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在历史环境中体验和谈判真实性，而对于许多人来说，这是生产身份和地点的重要因素。真实性被定义为真实，真实或真实的质量。关于历史环境，它在确定值得保护的东西以及如何保留和呈现的地点和古迹方面起着基本作用。但是，实际上，真实性是一个模糊的概念，是区分什么和不是真实的过程的过程被复杂的标准包围。长期以来，人们已经假定真实性是人工制品和古迹的物质结构中固有的客观和可测量的属性。已经制定了科学技术和评估标准，以试图客观地确定人工制品和古迹的真实性以及其历史背景的真实性和意义。然而，在过去的三十年中，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，这种真实性的方法已被广泛批评。真实性的“测试”已被证明是由西方理想和认识论所占据的。此外，许多据称是真实的文化传统和相关的遗产，已被证明是在意识形态动机的精英的影响下发明，重新发明或更新的。学术和遗产管理方法之间的这种分歧是真实性的理解差距。尽管最近强调了对象和纪念碑的当代社会价值以及遗产的无形方面（例如，在广泛引用的Burra Charter和Unesco关于身份验证的NARA声明中，这两个方法都无法解决其对人们如何与历史环境联系的强大影响。正如联合国教科文组织的NARA会议所强调的那样，人们对真实性的看法通常与与美学价值相关的无形品质有关，保护地点，保护地位和精神意义。然而，很少有持续的研究提供了对这些方面的扎实理解。我自己最近的研究表明，物质对象与人，土壤和土地之间的关系通常是通过“出生”和“滋养”概念表达的，这是人们对真实事物和不是什么的看法。此外，尽管博物馆和遗产组织在归因于真实性方面发挥了作用，但游客可以对此进行质疑，他们经常将其与人，物体，古迹和地方之间的“属于”的无形关系联系起来。该项目旨在调查人们如何在实践中体验和谈判真实性，以及他们如何在以流离失所和分裂为特征的世界中赋予自己的真实性思想，以使自己的位置理解自己的位置。将对概念历史的分析与最新的物质，人格和地点结合在一起，我打算开发一种理论方法，该方法侧重于真实性的“体验”方面。然后，我将通过从苏格兰和苏格兰侨民绘制的一系列案例研究中探讨如何在实践中实现和谈判的真实性。定性方法（包括参与者观察和半结构化访谈）将用于了解人们如何体验和谈判真实性。结果将是经过同行评审期刊中的三篇文章，为历史环境建立了关于真实性的学术研究的新议程，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