Beyond Eurocentrism? Heritage conservation and the politics of difference

There is a long-standing debate concerning the suitability of European or ‘western’ approaches to the conservation of cultural heritage in other parts of world. The Cultural Charter for Africa (1976), The Burra Charter (1979) and Nara Document on Authenticity (1994) are notable manifestations of such concerns. These debates are particularly vibrant in Asia today. This article highlights a number of charters, declarations and publications that have been conceived to recalibrate the international field of heritage governance in ways that address the perceived inadequacies of documents underpinning today’s global conservation movement, such as the 1964 Venice Charter. But as Venice has come to stand as a metonym for a ‘western’ conservation approach, intriguing questions arise concerning what is driving these assertions of geographic, national or civilisational difference in Asia. To address such questions, the article moves between a number of explanatory frameworks. It argues declarations about Asia’s culture, its landscapes, and its inherited pasts are, in fact, the combined manifestations of post-colonial subjectivities, a desire for prestige on the global stage of cultural heritage governance and the practical challenges of actually doing conservation in the region.     

Struggles of recognition: adverse effects of China’s living human treasures program

ABSTRACT

Heritagization processes have resulted in struggles of recognition across the globe. Scholarly work has demonstrated that determining what and whose cultural architecture, objects and practices are to be considered ‘heritage’ results in inclusion and exclusion effects which deprive some individuals, communities or ethnic groups of recognition. Many of these studies build on Western theories of recognition as developed by Axel Honneth or Nancy Fraser. However, due to the Western origin of these theories and – in most cases – application to democratic nation-states, the question arises whether Western theories of recognition can in fact be applied to non-Western authoritarian states. Taking the Chinese LHT system, the so-called ‘representative ICH Inheritor program,’ as a case study, I explore to what extent Western theories of recognition explain struggles of recognition in PR China. I argue that while these theories are useful in explaining the effects and purposes underlying struggles of recognition, authoritarian regimes like China may exacerbate struggles of recognition since their ‘institutional patterns of value recognition’ can more openly and forcefully use recognition and misrecognition as a tool to foster political and economic objectives. However, citizens respond by resigning, contesting or circumventing official decision-making processes.     

A New Albion in New America: British Periodicals and Morris Birkbeck’s English Prairie, 1818–1824

The “English Prairie” settlements in Edwards County, Illinois attracted an inordinate amount of commentary in the post‐Napoleonic War period, providing a window into British intellectual life of the period. Morris Birkbeck, the more famous of the English Prairie’s two founders, came to personify America for British readers. Commentators ranged widely in their opinions of the English Prairie, speaking in broad terms of either superior aspects of western American society and polity or else making the new state of Illinois a foil to illustrate the ills of democracy and religious disestablishment. Three of the most prominent British reviews of the time – the Edinburgh Review, Quarterly Review, and Westminster Review – were vital participants in this debate that was really about the future of Great Britain. The periodicals created images of America suited to their understanding of the situation, as one small part of sparsely populated Illinois became a vicarious arena for competing concepts of politics and religion.