Concrete matters: Ruins of modernity and the things called heritage

Abstract

Intangibility has become a trendy term within heritage studies and is now even considered to refer to heritage in general. This article discusses this development, along with its integrity and consequences for the fate of things in the heritage discourse. With reference to the concrete ruins of Iceland's recent past it addresses the traditional and contemporary processes of discrimination and othering within heritage definitions, and the often fragile dialectic between heritage and waste. With a foothold in these very concrete and tangible remains the article questions the emerging claim 'that all heritage is intangible' and suggests that a broader heritage conception, and a true concern for the very tangible qualities of things, may bring us closer to a comprehension of the (heritage) value of these modern ruins. Ruin memory'They have destroyed the factory! It is not the same -it has lost its charm now.' These were the words of a frustrated photographer I met in Strandir, in Iceland's Westfjords, while working on my project on herring factories in the area last summer. I instantly knew what he was referring to. One of the two decaying and roughly half a century old

Prospects for a Postsecular Heritage Practice: Convergences between Posthumanism and Popular Religious Practice in Asia

“…It is interesting to reflect that if the divinely animated quality of the materiality of popular religion is captured at all within the ambit of heritage practice as it is currently constituted it would likely be under the category of intangible heritage. However, as the archaeologist Þóra Pétursdóttir (2013) maintains, arguments by heritage scholars that all heritage should be regarded as intangible, although intended to counter an ingrained tendency in the heritage field to focus on the physical fabric of heritage objects to the exclusion, or near exclusion, of their social context and their discursive construction, have nevertheless entailed a turn away from things as independent, vibrant entities. Instead, it situates them anthropocentrically as things taking their meaning and significance from humans.…”

“…This quality of theirs resonates, to an extent, with what some scholars now maintain is the real nature of things when seen outside the discursive constraints of humanism. Bjørnar Olsen (2010Olsen ( , 2013 and Þóra Pétursdóttir (2013) argue that although much archaeological thought has moved beyond the idea of things as social constructions, crediting them with agency and integrity as actors in Latourean collectives and crediting them with social lives, this has in a sense domesticated them. It has negated or blurred their radical otherness as things in themselves.…”

“They were built to last”: Anti-consumption and the Materiality of Waste in Obsolete Buildings

“…This highlights the need to integrate a broader sociocultural perspective into valuation discussions. In line with Pétursdóttir's (2012) call for the democratization of heritage, our second research question asks what values consumers ascribe to obsolete buildings, and our third research question goes onto explore how consumers express their appreciation of these alternative values of obsolete buildings. In our conclusions, we then build upon the insights from our findings to discuss how public policy makers can re-evaluate the significance of obsolete buildings.…”

“…(Josh) Josh introduces heritage agencies as another institutional stakeholder with a specific approach to valuation. His comments on the neglect of industrial history highlight the forsaken value of these buildings that reflects the heritage prejudice that befalls many modern ruins (Pétursdóttir 2012). Many of our participants share a similar resistance to the power of such institutions for their seemingly narrow criteria used to inform preservation decisions.…”

The politics of vibrant matter: Consistency, containment and the concrete of Mussolini’s bunker

“…While weathering is generally seen as how the forces of nature such as wind and rain may affect exposed buildings on the surface (Mostafavi and Leatherbarrow, 1993), the process does not preclude interred spaces from having seepage that may damage the structure (Von Meiss and Radu, 2004). Similar to other cases where decay is viewed through agency (see Edensor, 2005;DeSilvey, 2006;Pétursdóttir, 2013), there is merit in considering the state of concrete's materiality partly because it exposes some of the difficulties posed when determining heritage value. Furthermore, it Pétursdóttir's (2013) case study featuring an abandoned concrete herring factory in Iceland offers a compelling example that exhibits the dualism involved in exposing the aesthetic versus the historic traditions of heritage in a given location.…”