The New Heritage and re-shapings of the past

Holtorf, Cornelius; Fairclough, Graham

doi:10.4324/9780203068632.ch15

Cited by 41 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As a starting point, we must recognize that "heritage" has very little to do with the past but actually involves practices which are fundamentally concerned with assembling and designing the future-heritage involves working with the tangible and intangible traces of the past to both materially and discursively remake both ourselves and the world in the present, in anticipation of an outcome that will help constitute a specific (social, economic, or ecological) resource in and for the future (Harrison 2013;Holtorf 2013;Holtorf and Fairclough 2013;Holtorf and Högberg 2013). This, which my colleague Cornelius Holtorf refers to as the "new heritage" paradigm (Holtorf and Fairclough 2013) has begun to acknowledge that heritage is neither "fixed" nor "inherent," but emerges in dialogue among individuals, communities, practices, places, and things. I would push this blending of categories further to suggest that all domains that are informed by notions of endangerment (cf.…”

Section: Heritage As the Space In Which Futures Are Assembledmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond “Natural” and “Cultural” Heritage: Toward an Ontological Politics of Heritage in the Age of Anthropocene

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The critique of the separation of natural and cultural heritage is now well established. Rather than repeat arguments against what many would now acknowledge as an artificial separation, this paper considers the implications of working within the expanded field that is created for heritage when the dissolution of the boundaries between natural and cultural heritage is taken as given. I argue that embracing this dissolution allows us to reorient and reconceptualize heritage. Heritage is understood here as a series of diplomatic properties that emerge in the dialogue of heterogeneous human and non-human actors who are engaged in practices of caring for and attending to the past in the present. As such, heritage functions toward assembling futures, and thus might be more productively connected with other pressing social, economic, political, and ecological issues of our time. Indeed, we need not look far to comprehend alternative forms of heritage-making that already model such connectivity ontologies. Fundamental to understanding the value of these alternative heritage ontologies is the recognition of ontological plurality: that different forms of heritage practices enact different realities and hence work to assemble different futures. Following on from this point, I sketch out an ontological politics of and for heritage-a sense of how heritage could be oriented toward composing "common worlds" or "common futures," while maintaining a sensitivity to the ways in which each domain of heritage relates to a particular mode of existence. At stake here is the acknowledgment that each such mode of existence produces its own particular worlds and its own specific futures. I do this within the context of a consideration of the implications of the recognition of a certain set of entanglements of culture with nature, the folding together of what we used to term the human and the non-human, which characterizes our contemporary moment. To illustrate these points, I introduce the framework for a new collaborative research Resumen La crítica de la separación del patrimonio natural y cultural está actualmente bien afianzada. En lugar de presentar argumentos reiterados contra lo que muchos considerarían una separación artificial, en este artículo se tienen en cuenta las implicancias de trabajar dentro del ámbito expandido que se crea para el patrimonio cuando la disolución de los límites entre el patrimonio natural y el cultural se da por descontada. Sostengo que la aceptación de esta disolución nos permite reorientar y reconceptualizar el patrimonio. El patrimonio se entiende aquí como una serie de propiedades diplomáticas que surgen en el diálogo de agentes heterogéneos humanos y no humanos que participan en prácticas de cuidado y atención del pasado en el presente. En consecuencia, el patrimonio funciona hacia la construcción de futuros, y por lo tanto, podría estar más conectado productivamente con otros temas sociales, económicos, políticos y ecológicos apremiantes de nuestro tiempo. Ciertamente, no necesitamos mirar...

show abstract

Section: Heritage As the Space In Which Futures Are Assembledmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond “Natural” and “Cultural” Heritage: Toward an Ontological Politics of Heritage in the Age of Anthropocene

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, preservation, conservation, and restoration of heritage are only some among many available options (Holtorf 2015;Holtorf and Fairclough 2013;Kobiałka 2014;Williams 2015). We would like to suggest that sometimes a true critical stance means letting things and landscapes die or allowing them to obliterate.…”

Section: First World War Landscapes Between Memory and Oblivionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The Great War and Its Landscapes Between Memory and Oblivion: the Case of Prisoners of War Camps in Tuchola and Czersk, Poland

Kobiałka¹,

Kostyrko

Kajda

2016

Int J Histor Archaeol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many sites related to the First World War are forgotten and neglected in today's Poland. This paper shortly presents the ways of practicing Bconflict archaeology^in Poland and it discusses results of the non-invasive archaeological survey conducted in Tuchola and Czersk, places where during the First World War Germans built and run prisoners of war camps. In the article the material remains of the camps that have survived in the local landscapes till the present are analyzed. Both sites are at the same time remembered and forgotten by local communities. This paper tries to account for oblivion as an inherent part of local landscapes that adds a unique value to them.

show abstract

“…As a result, scholars are advocating a 'new heritage' paradigm which acknowledges the unfixed, malleable and permutating nature of heritage (Holtorf and Fairclough 2013).…”

Section: Cultural Heritage In Policy and Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural heritage entanglements: festivals as integrative sites for sustainable urban development

Perry

Ager

Sitas

2019

International Journal of Heritage Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whilst the importance of cultural heritage in sustainable urban development has been increasingly recognised in policy frameworks at multiple levels, there remains a lack of understanding about how global and international goals land in different places. This paper specifically addresses this question through a study of 18 festivals across the Global North and South. We argue that festivals are integrative sites in which tangible and intangible heritage properties are entangled: bidirectional, co-dependent and non-linear. Given the critical role in linking urban contexts and histories with immaterial experience and meaning in the city, we argue that festivals can illuminate wider concerns. Specifically, this means seeing festivals as part of the 'new heritage paradigm' and assessing their contribution to processes of just urban transformations. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

The New Heritage and re-shapings of the past

Cited by 41 publications

References 0 publications

Beyond “Natural” and “Cultural” Heritage: Toward an Ontological Politics of Heritage in the Age of Anthropocene

Beyond “Natural” and “Cultural” Heritage: Toward an Ontological Politics of Heritage in the Age of Anthropocene

The Great War and Its Landscapes Between Memory and Oblivion: the Case of Prisoners of War Camps in Tuchola and Czersk, Poland

Cultural heritage entanglements: festivals as integrative sites for sustainable urban development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About