See link for further work
2006 DMB with Creighton O. 'Contested Identities: the dissonant heritage of European Town Walls and Walled Towns' International Journal of Heritage Studies. (IJHS) 12:3 pp234 -254
Well, this from my experience a matter in many cases. As museums and visitor centres are changing from a linear understanding of communication (sender-reciever-based) to a more complex and systemic understanding of communication and interpretation, the need of the day is to develop and implement participatory approaches in the world of museums and visitor centres. IMO with this we will naturally get a broader and more complex content and debate.
I humbly suggest on Holocaust Memorial day that a fuller answer to my questions would be appropriate in the light of Regensburg's experience of Kristallnacht. In Bristol we need to interpret our legacy of the Slave Trade as well as more civically conventional heritage, In Regensburg...?
Yes, you can see a definite change in countries that have had visitor centers for a while. Similar to Mathias, I have seen a change towards a constructivist approach (not unlike some major art galleries) where information is put out there and visitors are left to construct their own meanings and sometimes narratives. One example is perhaps the visitor centre set up after the 1996 tourist massacre by Martin Bryant at the Port Arthur Historic Site, Tasmania. It has to deal with that grim event and the more distant past of convict incarceration on the site.
I think it is a political issue so any stance on it will be political in nature, much the same as supporting the mainstream is a political statement, especially if there is reliable information that contrasts the normative view on the subject. Take for instance the previous held belief in the US of Columbus being the first "European" to discover America. We have L'anse-aux-meadows viking settlements we have tales of Portuguese fishermen, we have the Reiss map and so on. Yet there are still Flat-Earthers. I would be more concerned with what benefit does the alternate view provide to the public. It may be as simple as allowing others to understand people with different views, and why they think that. You could try to teach people such as a skill. If everything is to assist in discourse then there should be some concept that is gained. I think for Heritage Management with the commodification of culture, we need to take into consideration, what value does it provide. A display on the dead sea scrolls may bring in biblical type of people who will pay to see it, and that in turn can benefit the Museum in curating or providing other materials. A display linked to a ethnic group may arouse interest from that ethnic group or people interested in that culture. Like all forms of media it is for the audience. With a Museum in cataloging or displaying, aside from politics, we if we are good reporters of an objects history, should relate what the object has meant through time, not just what it means to people today; however it is all about audience and social benefit, and there should always be a concern for politics, that is any public unrest it may cause. Ultimately the government will set limits on what is allowed to be publicly presented from locality to locality. IMO Museums are a form of display art.
Engagement with possibly effected communities would be a careful approach of consensus based programming.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Cartography
- Mapping
- Maps