Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilAppels à contributionAppels clos‘Cultural Heritage Visitors’

‘Cultural Heritage Visitors’

Deadline for submission of proposed contributions: 8 March 2023

Scientific coordination

Anne Gaugue: Geographer and HDR (‘Accreditation to Supervise Research’) lecturer at the Université Clermont-Auvergne

Olivier Lazzarotti: Geographer and professor at the Université de Picardie-Jules-Verne

Lily Martinet: Officer in charge of intangible cultural heritage, in the Department of Research, Promotion, and Intangible Cultural Heritage at the French Ministry of Culture; Co-Editor-in-Chief of the journal In Situ. Au regard des sciences sociales

Call for contributions

  • 1 LAZZAROTTI, Olivier, 2012, Des Lieux pour mémoires, Armand Colin, Paris; Collection: ‘Le temps des (...)
  • 2 MALRAUX, André, 1960, ‘Pour sauver les monuments de Haute-Égypte’ (‘To save the monuments of Upper (...)
  • 3 UNESCO, 1971, Sauver Venise, Robert Laffont, Paris.

In Europe, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, the founders of monuments paid little heed to visitors and took it upon themselves to decide which facts to impart and which sites were worthy of being designated as heritage (for example, by drawing up a list, in 1840, of France’s monuments historiques, or historical monuments). However, in the 1960s, visitors became one of the key components of the designated heritage sites.1 From André Malraux’s appeal to the international community with regard to Abu Simbel2 to UNESCO’s appeal to ‘Save Venice’,3 the heritage cause has always been supported by public opinion, and hence the visitors, and, in some cases, the tourists. And this is not an insignificant fact: through their in situ presence, visitors are not merely helping to convey the significance of these sites. As representatives of society at large, they interpret, sometimes contest, occasionally endorse, often appropriate, and inevitably transform the sites’ original significance.

  • 4 LE MENESTREL, Sara, 1999, La Voie des Cadiens, tourisme et identité en Louisiane, Belin, Paris; Col (...)

Hence, in any case, these visitors, who are physically present, participate in the production and transmission of remembrance. In other words, they have a direct impact on the selection of what is retained and, implicitly, what is excluded. Consequently, they nurture these remembrances and, as a result of their ongoing presence, are stakeholders in their development.4 And this is one of the major issues in this call for contributions: from the specialists, scholars, and experts who designate heritage as significant to the visitors who frequent them, how do these actors interact and decide what should be remembered? In other words, who decides on what deserves to be retained and how it must or could be retained, and, reciprocally, what is to be excluded?

  • 5 PEDERSEN, Arthur, 2002, Managing Tourism at World Heritage Sites. A Practical Manual for World Heri (...)

On the one hand, the strict advocates of memorial conservation, who are primarily interested in preservation, are concerned that some visitors may damage the sites or modify practices; for them, heritage is under threat from the excessive number of visitors. Incidentally, it is not for nothing that UNESCO refers to the concept of ‘Carrying Capacity’ and ‘Limit of Acceptable Change’.5 On the other hand, while certain sites and of traditional cultural expressions might ‘complain’ about an ‘excessive’ frequentation, most of the time, quite the opposite occurs. Most heritage stakeholders deplore the lack of visitors. But what is–if such a thing exists–the right number of visitors? How can that be assessed?

  • 6 LAZZAROTTI, Olivier, 2021, ‘Des vies après la mort ?’, in Hassan FAOUZI & Olivier LAZZAROTTI, Patri (...)
  • 7 See Rémy Knafou’s text, ‘Auschwitz, lieu touristique’ (‘Auschwitz: a tourist destination?’), Via, ( (...)

While the stakes are tangible and economic, they are also symbolic. These tensions, which sometimes extend to conflicts, take on a particular aspect and visibility when they concern sites that are tragically marked by the course of history, such as Hiroshima,6 whose inscription on the World Heritage List in 1996 was controversial, or Oświęcim.7

Key aspects and issues envisaged

The general issue concerns the impact of visitors on heritage sites; inversely, three key–but non-exclusive issues–may be identified.

1. Visited heritage

Finding the ‘ideal number’ of visitors

Between ‘too many’ and ‘not enough’, what would be the ‘right’ number of visitors? From ‘too many visitors’8 to ‘overtourism’, what solutions have been proposed and what has been done? Who makes such assessments? How important are the economic, social, and symbolic imperatives in these assessments? What are the resulting measures and how, if necessary, can visitor numbers be ‘regulated’?

Finding ‘ideal visitors’

  • 9 The notion of ‘ideal visitor’ may be compared to that of ‘project user’, conceptualised by Madelein (...)

What is the difference between the ‘real visitor’ and the ‘ideal visitor’?9 Visitors are not a homogeneous group, either from the point of view of practices or from the point of view of representations. For example, is it acceptable to take a selfie at the entrance of the Auschwitz concentration camp? Can visitors free themselves from customary protocols that prescribe or prohibit certain behaviours? For example, is it acceptable that visitors climbed the Uluru rock (Australia) in the past, even though the local Indigenous people consider it a sacred place and asked them not to do so? Lastly, who decides what ‘good’ practices are? And what approach should be taken to the presence of visitors–from their active participation (for example, during the fest-noz festivals in Brittany) to their passive observation (from the mask dances in Dogon Country (Mali) to the Balinese dances)–when immaterial heritage is available to be discovered?

2. Visitors without heritage

How can an assessment be made of the reproduction of cultural heritage–such as, amongst others, the many replicas of the Lascaux cave and the recreation of the Cosquer caveand virtual worlds, such as the metaverse, which seek to recreate elements of cultural heritage? Is viewing digital copies of works comparable to a museum experience? In other words, how do staged live adaptations of traditional songs, dances, and rituals affect their reception by the public? Are these experiences a contemporary way of simultaneously deflecting attention from and addressing a contemporary issue: how can visits and the safeguarding of cultural heritage be reconciled?

3. Who creates which memories?

The rationale of the visitors, who sometimes convey their own understanding of cultural heritage, intersects with that of the other actors–the scholars, the experts who are grouped, or not grouped, into associations, and members of cultural institutions–, who occasionally set themselves up as representatives of official memories. How do they relate to each other? How do the processes of memorisation–which, ultimately, determine what societies remember and forget–function?

Thus, the contributors responding to this call for contributions will seek to define, analyse, and compare the terms of the issue raised: what impact do visitors have on heritage?

These subjects do not restrict or limit the theme. Contributors are welcome to raise any other topics. The main focus of this call is, in other words, to examine–as broadly and as openly as possible–the many effects that visitors have on heritage.

The scope of study is worldwide and all types of heritage–tangible, intangible, natural, and so on–can be highlighted. The call for contributions is addressed to all social sciences and humanities, researchers, and cultural heritage practitioners and professionals.

Proposed contributions

The articles submitted must contain some original research, hypotheses, or updated information; they should not contain a copy of a previously published text.

The contributions will be examined in accordance with the journal’s assessment policy. If you wish to contribute to this Issue, please send an abstract of your proposed article (1,500 characters maximum) together with a short résumé before 8 March 2023.

- by email:

insitu.arss@culture.gouv.fr

- or by post:

Ministère de la Culture

Direction Générale des Patrimoines et de l’Architecture

Revue In Situ. Au regard des sciences sociales

For the attention of Nathalie Meyer

6, rue des Pyramides

75001 Paris

France

The texts of the articles corresponding to the successful proposed contributions must be submitted by 1 September 2023. You can write your contribution in French or in your native language. It will be published in its original version with a French translation. The length of the articles is between 15,000 and 35,000 characters, including spaces, notes, and bibliography.

Author guidelines, containing information about the number of pages, the illustrations, the insertion of notes and links, etc. are available on the journal’s website:

https://journals.openedition.org/insituarss/276

Notes

1 LAZZAROTTI, Olivier, 2012, Des Lieux pour mémoires, Armand Colin, Paris; Collection: ‘Le temps des idées’ and Id., 2019, ‘Cinq leçons géographiques sur les mémoires’, In Situ. Au regard des sciences sociales, Issue 1, (online) https://journals.openedition.org/insituarss/425 (link valid in November 2022).

2 MALRAUX, André, 1960, ‘Pour sauver les monuments de Haute-Égypte’ (‘To save the monuments of Upper Egypt’), in MALRAUX, André, 1996, La Politique, la culture. Discours, articles, entretiens (1925-1975); texts presented by J. Mossuz-Lavau, Gallimard, Paris; Collection: ‘Folio. Essais’. See also Le Courrier de l’Unesco, Vol. XIII, Issue 2 (‘L’Unesco lance un appel au monde : sauvez les trésors de Nubie’, ‘UNESCO launches an appeal to the international community for the preservation of the monuments of Nubia’), February, 1960.

3 UNESCO, 1971, Sauver Venise, Robert Laffont, Paris.

4 LE MENESTREL, Sara, 1999, La Voie des Cadiens, tourisme et identité en Louisiane, Belin, Paris; Collection: ‘Histoire et société, cultures américaines’.

5 PEDERSEN, Arthur, 2002, Managing Tourism at World Heritage Sites. A Practical Manual for World Heritage Site Managers, UNESCO, Paris, available online, https://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-113-2.pdf (link valid in November 2022).

6 LAZZAROTTI, Olivier, 2021, ‘Des vies après la mort ?’, in Hassan FAOUZI & Olivier LAZZAROTTI, Patrimoine, tourisme et territoire, L’Harmattan, Paris; Collection: ‘Colloques et rencontres », pp. 13–20.

7 See Rémy Knafou’s text, ‘Auschwitz, lieu touristique’ (‘Auschwitz: a tourist destination?’), Via, (online) https://journals.openedition.org/viatourism/1593?lang=pt (link valid in November 2022).

8 See https://veilletourisme.ca/2012/05/16/en-quoi-consiste-la-surfrequentation-touristique-et-comment-la-controler/ (valid link in November 2022).

9 The notion of ‘ideal visitor’ may be compared to that of ‘project user’, conceptualised by Madeleine Akrich. See AKRICH Madeleine, 1987, ‘Comment décrire les objets techniques?’, in Techniques et culture, Issue 9, pp. 4964. Available online: https://journals.openedition.org/tc/4999 (valid link in December 2022).

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search