Heritage and the Production of Authenticity - an experiential approach.

遗产与真实性的生产——一种体验式方法。

• 批准号: AH/F004907/1
• 负责人: Sian Jones
• 金额: $ 3.94万
• 依托单位: University of Manchester
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2007
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2007 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FF004907%2F1
• 关键词: Heritage; Production; Authenticity; experiential; approach.

This project examines how people experience and negotiate authenticity in respect to the historic environment, and why, for many, it is an important element in the production of a sense of identity and place. Authenticity is defined as the quality of being authentic, truthful, or genuine. In respect to the historic environment, it plays a fundamental role in determining what is worthy of conservation, as well as how sites and monuments should be preserved and presented. However, in practice authenticity is a nebulous concept and the process of distinguishing what is and what is not authentic is surrounded by complex criteria. For a long time it has been assumed that authenticity is an objective and measurable attribute inherent in the material fabric of artefacts and monuments. Scientific techniques and assessment criteria have been developed in an attempt to objectively determine the genuineness of artefacts and monuments, as well as the veracity and significance of their historical context. Yet such an approach to authenticity has been extensively criticised over the last three decades within a variety of academic disciplines (including archaeology, social anthropology, heritage studies, philosophy and history). 'Tests' for authenticity have been shown to be dominated by western ideals and epistemologies. Furthermore, many supposedly authentic cultural traditions and associated heritage sites have been shown to be invented, reinvented or renewed, often under the influence of ideologically motivated elites. This division between academic and heritage management approaches to authenticity leaves a problematic gap in our understanding. Neither approach addresses its powerful influence on how people relate to the historic environment, despite the recent emphasis on the contemporary social value of objects and monuments and the intangible aspects of heritage (e.g. in the widely cited Burra Charter and UNESCO's Nara Statement on Authenticity). As UNESCO's Nara conference highlighted, people's perceptions of authenticity are often associated with intangible qualities connected to aesthetic values, place of conservation and spiritual significance. Yet there has been very little sustained research providing a solid understanding of these aspects. My own recent research suggests that relationships between material objects and people, soil and land, often expressed through notions of 'birth' and 'nourishment', are fundamental to people's perceptions of what is authentic and what is not. Furthermore, whilst museums and heritage organisations play a role in attributing authenticity, this can be contested by visitors, who often associate it with intangible relationships of 'belonging' between people, objects, monuments and places. This project aims to investigate how people experience and negotiate authenticity in practice and how they deploy ideas about authenticity to make sense of their own place in a world characterised by displacement and fragmentation. Combining an analysis of the history of the concept with recent theories of materiality, personhood and place, I intend to develop a theoretical approach which focuses on the 'experiential' aspects of authenticity. Using this approach I will then explore how authenticity is experienced and negotiated in practice through a series of case studies drawn from Scotland and the Scottish diaspora. Qualitative methodologies, including participant observation and semi-structured interviewing, will be used to gain insights into how people experience and negotiate authenticity. The result will be three articles in peer-reviewed journals establishing a new agenda for academic research on authenticity in respect to the historic environment, whilst also highlighting the implications for heritage management policy and practice.

该项目探讨了人们如何体验和协商历史环境的真实性，以及为什么对许多人来说，它是产生认同感和地方感的重要因素。真实性被定义为真实、真实或真实的品质。就历史环境而言，它在决定什么是值得保护的，以及如何保护和展示遗址和古迹方面发挥着根本作用。然而，在实践中，真实性是一个模糊的概念，区分什么是真实的，什么是不真实的过程被复杂的标准所包围。很长一段时间以来，人们一直认为真实性是人工制品和纪念碑的材料结构中固有的客观和可测量的属性。科学技术和评估标准的发展是为了客观地确定文物和纪念碑的真实性，以及它们的历史背景的真实性和意义。然而，在过去的三十年里，这种真实性的方法在各种学科（包括考古学、社会人类学、遗产研究、哲学和历史）中受到了广泛的批评。真实性的“测试”已经被证明是由西方的理想和认识论所主导的。此外，许多被认为是真实的文化传统和相关的遗产遗址被证明是在意识形态驱动的精英的影响下被发明、改造或更新的。这种学术和遗产管理方法之间的分歧在我们的理解中留下了一个有问题的鸿沟。尽管最近强调了物品和纪念碑的当代社会价值以及遗产的非物质方面（例如被广泛引用的《布拉宪章》和联合国教科文组织的《奈良真实性声明》），但这两种方法都没有解决其对人们如何与历史环境相关联的强大影响。正如联合国教科文组织奈良会议所强调的那样，人们对真实性的看法往往与审美价值、保护地点和精神意义等无形品质有关。然而，对这些方面提供扎实理解的持续研究却很少。我自己最近的研究表明，物质对象和人、土壤和土地之间的关系，通常通过“出生”和“营养”的概念来表达，是人们对什么是真实的、什么是不真实的感知的基础。此外，虽然博物馆和遗产组织在归因真实性方面发挥了作用，但这可能会受到游客的质疑，他们经常将其与人、物体、纪念碑和地点之间的无形“归属”关系联系起来。该项目旨在研究人们如何在实践中体验和协商真实性，以及他们如何在一个以流离失所和碎片化为特征的世界中运用关于真实性的想法来理解自己的位置。结合对这一概念的历史分析与最近的物质性、人格和地方理论，我打算开发一种专注于真实性的“经验”方面的理论方法。使用这种方法，我将通过一系列来自苏格兰和苏格兰侨民的案例研究，探索如何在实践中体验和谈判真实性。定性方法，包括参与观察和半结构化访谈，将用于深入了解人们如何体验和协商真实性。结果将在同行评议的期刊上发表三篇文章，为历史环境真实性的学术研究建立新的议程，同时也强调了对遗产管理政策和实践的影响。

项目成果

Experiencing Authenticity at Heritage Sites: Some Implications for Heritage Management and Conservation

在遗产地体验真实性：对遗产管理和保护的一些启示

• DOI: 10.1179/175355210x12670102063661
• 发表时间: 2013
• 期刊: Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites
• 影响因子: 0.2
• 作者: Jones S

Authenticity and heritage conservation: seeking common complexities beyond the 'Eastern' and 'Western' dichotomy

真实性和遗产保护：超越“东方”和“西方”二分法寻求共同的复杂性

• DOI: 10.1080/13527258.2020.1793377
• 发表时间: 2020
• 期刊: International Journal of Heritage Studies
• 影响因子: 1.8
• 作者: Gao Q