Ποιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

3rd HERMES Symposium (9/10th June 2006, Sofia/BG)

The Politics of Heritage and Regional Development Strategies – Actors, Interests, Conflicts 

 

 

Gregory J. ASHWORTH 

(University of Groningen/NL; E-mail: g.j.ashworth(at)rug.nl)

 

‘Let’s use our pasts to shape our futures’: between contradiction and synergy 

 

The remembered, relict, or imagined past is used as a policy instrument in pursuit of a wide variety of contemporary objectives at various spatial scales, amongst which is regional economic development. This paper will examine this relationship between heritage, as the contemporary uses of the past, and regional development, as a political strategy in terms of the inherent characteristics of the two phenomena. A conceptual discussion of the most significant intrinsic and unavoidable contradictions and synergies will lead to an outline of a framework for practice. 

 

 

                         

                         Gregory Ashworth

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Darko BABIĆ

(Dept. of Information Sciences, University of Zagreb/HR); E-mail: dbabic(at)ffzg.hr)

 

Can heritage bring peace and prosperity? 

 

Where the heritage lives? Do objects, monuments, tales or dances define it? Or current political 

structure? Probably yes, but only on administrative level and everything else is left to us, people. 

What is the real role of public, heritage institution as well as of the civil society regarding heritage policies? Are they aware of the potentials, and do they recognise its strengths as well as weaknesses? The word heritage has the capacity to accommodate almost everything. Among others, nationalism, prejudices or political incorrectness easily find the safe place inside it. But actually the heritage is much more beyond it. Heritage is, and must be, the mirror of our souls. It could have supra-national, national or regional descriptions, but after all something is, and could be named as heritage because it contains the wisdom where all borders and prejudicesare left behind. The heritage is by that so beyond all tangible and intangible definitions, it is about those spiritual values around us, from us and inside us. Understand, used and managed with that "spiritus movens" the heritage could become the real vehicle of human peace and prosperity. Some recent case studies from Croatia could easily remind us about it. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Leonora BONEVA-TRAYANOVA 

(National Museum of History/BG; E-mail: ttrayanov(at)saref.e-gov.bg)

 

Meaning-making and the construction ofheritage as socio-cultural mission 

 

The concept of heritage as a phenomenon characterising modernity, and especially its enormous 

postmodern enlargement, points out the idea of the nature of its construction as a socio-cultural 

mission, based on the contemporary conventions about its authenticity and appropriate ways of use. Because of the identity crisis of the institutionalised heritage centres – traditional museums and sites, the concept of total heritage becomes more and more popular and the mission of the contemporary large-scale museum as a core structure of the total heritage – more widely accepted. Regarding the two great dangers – the mummification and the vulgarisation of the heritage, the most important prevention seems to be the competence/deontology of all those who are in charge of meaning-making by interpreting and reconstructing the Past. Some regards of the Bulgarian ways of interpretation as a sign of the contemporary culture lead to examples of the Bulgarian heritage centres created in the communist period with their messages as well as to some new concepts as they are to be seen nowadays in the “Ethnographic Area Complex – Zlatograd” on the Bulgarian-Greek border. The idea of combining business and heritage, traditional crafts and cultural tourism, routes and stories, the non-tangible heritage and the material evidences with their messages and life philosophies concerns the institutionalised as well as the non-institutionalised heritage. Because the interpretation/misinterpretation, which is so important for the functioning of the contemporary culture, could have great (even unpredictable) consequences in the field of construction and meaning-making of heritage. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Monika DE FRANTZ 

(Bauhaus-University Weimar/D; London School of Economics and Political Science/UK; 

E-mail: monika.defrantz(at)iue.it)

 

Austria’s Eastern border: Regional development, multi-national heritage and minority politics 

 

Situated along Austria’s Eastern-most state border, Burgenland is the country’s youngest region with a long history of changing national belongings and the highest diversity of minority cultures: the Burgenland Croats, the Hungarians, and the Roma. The several small, territorially dispersed 

communities have almost fallen victim to assimilation in the German majority population. Its changing history and geographic position along the border has also made Burgenland Austria’s most socio-economically disadvantaged region. But the recent historic changes in Europe, starting with the opening of the Iron Curtain in 1989, to Austria’s EU accession in 1995, and EU enlargement in 2004 have recently brought new hope to the region. Burgenland has been acknowledged EU objective 1 status as well as large Interreg programmes, turning it into Austria’s largest receiver of EU regional funds. The regional government has recently promoted the multi-national border heritage as an important capital for the region’s European integration. Burgenland presents a case study of cultural mobilisation in a region affected intensely by the changing functions of its borders. Based on their long cross-border experience and their cross-cultural knowledge, the national minority organisations claim an important political role in mediating the governmental efforts for institution-building and the continued mistrust between the populations East and West of the former Iron Curtain. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Sevil Yesim DIZDAROGLU 

(Brandenburg Technical University Cottbus/D; E-mail: sinophe(at)gmail.com)

 

The role of cultural heritage inidentity creation in a post-colonial state.

 

The case of Jordan Cultural heritage, as a substantial component of identity creation is analyzed within Jordan’s cultural heritage policies which can be observed through the construction of the national culture and the presentation of the official heritage. The issue of national identity is particularly interesting in the process of nation building and strongly related to the politics of Jordanian nation-state and its vital relation to the past. Jordan’s cultural heritage is explored as a product purposely developed in response to the contemporary needs of tourism. The issue of cultural heritage tourism in Jordan is highly complex and addresses the question of tourism as a national strategy for economic development. The use of cultural heritage as a political resource is demonstrated in Jordan’s official discourse as a distinctive character of the nation and national history which can be traced back in the past. Apart from the official discourse, the use of cultural heritage as a tourism resource seeks to promote Jordan as a unique destination in Holy Land tourism whilst the political use of cultural heritage illustrates the state policy that can be applied internally to consolidate the political and ideological foundations of the Jordanian entity. The Jordanian state seeks to justify its ultimate aim through a dual strategy that can be applied both 

implicitly and explicitly. Although the ultimate aim reflects the internal politics of the Hashemite 

kingdom to reinforce its legitimacy and to establish internal stability with respect to economic well-being, it might well reflect the interest of international donors and Jordan’s efforts to ensure the resumption of lavish foreign assistance. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Sybille FRANK 

(Institute of Sociology, TU Darmstadt/D; E-mail: frank(at)ifs.tu-darmstadt.de)

 

Communist heritage tourism and its local (dis)contents at Checkpoint Charlie, Berlin 

 

With the Wall coming down in 1989, Checkpoint Charlie, Berlin's famous Allied border control point, became obsolete. Throughout the 1990s, millions of people witnessed its breathtaking transformation from a promising urban development site to a derelict symbol of reunified Berlin's "bubble politics", and, finally, to the former control point being partially re-erected for tourist consumption by competing public and private initiatives in the late 1990s. This paper aims at identifying the different players in the politics of history and memory at Checkpoint Charlie, and at investigating their diverging interests.Moreover, it will analyze Checkpoint Charlie as a site where local traditions of historic agency and display clash with different traditions brought along 

with tourists from all over the world. To this end, I will focus on a conflict that developed at Checkpoint Charlie between the Berlin government, the private Berlin Wall Museum, and some drama students in 2004. Dressed in uniforms of the former GDR People's Police, the students posed with tourists in front of a replica of the famous Allied control cabin for photo-shoots, or pressed GDR border stamps in passports. This demand-oriented import of the American living history model to Berlin was scandalised as an undesirable change of the locality under the grasp of global tourism, turning dismantled Checkpoint Charlie into a local "sacred site" eagerly defended by the Wall Museum against "Disneyfication". 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Miglena IVANOVA 

(Institute of Folklore, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia/BG; E-mail: miglenadi(at)abv.bg)

 

Representing the Bulgarian nation and its regions. Uses of traditional culture as heritage 

 

In 1891 A. Mitov (a well-known early modern Bulgarian artist) offered a clou for the First National 

Exhibition in Plovdiv. Having seen the Paris Exhibition, he admitted that young Bulgaria can not offer unbelievable novelties, but could prepare instead a pavilion with dolls dressed in folk attires and arranged as to represent the different regions of the country and “the whole Bulgarian nation in a miniature”. The organisers of Plovdiv Exhibition warmly embraced his suggestion. Realising the idea of a costume “map”, they added pictures of simple folkdressed in their traditional clothes. At the time being the pavilion turned out to be one of the most important sites showing traditional cultural heritage, but it was not the only one. From the 1890s on representations of costumes and also of embroidered or home woven materials, handicraftproducts, traditional singing, music making, dancing and narrating were extensively used to stand for the country and its regions. Intellectual investments in that sphere were numerous and never-ending. Aimed at keeping the images of the traditional culture and of its artifacts “alive” in cultural memory, the efforts of the experts and the other professionals engaged in representing folk culture deeply affected a considerable number of grassroot ideas and concepts. In my presentationI will examine how those processes changed the local folk understandings of “our” and “their” traditional skills, patterns and representations. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Jelisaveta MIHAJLOVIĆ

(Serbia Nostra / Europa Nostra in Serbia/YU; E-mail: jel_mih(at)yahoo.co.uk)

 

Values-led regeneration: Unlocking the values of the historic towns 

 

Traditional site management was a prioriassuming primacy of historic, aesthetic or scientific values over other socio-cultural ones. Recent approaches to the regeneration of historic towns take cultural values at the core of the regeneration process. This values-based regeneration for its primary purpose has protecting the significance of the historic town with taking into consideration all aspects of its cultural significance without unwarranted emphasis on any value at the expense of others. In traditional planning approaches, historic towns were in danger of losing their cultural, social, religious, spiritual, political values which are more intangible in their nature than other values. Considering that preservation of these values can easily come into a conflict with economic interests, a wider understanding of the constraints at an early stage would help to avoid the conflict. Values-led regeneration calls upon wider public support and involvement of a wide range of stakeholders in the planning process, indicating that it is as much a bottom-up as a top-down process and that successful values-led regeneration means working with, rather than dictating to, communities. This paper discusses the advantages value-based regeneration has in comparison to traditionally managed historic towns in terms of significance protection and specific values and qualities that are recognised using this approach, but also the advantagesthat it has for its citizens and visitors in both cultural and economic sense. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Łucja PIEKARSKA-DURAJ 

(Małopolska Institute of Culture, Krakow/PL; E-mail: piekarska(at)mik.krakow.pl)

 

Steel irony captured in space: a narrative for visions of Nowa Huta 

 

Nowa Huta is the name of a unique urban space. Designed in a form of ideal city it served as a tool for socialist propaganda, in which work was very often emphasised on. Labour was then seen as an agent constituting a new man – he, who shall bring the shared ideals into life. The beginnings of Nowa Huta fall in the post-second world war period, after a series of unfortunate events that scattered the population of Poland, leaving the young generation with neither proper education nor homes. Nowa Huta served as a synonym for hope, as it provided newcomers with both: education and homes, adding an invaluable extra – a stable job. To prove the dialectics of history it is also Nowa Huta that gave birth to major political changes in Poland: it was a cradle of Solidarity and a scene for massive demonstrations as well as illegal early civil movements. It is nowadays widely doubted whether the idea of a socialist steel town could have ever succeeded, especially when the lack of a real market in socialist economy is taken into consideration. Nevertheless, Nowa Huta remains a good example of a socio-economic hybrid controlled by the socialist state in Poland. Steel was a crucial element in this construction, as steel industry was supposed to sustain this city. Virtually everybody here either worked with steel or had somebody close at the steel enterprise. Space – significantly structured by architecture and urban planning – had been consciously used in the creation of Nowa Huta from its mere conception. In the architecture of Nowa Huta various stylistic elements can be found: renaissance proportions and classical ornaments neighbour with monumental façades or blocks of flats. A real medium that is a message itself. Of course not all brave visions had been realised. And those that have survived in drawings, sketches and notes have recently been gathered for the first time and presented in a form of exposition. How an idea gets closed in form can be traced when one visits the expo. This is also an example how the heritageof a site is constructed in a means of narrative - as told by a specific heritage display. What texts is it constructed of? Does it mirror the historical reality experienced and remembered by most of interested visitors? Last but not least, what shapes were given to ideas that inflamed hundreds of steel workers in the creation of the New Town? 

Reflecting on the relations which social memory has with space I would like to pose these questions in order to analyse an existing exhibition of plans, designs and blueprints of Nowa Huta, many of which remained just visions. By looking at present testimonies given by inhabitants talking of their life in Nowa Huta, I would like to conclude by giving characteristics to different aspects of urban space: both those captured by the visions, as well as those experienced in everyday life. The latter are results of one-year research carried out recently in Nowa Huta. 

The steel town of Nowa Huta is now a district of Cracow, one of the famous and most historical towns of Eastern Europe. Catholic and conservatist Cracow was never finally conquered by atheist and materialist Nowa Huta, as it was planned by those who decided where the steel plant would be built. And “Man of Iron”, an award-winning movie by Andrzej Wajda showing glimpses of unofficial history of the place, owes its success also to the place it is connected with. Place that can be seen as a representation of many dreams and defeats which Poland has gone through. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Levente POLYÁK 

(Institute of Sociology, ELTE University of Budapest/HU; E-mail: polyaklevente(at)gmail.com)

 

Heritage as argument, heritage as authority: Notions and positions in contemporary Budapest urban planning discourse 

 

Spatial structures and nodes are distinguished objects of cultural heritage due to the strong spatial rootedness of collective memory. Community symbols and orientation points, as well as the surfaces and ambiances of collective familiarity are often located in rural or urban public spaces. Accordingly, there is nothing surprising in the fact that questions of heritage play a central role in the growing public concern with the development plans for 21stcentury Budapest. What is more surprising about the conquest of the notion of heritage in the Budapest urban discourse is the way it creates unusual frontlines between political players of various levels. 

Heritage is used as an argument when it turns to the dilemma of whether deteriorated buildings of historical districts should be renovated even at large costs, or whether they should be demolished to allow new office and apartment buildings replacing them to give a new commercial and demographical impulse to these quarters. Heritage is also used asan argument when transport infrastructure seems to be insufficient, restricted by the existing historical urban tissue, and when local authorities declare to be ready to sacrifice the latter in order to develop the former. But, controversially, the use of the ‘heritage argument’ occurs on both sides of these debates. 

In my presentation I will attempt to analyse the conflicts emerging between initiators of certain 

development projects and defenders of heritage sites.The significance of these cases is not only that they highlight the different ways the notion of cultural heritage can be used and exploited in the urban planning context, but also that they create an interplay of different political forces, where hierarchies of authority overturn, according to the changing roles which NGOs, local, regional, national and transnational authorities occupy in the conflict. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Philippe-Bernd SCHMIDT 

(Institute for European Urban Studies, Bauhaus-University Weimar/D; 

E-mail: Philippe.Schmidt(at)archit.uni-weimar.de, PhilippeSchmidt(at)gmx.de)

 

Cultural Heritage and the challenge of compromise building. The case of the Weimar 

‘Gauforum’ 

 

The city of Weimar is well-known for its UNESCO world heritage of the Weimar Classic as well as the Bauhaus buildings. Beside these well-known and positive cultural impulses, the built remains of Nazi-Germany signify another witness of the local and national history. They form a further layer of heritage with negatively connotated meaning and the difficult question about national identity. The presentation focuses on the Weimar ‘Gauforum’, a large urban structure, built for political 

representation by the Nazi regime. Its ground-breaking started in 1936, one year before the 

Buchenwald Concentration Camp was accomplished. While the debate about a culture of remembrance has especially transformed places of torture and obliteration into places of cultural and collective memories, the meaning of built political representation of the National Socialist tyranny opens an array of questions about how to deal with that architectural heritage. The Gauforum has undergone several changes in use and function from the Third Reich to post-socialist Germany. The recent accomplishment of the concept of “spatial emptiness” has led to several conflicts in the transformation of the site. The presentation shows how political decision, historical meaning and an investor’s concept culminate in physical compromise planning. It aims at a discussion about how far intermingling concepts and compromise building is adequate for the reception of built heritage and how this leads to ambivalent meanings. 

 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Sebastian SCHRÖDER-ESCH 

(Institute for European Urban Studies, Bauhaus-University Weimar/D; 

 

 

The political dimension of heritage – mapping the field 

 

This first presentation of the conference will serve several purposes: Firstly, it will provide a brief 

description of the HERMES project in general; secondly, it intends to give an overview of the aims and the structure of the Sofia symposium; and thirdly, it aims to address some central issues and questions in order to open up the debate for the rest of the conference. HERMES (short for: Heritage and New Media for Sustainable Regional Development) is an initiative co-financed by the EU’s Interreg IIIB CADSES programme, with a duration of 2½ years. Its sixteen partner institutions pursue a variety of activities in the fields of media (especially internet radio), 

museums, local and regional development, and research and education. The project’s common denominator is the belief that culture and cultural heritage need not only be a cost factor for 

communities on various scales, but that they can indeed be (also) regarded as contributing to the social and economic development of communities at various scales. All activities carried out within HERMES intend to apply and exemplify this understanding of the nexus between heritage and development which is simultaneously aware of the potential and the restrictions of such an approach. The intention of the present symposium in Sofia is to investigate the political dimension of heritagefrom two perspectives: on the one hand, the so-called ‘politics of heritage’ will be discussed, based on an understanding of heritage as socially constructed meaning which is embedded in issues of identity and power in societies; on the other hand, the role and the (potential) significance of heritage in spatial planning and local/regional development strategies on various levels will be looked at. The introductory presentation will suggest to view heritage not as a ‘natural’ given, but as the result of societal and political decision-making. It should be conceptualised as a certain meaning which is attached to ideas, objects, practices, places etc.; in other words: ‘heritage’ is simply the present use of the past for certain socio-political and/or economic purposes, shaped by negotiations within and between cultural groups. Hence the central questions with regard to the potential and the risk of instrumentalising heritage for political purposes are: who defines the content of heritage (and who doesn't)? whose interest does it serve? which function(s) is heritage meant to fulfil, and to what extent is this achieved? what are the costs and benefits from the creation and instrumentalisation of heritage? 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Monika SMOLEŃ & Karolina TYLUS 

(Polish Ministry of Culture, Warsaw/PL; E-mail: msmolen(at)mk.gov.pl, ktylus(at)mk.gov.pl)

 

Culture as a factor for local & regionaldevelopment. A case study of Poland 

 

Cultural policy is not one of the common policies of the European Union, but according to article 151 of the Treaty, the European Commission supports the cultural diversity in the Member States as well as – thanks to the recognition of culture as a factor of development – investments in the field of culture and protection of cultural heritage within the common regional policy. Financial support is transferred from the European Commission to the cultural sector from two basic sources: 

a) structural funds 

b) Community programmes 

Structural funds are the most important instrument for the financing of culture and regional policy from the European Union means. As the main objective of the regional policy is to increase the level of social and economic cohesion of all regions within the European Union, the projects co-financed from the structural funds are treated as investments which have a direct influence on social and economic development of regions, on strengthening their competitiveness and improving a widely understood quality of life of their citizens. According to an analysis carried out in the previous budgetary period, structural funds comprised 83 % of funding for cultural projects: out of each 10 Euros spent on culture by the European Commission, as much as 8 Euros came from this source. Operational Programmes that are the basis for the implementation of the structural funds in the period of 2004-2006, allow to use the significant financial resources for the realisation of cultural projects. Such a possibility was guaranteed in four of six Operational Programmes. These programmes enable to carry out various types of projects concerning– among others – the development of cultural infrastructure, protection of cultural heritage, development of artistic schools’ infrastructure, information society infrastructure, support for cultural education and – last but not least – the development of cultural industries. In 2004-2006 Poland may obtain from the structural funds more than 320 mln Euros for cultural projects and additionally – in 2004-2009 – 77 mln Euros from the European Economic Area Financial Mechanism and the Norwegian Financial Mechanism. Structural funds are a big chance for culture in Poland as well as for levelling of long-lasting negligences in this field. Additionally, as far as the gaining of support is concerned, it is worth to emphasise the high level of effectiveness of applicants within the cultural field which is a proof of their good preparation to implement the projects. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Svetlana Mitkova TONCHEVA & Nikolay VUKOV 

(Institute of Folklore, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia/BG; 

E-mail: smt_b(at)abv.bg, nikolai.vuko(at)gmail.com)

 

Town centres and post-socialist heritage: the reworking of memorial landscapes in post-socialist Bulgaria 

 

The end of socialism as a state ideology has led to substantial transformations in the structure, 

organisation and meanings of most town centres in Bulgaria. Some elements of central squares and streets were destroyed, others were reshaped into new representations, and many new ones appeared, investing the townscapes with different meanings. The most ostensible changes occurred with memorial sites and the places for public commemoration, whose fate keeps on posing the problem of historical, cultural and public heritage in a particular light. Who, whether, and how would preserve sites that bear the traces of ideological association; what are the main challenges and stakes in their inclusion in the list of historical and cultural heritage; how does heritage relate to the politics of remembering, and how does it manage with the diverse lines of political, social, and historical contestation – these are the major questions that these sites propose for public discussion. The goal of the current paper is to shed light on some of the changes in memorial landscapes in post-socialist Bulgaria and on the relationship of these changes to the production and reproduction of cultural heritage in a post-socialist mode. Drawing examples from several major cities in Bulgaria, the presentation will outline the major changes that occurred with memorial sites after 1989 and will approach the politics of heritage along the contoursof memorial representations in an urban setting. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

Craig YOUNG & Duncan LIGHT 

(Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University/UK; 

Liverpool Hope University/UK; E-mail: c.young(at)mmu.ac.uk)

 

The dissonant heritage of ‘Communist heritage tourism’ 

 

Since the end of socialism in East and Central Europe (ECE) international and domestic tourism has expanded. The tension between heritage as an economic resource and as a source of new identities for post-socialist nations links to the issue of dealing with the socialist past. Tourism promotion emphasises the heritage of the pre-socialist past or the natural environment frequently obscuring the socialist past. Such discourses link to wider narratives of reimaging post-socialist nations as modern, Western, and democratic. However, the heritage of socialism retains a presence in tourism spaces in a way that often disrupts new identities. In some places it is impossible to avoid the physical heritage of the state-socialist era, as large industrial and housing complexes, public art and Communist kitsch sold in flea-markets brings the socialist era to tourists’ minds in ways that disrupt visions of the post-socialist nation. More explicit use is being made of the heritage of socialism, for example through the museumisation of the socialist era, the commemoration of the victims of Communism, walking tours about the socialist era, themed consumption spaces ordiscussion of the socialist era and sites in guide books. This paper explores the socio-cultural geographies of the dissonant heritage of the socialist era. It explores how the socialist past is represented and performed, how domestic and international tourists consume such sites, and the contested representation of the past. 

 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

Jernej ZUPANČIČ

(Dept. of Geography / Institute for Ethnic Studies, University of Ljubljana/SLO; 

E-mail: jernej.zupancic(at)guest.arnes.si)

 

From tragedies to common perspectives: natural and historical heritage of Kočevsko, 

Slovenia 

 

Kočevsko in south Slovenia is predominantly carst surface, covered by preserved, vital woods, rich in its natural variety fauna and flora. A part of it isstill a virgin wood. Aproximately 600 years ago, the region was populated by German colonisers, mostly as a kind of punishment. They cultivated the land and were ethnically resistant as a “German island” in Slovenian space and society. Until 1941, when Slovenia was occupied by fascist and Nazi troops. According to agreement Hitler – Mussolini the “Gotschee-Germans” were moved to southern Styria (north of the river Save). Their settlements were destroyed by Italian troops, because of scare of partisan troops. The Slovenian partisans developed their political and military headquarter, technical workshops and hospitals of Slovenian anti-fascist/nacist resistence, deep in the Kočevsko woods. After the war, in carst holes and abysses thousands of Slovenian “domobranci” (Homeguard) and Croatian ustaše, returned from Anglo-American troops from Austrian Carinthia to Yugoslavia. Kočevsko returned to wooden-land, as it was 600 years ago. Natural resources, two tragic destinies and one epopee represent a rich base for making cultural / historical paths, open–air museums, memorial sites and similar kinds of protection, reconstruction and promotion of natural, historical and cultural heritage. The contribution shows some opportunities and makes some suggestions as to how to improve these different destinies from the past to future perspectives.