The Next American Revolution: Sustainable Activism for the Twenty-First Century
The Next American Revolution: Sustainable Activism for the Twenty-First Century
复制标题
下一次美国革命：二十一世纪的可持续行动主义
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
David N. Pellow
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
David N. Pellow
《国家的文化财富》一书以亚当·斯密为题，为维维安娜·泽利泽等学者开创的文化经济学领域做出了贡献，该领域探索了经济和文化领域的不可分割性，更具体地说，通过象征性表现、仪式和叙事来创造经济价值。编辑们汇编了一些案例研究，阐明了文化资源（文化“遗产”，关于文物和地方的叙述，塑造产品和人民感知的图像）转化为经济财富的方式。这本书考察了影响这种转变的历史进程、制度和代理人，最有能力收回由此产生的利润的社会行动者，试图将文化转向经济目的时遇到的困难，以及克服这些困难的策略。这些案例研究几乎都相互参照，强调了一个共同的主题：国家、种族群体和不同的经济行为者在通过“遗产”旅游、国家、民族和商品的“品牌”以及消费者对生产过程的看法的管理来整合文化资源以创造经济价值的努力中可能处于不利地位。关于文化资源转化为经济财富的几种常见理论观点构成了每篇论文所研究的具体主题的基础。其一是，在确定文化价值并将其转化为经济用途的权力方面，存在着不对称和不平等，无论是在国家、族裔和职业群体之间，还是在任何市场商品的生产者之间。一份关于遗产保护历史和教科文组织指定世界遗产地点的文件详细介绍了具体的政治历史以及制度化的专业力量和民族精神，这些力量和精神导致富裕国家集中了指定的遗产地点。这样，这些国家就比其他国家更有能力从为旅游和其他商业目的开发遗产地中收回所损失的经济价值。保护专业人员的跨国动员，嵌入大学，学术学科和文化官僚机构，导致了一些国家比其他国家更有利于“文化遗产”生产的规则的制度化。采用“全球价值链”的观点，一些论文表明，在一个漫长的生产和营销链中，商品通过品牌，设计和针对特定消费者群体的叙述被赋予象征价值，增加文化价值的创造者通常会收回最终产品的大部分经济价值-例如，英国负责南非葡萄酒品牌的公司，或泰国在互联网上销售丝绸的中间商。欧文·戈夫曼（Erving Goffman）关于印象管理的著作，长期以来一直被机构社会学、职业社会学和旅游社会学的学者们很好地利用，在这里被明确地作为文化经济研究的一个有用的视角。对于一个严重依赖国际旅游的国家来说，作为一个有吸引力的旅游目的地的形象被战争和广泛传播的暴行图像破坏了，那么这个国家有什么选择呢？它会把死亡集中营和杀戮场变成历史的“景点”吗？或者它会试图抹去所有让人想起其污名化历史的迹象，将这个国家重新贴上与其他国家相同的标签，而这些国家的形象和历史被它劫持为自己的？本卷中的一篇论文分析了克罗地亚为了重振旅游业而管理不光彩的国家身份的策略，采用了戈夫曼的耻辱理论，建议
Alluding by its title to Adam Smith, The Cultural Wealth of Nations contributes to a field of cultural economics pioneered by scholars such as Viviana Zelizer, that explores the inseparability of economic and cultural domains and more specifically, the creation of economic value through symbolic representations, ritual, and narrative. The editors compiled a number of case studies that illumine the manner in which cultural resources (cultural ‘‘heritage,’’ narratives about artifacts and places, images shaping the perception of products and peoples) are transmuted into economic wealth. The book examines historical processes, institutions, and agents that have effected such transformations, the social actors best positioned to recoup the resulting profits, difficulties encountered in attempts to turn culture to economic ends, and tactics used to surmount them. The case studies, almost all of which usefully cross-reference one another, stress a common theme: nations, ethnic groups, and diverse economic actors may be advantaged or disadvantaged in efforts to marshal cultural resources to create economic value through ‘‘heritage’’ tourism, the ‘‘branding’’ of nations, peoples, and commodities, and the management of consumer perceptions of production processes. Several common theoretical perspectives on the transmutation of cultural resources into economic wealth underlie the specific subjects examined by each of the papers. One is that there are asymmetries and inequalities, whether between nations, ethnic and occupational groups, or producers of any marketed commodity, in the power to define cultural values and turn them to economic use. A paper on the history of heritage conservation and on the designation of UNESCO World Heritage sites offers a detailed account of the specific political history, as well as the institutionalized professional power and ethos that resulted in a clustering of designated heritage sites in wealthy nations. These nations are then better positioned than others to recoup the economic value to be culled from the exploitation of heritage sites for tourist and other commercial purposes. A transnational mobilization of conservation professionals, embedded in universities, scholarly disciplines, and cultural bureaucracies has resulted in the institutionalization of rules favoring ‘‘cultural heritage’’ production in some countries more than in others. Adopting a ‘‘global value chain perspective,’’ some papers demonstrate that in a long chain of production and marketing, in which goods are endowed with symbolic value through branding, design, and narratives targeting particular groups of consumers, the creators of added cultural value often recoup most of the economic value of the final product—for example, companies in the United Kingdom responsible for the branding of South African wine, or middlemen in Thailand selling silk cloth on the internet. Erving Goffman’s work on impression management, long turned to good use by scholars in the sociology of institutions, occupations, and tourism, is explicitly adopted here as a helpful perspective in the study of cultural economy. What are the options for a country heavily dependent upon international tourism whose image as an attractive destination is spoiled by war and widely circulated images of atrocities? Will it turn the death camps and killing fields into historical ‘‘attractions’’? Or will it attempt to erase all signs recalling its stigmatizing history, rebranding the nation as identical to that of other countries whose imagery and histories it hijacks as its own? One paper in this volume, analyzing Croatia’s tactics for managing a discreditable national identity in the interests of resuscitating its tourist industry, adopts Goffman’s theory of stigma, suggesting