs that lead to the story were stolen, effectively silencing the voice of a Black man in our community.14 DeRocher’s reaction to this was to study sources such as oral histories and the local newspaper for incidents of racism of various types. Her capstone posits that La Crosse had been a “sundown town,” or a city that purposely maintained itself as white since the 1890s. James Loewen, the preeminent scholar on sundown towns, later confirmed DeRocher’s findings.15

Digital Community Engagement as an Element of Local Policy Change

More recently the story told by Dan Green (Kera Cho Mani ga), excerpted at the outset of this chapter, began to take a heightened meaning in the collective imagination of La Crosse, acting as another rallying cry for activists. The remainder of this chapter will be an examination of the influence Hear, Here had in the most recent movement to retire the “Hiawatha” statue. As we will see, Hear, Here helped to bring some important stories into the mainstream, and thus joined a river of less-public discussions about the statue that resulted in conversations and eventually new understandings and attitudes.

Three stories emerged in the first three years of the Hear, Here project that acted as a catalyst for the retirement of the gigantic statue along the Mississippi. The first narrator was Dan Green (Kera Cho Mani ga) in 2015. He explains that many long-term residents of La Crosse believe the statue honored Native Americans. His response is one of both understanding and resistance. The second phase of the project included a 2017 poetry contest, which generated a poem titled “Fun.” In this poem, William Stobb explains the “look” of the statue as cartoonish, and its meaning in context of the 1960s. Finally, in the most recent 2018 additions to the project, Lutheran pastor Benjamin Morris moves the meaning of the statue far beyond La Crosse itself into the larger colonialist endeavor of the United States. He articulates a personal connection made between the statue and the protests he participated in against the Dakota Access Pipeline at Standing Rock.

By no means is Hear, Here the first forum to air La Crosse citizens’ opinions about the statue. As a history project, one of the things that we do is overlay stories of past events, thoughts, and ideas, making them constantly and consistently present in the landscape. In no other Hear, Here location is this more true than for the “Hiawatha” statue, which has been embroiled in controversy for sixty years. There are three major periods where the arguments surrounding the meaning of the statue became particularly intense: 1) in 1958–1963, when it was first conceived, created, and named; 2) in 2000, when it was in need of a costly repair; 3) and in 2015–2018, when Hear, Here and other organizations came together and created pressure to change local policy.

The initial controversy beginning in 1958 centered on naming and placement. The naming debate revolved around whether the statue should be called “Hiawatha,” after a well-known Disney cartoon Little Hiawatha, or Chief Decorah, after a prominent member of the local Ho-Chunk band.16 In the end, the City of La Crosse named the statue “Hiawatha” because they believed the connection to Disney would bring more tourists to the area.17 The second controversy in the initial period was about placement. The proposed, and ultimately chosen, location for the statue is at the convergence of three rivers, an area the Ho-Chunk consider sacred ground.18 This location was also near where the United States removed the Ho-Chunk people via steamboat under the Indian Removal Act of 1830.19 The Disneyfied statue representing a person unrelated to the local Native American group helps create a collective amnesia that denies the colonial violence that occurred at the location where the statue now stands.

In 2000 the statue once again became news, this time because it needed repair.20 At this moment the city put together a committee to decide the fate of the statue—retirement or repair. A number of local debates were held and the local paper covered the story extensively. The family of Anthony Zimmerhakl, the deceased artist who created the statue in 1958, had a large voice in this debate. They believed that taking the statue down would dishonor the artist. Ho-Chunk people, on the other hand, argued that keeping the statue up was a dishonor to them and their culture. In the end the committee chose to repair rather than retire the statue.21

This brings us to the 2015–2018 debate, the debate in which Hear, Here took part. It’s worth establishing a timeline of events. In 2015, the Hear, Here project launched Dan Green’s (Kera Cho Mani ga) narration about what he calls “the Colossus of Kitsch.” Then in 2015, students in Timothy Gongaware’s capstone class in Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice at UW-L produced a 24-minute video about the statue. In 2016, Gongaware and top administrators at UW-L shared the video broadly with the university and the public.22 This same year, William Stobb contributed his poem “Fun,” which characterized the statue as a cartoon-like portrayal, to Hear, Here. In 2017, because of national controversy around Confederate monuments, the Arts Board and the Human Rights Commission at the City teamed up to create a listening session hosted at the Ho-Chunk Nation’s Three Rivers House on December 6, 2017.23 And in 2018, Pastor Morris added the third Hear, Here story about the statue by relating its history to the Dakota Access Pipeline protests in which he participated. In January 2018, Tracy Littlejohn (Cooninaziwi) created a Facebook group titled “Hiawatha Statue Removal.” Later in March, a petition for retirement and a letter-writing campaign began, and in April an anti-statue citizens’ group was formed.

The anti-statue arguments presented in 2015–2018 were sophisticated—possibly because Gongaware’s students’ 24-minute video focused on an Indigenous representation in La Crosse allowed for a fuller examination of the issue. In the video, we find arguments that stereotypical imagery affects the self-esteem of Native American people, and that stereotyping creates identity crises that contribute to increased suicide rates among Native Americans. The video also states that Native American peoples do not form a single group, but many groups, and therefore it is offensive to assume that “Hiawatha” represents the Ho-Chunk. Along the same lines it is asserted that images of Native Americans are always placed in the past, which is detrimental for people’s understanding of Native peoples in today’s society. The video culminates by arguing that keeping Native American peoples as a single group and representing them in the past are forms of white supremacy that perpetuate the imbalance of the power between Native Americans and white Americans.

In addition to the video, there was a marked shift in representation of this side in the mainstream media as well. In a La Crosse Tribune article, Shaundel Spivey, head of the Human Rights Commission, explains the issue thus:

Herein we see a major shift from the earlier two anti-statue groundswells: the Ho-Chunk and their supporters are now the ones defining the narrative, their voices are amplified, and they often choose to not directly address the narrative formed by the family and statue supporters.

The pro-statue arguments in this phase relied on the argument from 2000, focused on its traditional place in the city, honoring the Ho-Chunk people, and nostalgic memories about the deceased creator Anthony Zimmerhakl.25 Two new arguments in this camp emerged: claims that the Zimmerhakls have Native American ancestry, and that Zimmerhakl taught his students reverence for Native American peoples.26

Because of this renewed discussion around the statue, Mayor Tim Kabat called together a group on February 14, 2018. The group included council members, members of the Ho-Chunk Nation, and members of the Zimmerhakl family. The purpose of the group was to discuss the possibility of taking down the statue, ideally with the consent of the Zimmerhakl family. The mayor learned from the 2000 debates that media coverage could inflame the issue, creating retrenchment on both sides. Creating an unofficial group that bridged the different perspectives in the debate successfully kept the conversation out of the media and away from City Council Chambers where it was less certain how the chips would fall. The mayor hoped to resolve the issue peacefully and quietly.

Around the time the group began meeting, I prepared a letter to the editor with a colleague, Kate Parker, in response to a column that we thought overrepresented those who wanted to keep the statue.27 I checked with Tracy Littlejohn (Cooninaziwi) who told me to keep the issue out of the paper and instead persuaded us to start a letter-writing campaign that might increase the support to retire the statue. So, along with Parker and in consultation with members of the Ho-Chunk Nation, we drafted an email to colleagues and other interested parties. Someone forwarded the email to student Aaron Batoya. Along with a larger group of students, he began to gather signatures at the clock tower on campus, at farmers markets, and as part of a door-to-door campaign. Batoya and his colleagues also requested letters from faculty and community members interested in writing against the statue. In this way, Batoya collected 1,328 signatures and eleven letters. Individuals sent various other letters and emails directly to the mayor based on the original email that Parker and I wrote and a subsequent letter-writing request made via the Facebook group “Hiawatha Statue Removal.”

In the meantime, city council member Jacqueline Marcou, one of the people who was at the meeting with the mayor, organized a group of concerned citizens: two council members, three faculty members (myself, Parker, and Dan Green), Hear, Here narrator Benjamin Morris, and Aaron Batoya. We met to discuss the next steps in helping to continue the momentum for the statue’s retirement. More letters were added and we circulated the petition to new groups.

On July 24, 2018, the group convened by the mayor five months earlier met once more. On this same day, the petition and letters gathered by the UW-L students were delivered to the mayor’s office. At this meeting, the Zimmerhakl family expressed that they would like the statue preserved, and if that meant moving the statue onto private land they would be amenable. Both sides viewed the compromise to move the statue, which will cost an estimated $50,000, as a good solution to their opposed goals.28

This third movement to retire the statue was different from the earlier two in a number of ways. First, the Ho-Chunk and their supporters brought the issue to the fore themselves using the platform of Hear, Here and the student video, which allowed them to create and control the narrative. Open debates about the statue were held on Ho-Chunk property and sanctioned by two government committees: the Arts Board and the Human Rights Commission. Two powerful city boards were supporting the anti-statue debate, helping to maintain and support the Ho-Chunk narratives. This left the Zimmerhakl family and their supporters scrambling to form a new narrative that did not relate to the arguments articulated and controlled by those against the statue. That the mayor was a progressive also gave the debate an opening to affecting policy change. The mayor astutely created a group with key players—family members of the artist, city council members for and against the statue, and Ho-Chunk people—that could craft a policy behind closed doors that La Crosse residents would respect no matter what side of the debate they were on. Advocates for statue retirement, through a petition and letter-writing campaign, provided additional pressure. In the end it became obvious to the Zimmerhakl family that they were not going to win the long game: “Council members are going to change. Mayors are going to change. Ideas are going to change. We might win this time around but next time around, we may lose.”29

While this is a win in some ways—a stereotypical statue is being taken down after sixty years of debate—it is but a small victory that does little to affect the larger goal of respect and understanding of the history of Native peoples. While the pain of the statue is removed, the tragedy of imperialism and white-is-right history remains. This is true not only of the “Big Indian” statue but also of all the anti-Black Confederate statues removed throughout the Southern United States. Controversy over monument removal is not relegated to the South or the former Confederacy; there is much work to be done in northern states as well. Until the powerful white population can understand and appreciate the position of the groups they have oppressed, express their sympathy and regret, and consider reparations, this story will not be over. Statues may come down but it’s the hearts and minds of those that would have them remain that are the real battlegrounds for change.

Sixty years of controversy around the statue generated many different arguments and moments of influence. Hear, Here intersected with these histories and actions, serving as a way for Dan Green’s (Kera Cho Mani ga’s) story to be told and retold. The project made his story consistently visible rather than relegated to historical editorials, university classrooms, or ephemeral Columbus Day protests. Creating yet another—and in some ways more permanent—source of visibility for Green’s (Kera Cho Mani ga’s) voice was one link in a sequence that included the filming of a documentary, community discussions, social media groups, advocacy by private citizens, municipal-sanctioned discussion groups, and petitions, letter-writing campaigns, op-eds, articles, and letters to the editor. Hear, Here was a link in the chain that would ultimately lead to a decision to move the statue.

I would like to thank first and foremost archivists Laura Godden at Special Collections Murphy Library and Scott Brouwer at the La Crosse Public Library Archives for their help identifying and scanning important sources that form the basis of this article. To Rebecca Wingo and the editors of DiCE for asking me to participate and patiently reviewing my work numerous times. Thank you to Katrina Bjornstad, my Research Assistant at Western University, for work on the footnotes and fact checking. To my readers Jennifer DeRocher, Michelle Hamilton, Patricia Skidmore, and Kate Parker. To Dan Green, Tracy Little John and Tim Blackmore who are always available for consultation. And to all the students and narrators who have participated in Hear, Here. This project would not be what it is without you.

Notes

1. Ariel Beaujot, Hear, Here: Voices of Downtown La Crosse, http://www.hearherelacrosse .org/. All Hear, Here materials are also housed at Hear, Here: Voices of La Crosse Manuscript Collection, LAX Mss 2015/01. University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

2. The use of the term “retired” rather than “removed” was suggested as part of the campaign by Tracy Little John, a member of the Ho-Chunk Nation and also the creator of the Facebook page. The language of removal harkens back to the removal of Native groups from the areas east of the Mississippi and this is why the group opposing the statue chose to use different terminology.

3. First launch was on April 12, 2015 and resulted in 250 calls that day and 776 calls for the month. The second launch on April 28, 2018 resulted in 380 calls, adding to the 581 calls for that month. In comparison April 2016 had 84 calls and April 2017 had 96 calls.

4. Initial start up cost for EZ route was just under $2,000 for the first year (or $167 a month) and just over $1,000 for subsequent years (or $84 a month). Custom-building an IVR system is about twelve times the cost.

5. For more information about how to build a Hear, Here project using AWS Connect see: Fabrizio Napolitano and Mark Tovey, “Hear, Here at City of London: Build a DIY Audio-Tour with Amazon Connect,” AWS Contact Center, April 9, 2019.

6. Initial start-up cost for AWS Connect: $190.02 (or $15/month) and $90.09 (or $8/month) for every year thereafter.

7. La Crosse Hear, Here Google Analytics data since the website launch on March 4, 2015 shows 10,039 total users. Unfortunately, we do not have any data from approximately January 12, 2018 – January 9, 2019. We also noticed an issue starting June 2017, as there are only small spikes of data reported starting then until this issue was fixed on Jan. 9, 2019.

8. Initial costs will vary but quotes will likely range between $10,000 and $25,000 with a yearly maintenance cost of about $2,500.

9. In Google Drive, we keep records of the full and edited audio, transcripts, annotated bibliographies, interview questions, IRB and consent forms, photographs for each story, walking tours, presentations, analytics of the phone system, charts and tables for all stories, grants written, university class material like syllabi and readings, poster and pamphlet designs, “how to” documents for future contributors, maps and mapping information, web design information, and all writing done about the project including OpEds, journal articles, manuscripts, and book chapters.

10. Special Collections Murphy Library holds all the audio on files, transcripts, questions, consent forms, annotated bibliographies, all the class work, and all the extra materials generated in Google Drive, along with print-outs of all the web changes, and many (but not all) emails that have been exchanged about Hear, Here.

11. Paul Thompson, The Voices of the Past, 3d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).

12. Daniel Kerr, “We Know What the Problem Is: Using Oral History to Develop a Collective Analysis of Homelessness from the Bottom Up,” Oral History Review 30, no. 1 (2003): 27-45; Steven High, Oral History at the Crossroads: Sharing Life Stories of Survival and Displacement (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2014).

13. Robin DiAngelo, “White Fragility,” International Journal of Critical Pedagogy 3, no. 3 (2012): 54-70; George Lipsitz, “The Racialization of Space, the Spacialization of Race: Theorizing The Hidden Architecture of Landscape,” Landscape Journal, 6, no. 1 (2007): 10-23; Robert Weyeneth, “The Architecture of Racial Segregation: Challenges of Preserving the Problematic Past,” The Public Historian 27, no. 4 (2005): 11-44; J. Kuo Wei Tchen and L. Ševčenko, “The ‘Dialogic Museum’ Revisited: A Collaborative Reflection” in: Letting Go? Sharing Historical Authority in a User Generated World, ed. Bill Adair et al. (The Pew Center for Arts & Humanities, 2011): 80–97; Dan Collins, “Community Mapping: From Representation to Action” in Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Electronic Art, ed. K. Cleland, L. Fisher, and R. Harley (Sydney: International Symposium on Electronic Art, 2013).

14. Ariel Beaujot, “Sun Up in a Sundown Town: Public History, Private Memory, and Racism in a Small City,” The Public Historian 40, no. 2 (2018): 43-68.

15. Nathan Hansen, “Sociologist discusses La Crosse’s history as a ‘sundown town,’” La Crosse Tribune, October 28, 2016, accessed May 30, 2016; Jourdan Vian, “La Crosse mayors, community pledge to work toward equality,” La Crosse Tribune, December 9, 2016, accessed May 30, 2017. See also: James Loewen, Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006).

16. “Hiawatha No Native: Koch Objects to Idea for Riverside Statue,” La Crosse Tribune, June 29, 1958, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin; “For Indian Statue: Society to Oppose Name of ‘Hiawatha,’” La Crosse Tribune, April 3, 1961, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin; “Hiawatha vs. Decorah: Aldermen Hear Debate On Name For Statue,” La Crosse Tribune, September 12, 1961, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

17. Press Release from City County Tourist Publicity Committee, April 20, 1962, La Crosse Series 13- Box 16- Folder 5, La Crosse Public Library Archives, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

18. Kidder, “Object to Hiawatha Statue: Indians on Warpath Against Chamber Unit,” La Crosse Tribune, March 29, 1961.

19. For information about Ho-Chunk removal see: La Crosse County Historical Sketches Series 1 (La Crosse: Liesenfeld Press, 1931), pg 31, La Crosse County Historical Society, La Crosse, Wisconsin; George Nichols, Recollections of a Pioneer Steamboat Pilot Contributing to the Early History of the Mississippi (La Crosse: Tucker and Company Printers, 1883), 17-18.

20. David Holstrum, “Hiawatha Big Indian Construction,” May 11, 2000, Series 013, Box 16, File 5_2000-5-11, La Crosse Public Library Archives, La Crosse, Wisconsin; Joan Kent, “Donation increases funds for Hiawatha statue restoration,”July 20, 2001, La Crosse Tribune vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

21. Joan Kent, “Indian statue repairs on hold,” La Crosse Tribune, June 16, 2000, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin; Betsy Bloom, “Family Wants Statue to Stay,” July 3, 2000, La Crosse Tribune, in Hiawatha Statue Folder, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin; Joan Kent, “Park Board to Discuss Fate of Hiawatha Statue,” July 19, 2000, La Crosse Tribune, Hiawatha Statue Folder, Special Collections Murphy Library; Joan Kent “Committee Disagrees on Fate of “Hiawatha”” November 16, 2000, La Crosse Tribune, In Hiawatha Statue Folder, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

22. Nathan Hansen, “UW-L Students Tackle ‘Big Indian’: Native American imagery in La Crosse topic of class video ‘Patterns,’” La Crosse Tribune, February 1, 2016, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

23. Jourdan Vian, “Controversy Over Hiawatha Statue,” La Crosse Tribune, December 7, 2017, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

24. Jourdan Vian, “Controversy Over Hiawatha Statue,” La Crosse Tribune, December 7, 2017.

25. Arla M. Clemons, “Arla M. Clemons, Indian Statue Highlights Native Heritage” La Crosse Tribune, February 28, 2016, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin; Steve Kiedrowski, “Steve Kiedrowski: Hiawatha Statue is a Tribute,” La Crosse Tribune, February 21, 2016, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin; Lilly Nelson, “Lilly Nelson, “Hiawatha” Represents Our Diversity,” La Crosse Tribune, February 19, 2018, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

26. Jourdan Vian, “Hiawatha Statue Debate Heats Up,” La Crosse Tribune, December 9, 2017, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin; Jourdan Vian, “Controversy Over Hiawatha Statue,” La Crosse Tribune, December 7, 2017; Steve Kiedrowski, “Steve Kiedrowski: Statue Is a Tribute to our Heritage,” La Crosse Tribune, December 17, 2017, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

27. Peggy Derrick, “Things That Matter: Hiawatha Nostalgia,” La Crosse Tribune, March 4, 2018, in vertical file: La Crosse: Art- Statues/Sculptures- Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

28. Scott Behrens, “Hiawatha Statue in Riverside Park may be removed soon,” News 8000 WKBT-TV, July 24, 2018; Jordan Vian,“ ‘Hiawatha’ could find a new home outside of Riverside Park,” La Crosse Tribune, July 29, 2018.

29. Scott Behrens, “Hiawatha Statue in Riverside Park may be removed soon,” News 8000 WKBT-TV, July 24, 2018.

Works Cited

Beaujot, Ariel. Hear, Here: Voices of Downtown La Crosse, http://www.hearhere lacrosse.org/.

Beaujot, Ariel. “Sun Up in a Sundown Town: Public History, Private Memory, and Racism in a Small City.” The Public Historian 40, no. 2 (2018): 43–68.

Behrens, Scott. “Hiawatha Statue in Riverside Park may be removed soon.” News 8000 WKBT-TV, July 24, 2018.

Bloom, Betsy. “Family Wants Statue to Stay.” La Crosse Tribune, July 3, 2000. In Hiawatha Statue Folder, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Clemons, Arla M. “Arla M. Clemons, Indian Statue Highlights Native Heritage.” La Crosse Tribune, February 28, 2016. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Collins, Dan. “Community Mapping: From Representation to Action.” In Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Electronic Art, ed. K. Cleland, L. Fisher, and R. Harley. Sydney: International Symposium on Electronic Art, 2013.

Derrick, Peggy. “Things That Matter: Hiawatha Nostalgia.” La Crosse Tribune, March 4, 2018. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

DiAngelo, Robin. “White Fragility.” International Journal of Critical Pedagogy 3, no. 3 (2012): 54–70.

“For Indian Statue: Society to Oppose Name of ‘Hiawatha.’” La Crosse Tribune, April 3, 1961. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Hansen, Nathan. “Sociologist discusses La Crosse’s history as a ‘sundown town.’” La Crosse Tribune, October 28, 2016. Accessed May 30, 2016.

Hansen, Nathan. “UW-L Students Tackle ‘Big Indian’: Native American imagery in La Crosse topic of class video ‘Patterns.’” La Crosse Tribune, February 1, 2016. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Hear, Here: Voices of La Crosse Manuscript Collection, LAX Mss 2015/01. University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Holstrum, David. “Hiawatha Big Indian Construction.” May 11, 2000, Series 013, Box 16, File 5_2000–5-11, La Crosse Public Library Archives, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

“Hiawatha No Native: Koch Objects to Idea for Riverside Statue.” La Crosse Tribune, June 29, 1958. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

“Hiawatha vs. Decorah: Aldermen Hear Debate On Name For Statue.” La Crosse Tribune, September 12, 1961. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

High, Steven. Oral History at the Crossroads: Sharing Life Stories of Survival and Displacement. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2014.

Kent, Joan. “Donation increases funds for Hiawatha statue restoration.” La Crosse Tribune, July 20, 2001. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Kent, Joan. “Indian Statue Repairs on Hold.” La Crosse Tribune, June 16, 2000. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Kent, Joan. “Park Board to Discuss Fate of Hiawatha Statue.” La Crosse Tribune, July 19, 2000. In Hiawatha Statue Folder, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Kent, Joan. “Committee Disagrees on Fate of ‘Hiawatha.’” November 16, 2000, La Crosse Tribune. In Hiawatha Statue Folder, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Kerr, Daniel. “We Know What the Problem Is: Using Oral History to Develop a Collective Analysis of Homelessness from the Bottom Up.” Oral History Review 30, no. 1 (2003): 27–45.

Kidder, “Object to Hiawatha Statue: Indians on Warpath Against Chamber Unit.” La Crosse Tribune, March 29, 1961.

Kiedrowski, Steve. “Steve Kiedrowski: Hiawatha Statue is a Tribute.” La Crosse Tribune, February 21, 2016. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Kiedrowski, Steve. “Steve Kiedrowski: Statue is a Tribute to our Heritage.” La Crosse Tribune, December 17, 2017. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Kuo Wei Tchen, J. and Liz Ševčenko. “The ‘Dialogic Museum’ Revisited: A Collaborative Reflection.” In: Letting Go? Sharing Historical Authority in a User Generated World, ed. Bill Adair, et al., 80–97. The Pew Center for Arts & Humanities, 2011.

La Crosse County Historical Society. La Crosse County Historical Sketches Series 1. La Crosse: Liesenfeld Press, 1931.

Lipsitz, George. “The Racialization of Space, the Spacialization of Race: Theorizing The Hidden Architecture of Landscape.” Landscape Journal 6, no. 1 (2007): 10–23.

Loewen, James. Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006.

Napolitano, Fabrizio and Mark Tovey. “Hear, Here at City of London: Build a DIY Audio-Tour with Amazon Connect.” AWS Contact Center, April 9, 2019.

Nelson, Lilly. “Lilly Nelson, ‘Hiawatha’ Represents Our Diversity.” La Crosse Tribune, February 19, 2018. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Nichols, George. Recollections of a Pioneer Steamboat Pilot Contributing to the Early History of the Mississippi. La Crosse: Tucker and Company Printers, 1883.

Press Release from City County Tourist Publicity Committee. April 20, 1962. La Crosse Series 13-Box 16-Folder 5, La Crosse Public Library Archives, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Thompson, Paul. The Voices of the Past, 3d ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Vian, Jourdan. “Controversy Over Hiawatha Statue.” La Crosse Tribune, December 7, 2017. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Vian, Jourdan. “La Crosse mayors, community pledge to work toward equality,” La Crosse Tribune, December 9, 2016. Accessed May 30, 2017.

Vian, Jourdan. “Hiawatha Statue Debate Heats Up.” La Crosse Tribune, December 9, 2017. In vertical file: La Crosse: Art-Statues/Sculptures-Hiawatha/“Big Indian,” University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Murphy Library Special Collections and Area Research Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin.

Vian, Jordan.“‘Hiawatha’ could find a new home outside of Riverside Park.” La Crosse Tribune, July 29, 2018.

Weyeneth, Robert. “The Architecture of Racial Segregation: Challenges of Preserving the Problematic Past.” The Public Historian 27, no. 4 (2005): 11–44.