It is a problem that some tourist attractions may promote stereotypes of a traditional culture. For example, the Dutch do not always wear wooden shoes. A greater problem is that at tourist attractions, especially historic sites, we can only present what we think we know about the past. But our knowledge of the past is constantly improving and changing because of continuing research, especially in archaeology. It is dangerous to build reconstructions of forts or historic houses, thinking they portray what actually existed, in reality. There are many historical reconstructions built in the 1920s and 1930s that we now know are not accurate; we wish they had not been built, and in the process they destroyed the archaeological remains. It is far better to build models and diorammas in museums to portray the past as we think we understand it. Models and diorammas also stir the imagination. The problem with re-enactors is more serious when there are military re-enactments of battles. Battles in the past, as they are today, were horrible episodes of suffering, death, blood, and gore. These re-enactments totally falsify the past, creating for entertainment something that should be horrible to see.

Hi, Camila! How are you? I think there are impacts, but we also need to be careful with the notion of authenticity, since all cultural assets of an intangible nature change over time. I would cite as an example the carnival in the city of Olinda, which takes place a week before the one intended for tourists for the local population.

Camila Vasconcelos

Keep in mind that all cultural assets change over time due to shifts in the values each generation applies: Article The Shifting Baseline Syndrome and Generational Amnesia in H...