Student’s Name
Institution Affiliation
Course title
Professor’s Name
Heritage Analysis
Heritage is a process or a verb. This definition may seem like a puzzle to many, as most traditional definitions emphasize heritage materiality only. From usual understanding, a verb means a doing word. Doing means an ongoing process. Relating this concept to heritage, we get the link between heritage and a verb. Heritage is a verb because of the evolution of its medieval sense relating to transitions in the experience of space and place. Heritage also entails early developments that interconnect between the colonial and pre-colonial period. The more profound understanding of this is that heritage not only dwells on the historical scope but also connects the past and the present, thus being essential to humanity. The production of power, identity, and authority is a process that results from heritage. It is, therefore, a continuous process that connects the past and the present. All these defend the idea of referring to heritage as a verb. This paper describes heritage integrating the traditional perspectives while supporting the argument on heritage being a process.
Heritage is a process that has developed and will still evolve for the long term. Cultural heritage is defined as society’s use of the past in the present-day. It greatly influences the activities and stereotypes that exist in the modern community. These statements prove why heritage is being referred to as a ‘verb’ by various commentators. It can be categorized as tangible or intangible. Every country across the world has a link to its culture with the past. In North America, heritage has a strong connection to the museums, national parks, and galleries in the cities. In Europe, the link is with the older city centers. The same modern reflection of the past is also in New Zealand and Australia, associated with the identity and landscape. Therefore, cultural heritage is a significant part of history as it links with various modern society activities, cultural, economic, and political.
UNESCO refers to cultural heritage as “the legacy of physical artefacts and intangible attributes of a group or society that are inherited from past generations, maintained in the present and bestowed for the benefit of future generations” (Tunbridge et al., 365-372). This organization outlines three aspects of cultural heritage; monuments, groups of buildings, and sites according to The World Heritage Convention, Article 1. Article 2 relates heritage with nature describing it through physiographic and geological formations, natural features, and natural sites.
Intangible heritage is the essence of heritage practice developments, unlike tangible heritage, which only provides the shallow definition of heritage as physical artefacts. Tangible heritage includes sites and features that are can be recognized as material traces. Examples of tangible heritage include historic places, buildings, and artifacts of significant worth and should be preserved for the future. This refers to the objects of great importance in archeology, science, architecture, and technology.
Intangible heritage includes myth, ritual, language, and many more traditions that vary amongst the many communities across the world (Harrison, 238-276). The practices were orally obtained from the ancestors and are still being transmitted today by the old to the young generation. Intangible heritage includes symbolic manifestations of the past culture where ideas, beliefs, and values are passed to the modern community. This makes the past meaningful to the present.
Heritage cannot be abridged to its tangible products only. Heritage must be diverse, and thus the reason why it is referred to as a verb. In 1960, it was written by an influential thinker that culture is continuously living and evolving. From the definitions of tangible and intangible, both forms of heritage must be valued and regarded as a process relating the past with the contemporary.
Preservation of heritage is essential to the people. UNESCO introduced the perception of World Heritage in 1972, referring to it as natural significance to the “common heritage of humanity.” Considering its importance in social, economic, scientific, and political life, heritage preservation must be prioritized worldwide.
Heritage studies reveal the complexity of the concept while analyzing the broad scope of the subject. The ideas can be general, ranging from the memorials in Wales to the media treatment in Princess Diana (Arnold et al., 79-89, 39-50). This has led to more anxiety and with many other commentators placing their different phenomena about heritage practice. Lowenthal adds with an argument that it’s only in the present time that heritage has ‘become a self -conscious creed,’ while Graham et al. (1) argues that its meaning has had several definitions in the last few decades. These different commentaries about the concept are attributed to the complexity of heritage practices.
It is simple to understand heritage commentaries have increasingly dated their subject in a way, considering the changes in heritage practices that the public is embracing in the present. Heritage is made to be a process that relates to past events with contemporary ones. Several authors seem to accept the current nature of this general dating framework entirely. This, however, is not surprising since many heritage practitioners are working to ensure that heritage is conserved and materials interpreted in the present. Accounting for the recent dating of heritage is necessary, but this made it possible by exploring the ‘presentness’ of heritage processes and practice. Therefore, heritage is produced in the present, and our relationship with the past is attributed to the present temporal and spatial experience. This argument supports the idea of heritage being defined as a verb.
Identity is an essential aspect of heritage. It provides one with existence and self-esteem. As a process, heritage relates to this concept. “Heritage promotes the tenderness of belonging and continuity” (Lowenthal, 2014). According to Graham et al. (41), ‘heritage provided meaning to human existence by conveying the ideas of timeless values and unbroken linkages that underpin identity.’ These interpretations reveal the influence of heritage literature on how humans exist and explain the different cultural practices that are still being observed to this date across the world.
The tourism industry plays a vital role in defining the economies of many countries. The emergence of ‘experience economy,’ which was widespread by American scholars Pine and Gilmore in a book (The Experience economy 1999), results in the fix of culture and heritage. Living history museums exhibit formats based on the day-to-day practices with its simple description as ‘heritage’ museums. The word ‘living’ is used to describe museology’s living historical approach (Daugbjerg et al., 681-687). Also, it tells the specificity with museums being that is build based on the periods they represent. In many living museums, the spaces have a look that tries to portray that the people who inhabited them are still there. They are often staged and vary with periods and seasons.
Living museums reflect on the events of the past by stage-managing them at different times in the present. The continuity of heritage is what makes the whole idea a ‘verb.’ For instance, Mackenzie House Museum in Toronto, Canada, is a living history museum that is a dedication of the life and work of William Lyon Mackenzie (1795-1861). Space and physical objects in the museum are a reflection of Mackenzie narrative. Visiting a living museum is a representation of the urge for the learning process and a form of intellectual regression. It gives one sensory experience and normalizes the museum’s whole situation, linking one directly to past events. These museums help play an essential role in lifestyle changes that are evident in the world every day. Contrastingly, traditional historical museums, especially those that mainly conserve the public’s material heritage and education, display only visual navigation points (Dudley et al., 103). The visitors are rarely allowed to talk or touch any objects while in the museum. They do not recreate the indefinable ‘sense’ that gives one the feeling living back then would be as it is in living organisms. The link created by living organisms ensures continuity of heritage practices in society today. This continuity defends the idea of referring to heritage as a verb.
Historical sites support the argument that heritage is a process or a verb. An example is the Tang Shouqian birth house and memorial park. These sites were necessary for the tourism industry. However, this is not what makes it relevant to this paper. Tang’s monument explores the long-term evolution of the heritage process. Regarding his leadership roles and patriotism, his legacy will live forever for many generations to come (Smith et al., 443-460). Tang’s historical sites help people realize the importance of achieving what he did, hence referencing the present (Brockmeier, 15-43). He is part of the past and does not exist anymore, but his will still connects with the present. Therefore, this illustrates the reason for regarding heritage as a ‘verb.’
Another site that supports this argument is Avebury. Avebury is a landscape that attracted many visitors from surrounding areas (Gilings et al., 359-399). Despite its beauty and serene nature that was good for an ocular view, the landscape had more to it. It gave the people living in the area knowledge, identity, and power. A deeper meaning to this was that Avebury represented the true religion ascribing its origin to the British Druids. It helped the people strengthen there is religious identity. It thus defends the concept of referring to heritage as a verb.
Newgrange is another site that defends the notion of heritage being regarded as a process or a verb. The example illustrates the dominance of the British in Ireland on the ancient heritage. The native inhabitants of Ireland were seen to be stupid and unable to work without civilization’s influence (Prendergast et al., 121-124). This heritage process, therefore, gives a reflection of the predilections and landscape alteration. After Ireland gained its independence, the heritage agenda was shifted to the post-colonial perspective. Newgrange became a significant part of the national history, with the landscape still being interpreted to the present day according to the political agendas. This systematic connection between the past and contemporary events makes heritage a verb referred to as a verb.
Australia is also recognized as one of the attractive nations with many historical sites in it. Magnetic Island is an Australian community that is next to the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. Its main characteristic is the permanent residents in it and resided by just ordinary people. Many people mainly identify the island as a place that enshrines a sense of isolation and freedom that is no longer possible to experience in urban areas (Bull, 267-277). It is a heritage site that provided the best view of nature and a landscape that enhances a sense of well-being and harmony. The serene natural environment encoded with day-to-day social and domestic activities makes the island the best place for many. The situation that arose from the development of Nelly Bay Harbour on the island, which resulted in public and private protests, indicates the essence of nature and heritage to the people. The people get used to the place to the point they are emotionally attached to it hence becoming inseparable. It becomes an ongoing process or a ‘verb’ where generations come and go, but they still preserve the island.
In conclusion, heritage is essential to humanity. Unlike tangible heritage, which can only give the traditional definition of the concept, intangible heritage is dynamic and how it should be interpreted. Intangible heritage makes the past to be of the essence in the present. The instances above have shown how heritage concepts are transforming relationships and identity in society. The paper demonstrates the heritage process satisfying the notion of referring to heritage as a ‘verb.’
Therefore, this paper confronts the common knowledge of heritage being just a physical artifact by arguing on the point of view that assesses heritage as a verb. The historical sites in this paper help in engaging this idea. Landscapes are not only seen as physical sites but also as a process as links with the emotions and identity of people living them, making them inseparable and associated with the everyday activities of the villagers in them. From the paper, it is clear that heritage is a phenomenon that everyone has to be taught to the people. We all need to embrace the developments in heritage practices. Comprehending the overall heritage phenomenon is essential in embracing the commentary changes of the concept. Lowenthal also argues that comprehending heritage is critical; ‘we learn to control it less it control us.’
Works Cited
Arnold, John, Kate Davies, and Simon Ditchfield. History and heritage: consuming the past in contemporary culture. Donhead Publishing Ltd, 1998, 79-89, 39-50.
Brockmeier, J., 2002, “Remembering and Forgetting: Narrative as Cultural Memory.” Culture & Psychology 8 (1): 15–43.
Bull, G. D. “Scleractinian Coral Communities of Two Inshore High Island Fringing Reefs at Magnetic Island, North Queensland.” Marine ecology progress series. Oldendorf 7.3 (1982): 267-277.
Daugbjerg, Mads, Rivka Syd Eisner, and Britta Timm Knudsen. “Re-enacting the past: vivifying heritage ‘again’.” (2014): 681-687.
Gillings, Mark, Joshua Pollard, and Kristian Strutt. “The origins of Avebury.” antiquity 93.368 (2019): 359-377.
Lowenthal, Heritage crusade, p. 1; Graham et al., Geography of heritage, p. 1.
Lowenthal, The heritage crusade and the spoils of history, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, p. 94.
- Johnson & B. Thomas, `Heritage as business,’ in D.T. Herbert, op. cit. (note 1), p. 170; D.
Smith, Laurajane, and Gary Campbell. “The elephant in the room: heritage, affect and emotion.” A companion to heritage studies (2016): 443-460.
Terry-Chandler, Fiona. “Heritage and history: a special relationship.” Midland History24188-93 (1999).
Tunbridge, John E., Gregory John Ashworth, and Brian J. Graham. “Decennial reflections on A Geography of Heritage (2000).” International Journal of Heritage Studies 19.4 (2013): 365-372.
Prendergast, Frank. “Robert Hensey, First Light: The Origins of Newgrange.” Journal of Skyscape Archaeology 2.1 (2016): 121-124.
Harrison, R., and Rose, D.B., 2010. Intangible heritage. In: T. Benton, ed. Understanding
heritage and memory. Manchester and Milton Keynes: Manchester University Press in
association with the Open University, 238–276.
Dudley, Sandra, ed. Museum materialities: Objects, engagements, interpretations. Routledge, 2013, 103.