Surveillance of the worlds of tourism: Foucault and the eye-of-power
Surveillance of the worlds of tourism: Foucault and the eye-of-power
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0261-5177(98)00090-9
复制
发表时间：
1999-02-01
影响因子：
12.7
通讯作者：
Hollinshead, K
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hollinshead, K
在过去的十年中，特别是在 Urry 的著作（1990，《旅游者凝视：当代社会的休闲与旅行》。伦敦：Sage）出版之后，机构/专业“凝视”的视角概念已在旅游研究中流行起来。虽然很少有人对尤里关于旅游业在后现代社会中的地位和意义的重要著作进行评论，但很少关注法国文学哲学的建构“lethough”（由此产生了英语术语“凝视”），莱珀对尤里对福柯思想的借鉴进行了有用的基础回顾。本文试图接续莱珀留下的地方，并对旅游业中的监视权力（lespect）进行更深入的批评，因为它对福柯关于权力之眼的思想进行辩证检验，因为权力之眼通过旅游和旅行（以及旅游和旅行研究）的机构/组织/机构发挥作用。这种监督的力量——这种判断和治理的力量——被证明是规范化话语和普遍化实践的权威组合，它通常会优先考虑旅游业中和通过旅游业对遗产/社会/世界的某些理解——就像权力之眼在任何机构、专业或集体环境中所做的那样。通过这种福柯式的愿景，从事旅游业的个人（以及旅行的他/她！）被视为“homo docilis”——即，不仅参与世界的调节和对其社会、文化、自然和地理环境的掌握的人，而且还通过他/她所坚持的以眼睛为中心的观点来调节并由此约束自己。本文旨在重新调查决策者在旅游研究的调查议程和旅游管理的发展实践中的参与情况，希望使他们在其工作的主导假设和预设方面更加尊重他人（也具有自我意识），(C) 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. 保留所有权利。
During the last decade, particularly following the publication of Urry's (1990, The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Society. London: Sage) text, the perspectival concept of the institutional/professional "gaze" has come into currency in tourism studies. while few reviews of Urry's important work on the place and significance of tourism in postmodern society pay much attention to the French litero-philosophical construction le regard (which gave rise to the English term "the gaze"), Leiper has produced a useful foundational review of Urry's debt to Foucauldian thought. This current article endeavours to take over where Leiper left off, and provides a more searching critique of the power of surveillance (le regard) in tourism, as it yields a dialectical inspection of Foucauldian thought concerning the eye-of-power as it acts through the institutions/organisations/agencies of tourism and travel (and of tourism and travel research). Such a power of surveillance - such a power of judgement and governance - is shown to be an authoritative mix of normalising discourse and universalising praxis which routinely privileges certain understandings of heritage/society/the world in and through tourism - as the eye-of-power can do in any institutional, professional, or aggregative setting. Through this Foucauldian vision, the individual who works in tourism (and he/she who travels!) is seen to be homo docilis - i.e., someone who not only participates in the regulation of the world and in the mastery of its social, cultural, natural and geographical environments, but who regulates and thereby constrains himself/herself through the ocularcentric outlooks which he/she upholds. The article seeks to reinvestigate the involvement of decision-making individuals in both investigative agendas in tourism research and in development practices in tourism management by hopefully making them much more other-regarded (and also self-aware) in terms of the governing suppositions and presuppositions they work to, (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.