If there is a process that has changed the relation between power and people in History, that has been without a doubt the French Revolution. For Paul Connerton the execution of Louis XVI was a turning point that will change politics and transform power to a new system imposed from the people. According to Connerton:
For those who came after, the present was seen as a time of fall into the ennui of a port- heroic age, or as a permanent state of crisis, the anticipation, whether hoped for or feared, of a recurrent eruption. Revolutionary imagining reached beyond the European heartland; since the late 19th century we have lived the myth of the Revolution much as the first Christian generations lived the myth of the End of the World (Connerton, 1989, pp. 6-7).
Following Connerton’s thought, it can be said that the 19th century will suffer serious changes in the way institutional powers interacted with the people. The change can be seenm for example, in the newly established republican government of United States of America. In the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution the founding fathers grant the people the right to bear arms, a controversial matter that is based on the idea that the people have the right to take up arms against the state if the people’s rights are violated. It is unsurprising then that the relations between power and people should change during the 19th century. The fear of an infectious revolution that could anihilate the most traditional way of government (monarchy) will influence the communication between the state and the people, and new tools to control people will develop. One such tool will be Museum and Universal Exhibitions.
London’s 1858 exhibition is considered the forerunner of the exhibitionist fever that will infect Western countries from that year onwards. The fairs were used to compete pacifically against other nations, to show technological advances and use them as symbols of power and development against rival states.
But universal exhibitions were not limited to scientific development, they also offered a public space for culture. According to Bennett (Routledge, 1996, pp. 82-83), it is now that we see a change in the exhibition of history, art and anthropology that will be introduced in public spaces such as museums and universal exhibitions. In the sumit of the colonial race, the culture of exotic starts to catch the eye of the public in the form of anthropological studies of the dominated peoples. The information was transmitted through museums, live exhibitions, photographies and dioramas and created the stereotypes that the Western world has to this day of the colonised nations. This new path of communication serve the state to involve its people in the state’s accomplishments, it made them witnesses and participants of the state’s acts through voyeurism. The ultimate goal of the exhibitions was to teach its subjects, create them a nationalist identity based on the difference with the Other to generate loyalty towards the nation, whose maximum representative is the state. Bennett sees beyond the creation of a new cultural memory, for him, the exhibitions serve the purpose to self-regulate the population. The voyeaur has a superior position to that of the exhibited people, giving them a sense of righteousness that encourages the viewer to be what the state tells them to be (i.e. not the Other). For the first time we see the government including the people in their policies as a result of the state’s fear of an armed social revolution.