scholarly journals Kuidas tekib pärand? Pärandiloome protsess kultuuri- ja looduspärandi näitel [Abstract: How is heritage generated? The heritage creation process as demonstrated by cultural and natural heritage]

2018 ◽  
pp. 493
Author(s):  
Kurmo Konsa
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Actor Network Theory ◽  
Theoretical Background ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
Creation Process ◽  
The Past ◽  
Natural Objects ◽  
The Future ◽  
Actor Networks

One of the most important materials available to us for building the future is the past. The future not only draws on the past, it is literally built out of the past. All this directly affects heritage as well – heritage is a technique that has to be used as effectively as possible for solving the local and global problems of contemporary and future societies. In this article, I describe the theoretical background of the heritage creation process and present two analytical tools that help to cast light on heritage identification processes. The first analytical possibility is to consider heritage creation processes based on different levels of society. Individual and community levels will be considered, along with local governments and the state, and finally all of mankind as well. Secondly, I differentiate object-centred, value-centred and human-centred approaches in creating heritage according to which aspects of heritage are at the centre of the process. I use the process of creating natural and cultural heritage as examples primarily in the Estonian context. The management of nature conservation and cultural heritage are two very significant fields of activity where the world is discursively divided into certain definite parts and managed according to this division. The views of both courses of action concerning heritage are rather different due to different professional backgrounds. The basis for heritage management is the clear definition of the values of heritage. All objects and phenomena are not equally valuable and it is impossible to manage them all. The fact that people ascribe heritage values to both natural and cultural objects does not mean that heritage is an arbitrarily constructed phenomenon that we can treat however we like. Alongside values, the next important aspect in managing heritage that has to be taken into consideration is the materiality of heritage. Heritage of any description always exists in material form. This is obvious in the case of natural objects and material cultural heritage, but intellectual and spiritual cultural heritage also implies at least the existence of people. The materiality of heritage means that heritage is always associated with other material objects, forming actor networks, to use Bruno Latour’s terminology from his so-called actor-network theory. Just as living beings are engaged in ecological systems, maintaining their own self-existence even without mankind, so are buildings, for instance, similarly connected to both human and natural actors. The preservation of natural or cultural heritage will not succeed without the active enterprise of man. Thereat, the central idea is not solely the preservation of physical material or the gene pool from the past, but also the management of changes. Managing changes means that it is impossible for us to preserve objects, phenomena and nature in such a way that it would be isolated from the physical and social environment. Yet since the environment is constantly changing, the adaptation of heritage management to those changes is necessary. Taking changes into consideration requires recognition of the historicity of heritage, and this also applies to natural objects and environments.

Controversies as method for ANTi-history: An inquiry into public administration practices

Organization ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 135050842110153
Author(s):  
César Tureta ◽  
Bruno Luiz Américo ◽  
Stewart Clegg
Keyword(s):  
Research Question ◽  
Actor Network Theory ◽  
Public University ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Focal Points ◽  
Translation Process ◽  
Actor Network ◽  
Multiple Realities ◽  
The Past ◽  
Actor Networks

Drawing on Actor-Network Theory and the cartography of controversies, we present a method for ANTi-History research to investigate the implementation of a contract between a labour services company and a public university hospital in Brazil. The research question focuses on how the past is enacted in the present. The method is a general guideline based on five focal points used to organize the fieldwork: identifying controversies; mapping the actor-network; drawing out the translation process; politics of actor-networks and multiple reality/power relations. The proposed method makes two contributions to ANTi-History literature. First, although these focal points have been discussed by ANTi-History scholars, they are scattered throughout the literature. We unite them to offer a guide to doing historically embedded research. Second, we show how controversy analysis can be helpful for mapping the politics of actor-networks and describing multiple realities in the construction of history.

scholarly journals The Perishable Past - On the Advantage and Disadvantage of Archaeology for Life

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 183-202
Author(s):  
Jes Wienberg
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Cultural Values ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
Social Anthropology ◽  
Cultural Heritage Management ◽  
The Past ◽  
Medieval Church ◽  
Point Of Departure

The aim of the article is to make clear whether and in that case why archaeology is important. Often this is seen as a self-evident fact which needs no motivation. My point of departure is a concrete example, namely, the medieval church of Mårup in Denmark which will soon fall into the sea: Why is it so crucial to save or document this church and many other traces of the past? Isn't the so-called cultural heritage condemned to destruction and oblivion? Rhetorical catchwords, cultural values, justifications and explanations within cultural heritage management, archaeology, history and social anthropology are presented and critically discussed together with indirect motivations borrowed from the literature about the abuse of the past.

scholarly journals Cultural Heritage and Antiquarian Attitude

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-44
Author(s):  
Mats Burström
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
General Public ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
The Past

The cultural heritage is not simply given by history; its content is also a matter for decision in the present. This calls for a dialogue between the heritage management and different groups in society. It is also necessary to formulate a vision of how material remains from the past can enrich the life of the citizen in general. One way to ensure that the cultural heritage touches people is to integrate it into new contexts. The realisation of these points requires a new amiquarian attitude towards the general public.

scholarly journals Is the Truth Down There?: Cultural Heritage Conflict and the Politics of Archaeological Authority

2006 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 143-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Barber
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Scientific Explanation ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
Archaeological Record ◽  
The Past ◽  
Culture History ◽  
History Approach ◽  
Applied Knowledge ◽  
Theoretical Foundations

The selective pressures and processes of cultural heritage management effectively disinherit some interest groups. Where this occurs in the context of postcolonial or nationalist conflict, the material archaeological record may be referenced to support or reject particular views. The disciplinary assumptions behind the archaeological evidence so produced are not usually contested in judicial contexts. A review of archaeology’s theoretical foundations suggests that this naivety itself may be problematic. A descriptive culture history approach dominated archaeology over the first half of the twentieth century with a strong political appeal to nationalist politics. Subsequently archaeology became concerned with processual explanation and the scientific identification of universal laws of culture, consistent with postwar technological optimism and conformity. A postprocessual archaeology movement from the 1970s has promoted relativism and challenged the singular authority of scientific explanation. Archaeologists caught within this debate disagree over the use of the archaeological record in situations of political conflict. Furthermore, the use of archaeology in the sectarian debate over the Ayodhya birthplace of Rama suggests that the material record of the past can become highly politicized and seemingly irresolvable. Archaeological research is also subject to other blatant and subtle political pressures throughout the world, affecting the nature and interpretation of the record. A system that privileges archaeological information values may be irrelevant also to communities who value and manage their ancestral heritage for customary purposes. Collectively this review of theory and applied knowledge suggests that it is unrealistic to expect that archaeology can authoritatively resolve strident claims and debates about the past. Instead, an important contemporary contribution of archaeology may be its potential to document cultural and historical contradictions and inclusions for the consideration of contemporary groups in conflict.

Preserving the Medieval City of Ani

2014 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 528-555 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heghnar Zeitlian Watenpaugh
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
Late Nineteenth Century ◽  
Muslim Country ◽  
Cultural Heritage Management ◽  
Heritage Sites ◽  
The Past ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Silk Road

Despite its architectural fame, the medieval city of Ani in eastern Turkey, once an Armenian capital on the Silk Road, was endangered until recently. Preserving the Medieval City of Ani: Cultural Heritage between Contest and Reconciliation traces the evolution of Ani since the late nineteenth century as an object of preservation and the subject of debate about heritage. As a primarily non-Muslim site in a modern, majority-Muslim country, Ani poses dilemmas shared by other cultural heritage sites in postconflict societies: it presents economic opportunity through tourism, but its history prompts questions about a painful recent past the state refuses to acknowledge. Analyzing the recent developments in cultural heritage management in Turkey involving international heritage organizations, especially for Christian and Armenian monuments, and highlighting the civil society debate about rediscovering long-suppressed episodes of Turkish history, Heghnar Zeitlian Watenpaugh argues that despite daunting difficulties beleaguering acknowledgment of the past, cultural heritage can provide a medium for reconciliation rather than contestation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document