HUMN8027

Critical issues in Heritage and Museum

Studies

This course provides an in depth analysis of the field of heritage and museum studies and
explores some of the conceptual, political and ethical issues faced by those working within
and researching in the area of heritage and museums. The course questions dominant
perceptions that heritage is simply about the collection and management of artefacts, sites
and monuments and challenges students to engage with understanding heritage as an area
of cultural and political practice. Students are introduced to the key intellectual frameworks
that allow us to understand heritage as a form of cultural practice, while each week students
are introduced to particular issues or ‘problems’; that heritage represents and are
encouraged to explore and debate their meanings, consequences and, where relevant, their
resolutions.
Mode of Delivery On campus or online
Prerequisites none
Incompatible Courses none
Co-taught Courses none
Course Convener: Laurajane Smith
Photo (optional)
Phone: 58162
Email: Laurajane.smith@anu.edu
Office hours for student Tuesdays 2-3pm
consultation:
Research Interests Heritage and Museum Studies
Relevant administrator if Bianca Grenville
any (optional)
Phone: 50171
Email: Soaa.admin.cass@anu.edu
Lecturer(s) Laurajane Smith
Phone(s): 58162
Email(s): Laurajane.smith@anu.edu
Office hours for student Tuesdays 2-3pm
consultation:

SEMESTER 2
2019
 COURSE OVERVIEW
Learning Outcomes
Upon successful completion of this course, students will have the knowledge and skills to:
1. Identify and judge the utility of different conceptualisations of 'heritage' and
understand how they come to be deployed within international and national cultural
policies and practices;
2. Analyse the role heritage and museums play in the politics of recognition, and
remembering and forgetting at both national and sub-national levels;
3. Analyse the diverse ways that heritage is perceived and valued by different interests
and assess the consequences of this for policy and practice;
4. Identify and analyse the power relations that shape contemporary heritage and
museum practices; and
5. Critically assess the role that heritage and museum experts play in the mediation of
conflicts over heritage and museum management and interpretation.

Assessment Summary
Assessment Task Value Due Date Date for Return of Linked Learning
Assessment Outcomes (optional)

Tutorial Participation 10% 1-5.

Tutorial 15% 7 days 2 weeks after 1-5.

paper/reflective following submission
summary tutorial

Minor Essay 25% 20/9/19 8/10/19 1, 2.

Major Essay 50% 4/11/19 22/11/19 3, 4, 5.

Feedback
Staff Feedback
Students will be given feedback in the following forms in this course:
• Written comments on essays and other written assignments
• Comments to individuals during student consolation times
• Verbal comments during tutorial sessions
Student Feedback
ANU is committed to the demonstration of educational excellence and regularly seeks
feedback from students. One of the key formal ways students have to provide feedback is
through Student Experience of Learning Support (SELS) surveys. The feedback given in
these surveys is anonymous and provides the Colleges, University Education Committee
and Academic Board with opportunities to recognise excellent teaching, and opportunities for
improvement.
For more information on student surveys at ANU and reports on the feedback provided on
ANU courses, go to
http://unistats.anu.edu.au/surveys/selt/students/ and
http://unistats.anu.edu.au/surveys/selt/results/learning/
Policies
ANU has educational policies, procedures and guidelines, which are designed to ensure that
staff and students are aware of the University’s academic standards, and implement them.
You can find the University’s education policies and an explanatory glossary at:
http://policies.anu.edu.au/

Students are expected to have read the Academic Misconduct Rule before the
commencement of their course.
Other key policies include:

 Student Assessment (Coursework)

 Student Surveys and Evaluations

Required Resources
Additional course costs
None.
Examination material or equipment
None
Recommended Resources
Smith, L. 2006 Uses of Heritage, London: Routledge
Harrison, R. 2013 Heritage: Critical Approaches, London: Routledge
Lowenthal, D. 2015 The Past is a Foreign Country – Revisited, Cambridge University Press

COURSE SCHEDULE

Week/ Summary of Activities Assessment

Session

1 Lecture: What is heritage? Laurajane Smith

2 Lecture: Critical approaches to heritage 1 Laurajane

Smith

Tutorial: The heritage Industry debate

3 Lecture: Critical approaches to heritage 2 Laurajane

Smith

Tutorial: Is all heritage is intangible?

 4 Lecture: Global Heritage Laurajane Smith

Tutorial: International heritage lists

5 Lecture: Politics of Recognition: Heritage and

communities of interest. Laurajane Smith

Tutorial: case studies

6 Lecture: Heritage and Indigenous Rights Laurajane Smith

Tutorial: case studies

7 WRITING WEEK Minor essay due end of week

8 Lecture: Heritage as affective practice. Laurajane Smith

Tutorial: Memory and emotion

9 Lecture: Heritage audiences, mindless dupes or mindful

heritage makers? Laurajane Smith

Tutorial: what constitutes ‘heritage tourism’?

10 Lecture: Heritage, Nostalgia and Populism. Laurajane

Smith

Tutorial: Are heritage and nostalgia inherently

conservative?

11 Lecture: Heritage and the museum Adele Chynoweth

Tutorial: Social activism and the museum

12 Lecture: Critical Heritage Studies and its implications for Major essay
professional practice Laurajane Smith
4/11/19
Tutorial: Course Review

Examination period N/A

ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS
The ANU is using Turnitin to enhance student citation and referencing techniques, and to
assess assignment submissions as a component of the University's approach to managing
Academic Integrity. For additional information regarding Turnitin please visit the ANU Online
website.
Students may choose not to submit assessment items through Turnitin. In this instance you
will be required to submit, alongside the assessment item itself, copies of all references
included in the assessment item.
Assessment Tasks
Participation
Students are expected to do, as a minimum, the required readings for each tutorial and to
come to class prepared to discuss the set topic. You will be assessed on the extent of your
engagement with each of the topics and your constructive and critical contributions to class
discussion across the tutorial series. In the first week students will be allocated tutorial topics
for which they will be lead discussant, their role will be to start and then facilitate debate on
the set topic.
Value: 10%

Assessment Task 1: Tutorial Paper

Details of task: The tutorial paper will consist of a short reflective essay on the tutorial topic
for which you were the lead discussant. Critically answer and discuss the tutorial question
drawing on both the required and supplementary reading for that week (you may of course
bring in additional relevant material).
Assessment Rubrics
The paper will be assessed on the essay assessment criteria (see below). This assessment
variously tests all learning outcomes.
Word limit: 2000
Value: 15%
Presentation requirements: The paper should be written following a standard essay
structure (introduction, body, and conclusion). Make sure your name is on the paper when
you submit it!
Estimated return date: 2 weeks after submission

Assessment Task 2: Minor Essay

Details of task:
You are required to choose a topic from the list below and produce a 2000 word essay
written to the highest academic standards with full and complete references (reference lists
will not count towards the word count).
You must choose a topic from the list below:
1. Outline the parameters of the British ‘heritage industry’ debate, to what extent has
that debate framed the way that heritage as a phenomena has been understood in the
Anglophone literature.
2. Traditional definitions of heritage stress the materiality of heritage; however, a
number of commentators have argued that heritage may be best understood as a process or
as a ‘verb’. That is, as something that is done, a process of making the past meaningful in
the present. Compare and contrast these definitions and discuss and assess the utility of the
idea that heritage is a verb.
3. Can the concept of universal heritage value be defended?
4. Intangible cultural heritage (ICH) has been defined as a third form of heritage,
separated from definitions of ‘cultural heritage’ and ‘natural heritage’. Review and assess the
utility of these three classifications of heritage, what does the idea of ICH add to our
understanding of ‘heritage’ as both a phenomena and a concept?
Required and supplementary readings listed under tutorial topics 2-6 will be particularly
relevant for answering the above questions.
This assessment addresses learning outcomes 1 and 2.
Assessment Rubrics
• Critical engagement with the topic and depth of understanding
• The development of a central structuring argument that answers the essay question
• Range/comprehensiveness of material covered and readings used
• Critical approach to sources and the ability to synthesise source material
• Referencing
• Relevance of material
• Use of examples
• Originality
• Structure and presentation

Word limit: 3000

Value: 25%
Presentation requirements: The paper should be written following a standard essay
structure in which a clear argument is developed (introduction, body, and conclusion). Make
sure your name is on the paper when you submit it!
Estimated return date: 2 weeks after submission

Assessment Task 3: Major Essay

Details of task:
You are required to carry out independent research and produce a 3000 word essay written
to the highest academic standards with full and complete references (reference lists will not
count towards the word count).

You must choose a topic from the list below:

1. Heritage experts are just another interest group in conflicts over the disposition of
material culture. Drawing on examples from anywhere in the world, critically discuss and
evaluate this statement.

2. Critically evaluate how an understanding of the politics of recognition, as defined by

Nancy Fraser, may help us to understand the nature of heritage and the social/cultural and
political conflicts that surround its management and conservation.

3. ‘Those museum personnel who believe that a museum’s mission is to communicate

or transmit specific messages, feelings, or other experiences will need to appreciate that in
general only visitors already attuned to seeking these experiences are likely to find them’
(Pekarick and Schreiber 2012: 495). Discuss and assess the implications of this statement
for understanding the core assumption that museums are instruments of education and
learning.

Pekarick, A.J and Schreiber, J.B. 2012. The power of expectation: A research note.
Curator, 55(4):487-496.

4. If tourism is ultimately the search for the authentic - can authenticity be found in
heritage sites and attractions, and does it matter?

5. “Nostalgia is a sentiment of loss and displacement, but it is also a romance with

one’s own fantasy” S. Boym (2001) The Future of Nostalgia, p. XIII
Nostalgia is intertwined with heritage; can this emotion of loss and longing inform our
understanding of heritage and its meanings in and for the present? Or does nostalgia simply
lead to maudlin fantasy making of no consequence?
6. Write a reflexive essay that responds to an issue of your choice raised in the course
and consider how debates in the literature around that issue may inform or alter your
professional practice in the heritage and/or museum sector. [Note: this essay may only be
attempted once you have spoken to, and gained consent from, Laurajane].

Readings for the major essay – use the course readings as a starting point to explore the
topic you have chosen. I will then expect you to have explored and found your own further
readings. We can discuss in tutorials how you might go about researching and finding extra
readings for your essay.

This assessment addresses learning outcomes 3, 4 and 5.

Assessment Rubrics

The essays will be assessed on the following criteria:

• Critical engagement with the topic and depth of understanding
• The development of a central structuring argument that answers the essay question
• Range/comprehensiveness of material covered and readings used
• Critical approach to sources and the ability to synthesise source material
• Referencing
• Relevance of material
• Use of examples
• Originality
• Structure and presentation

Word limit: 3000

Value: 50%
Presentation requirements: The paper should be written following a standard essay
structure in which a clear argument is developed (introduction, body, and conclusion). Make
sure your name is on the paper when you submit it!
Estimated return date: 3 weeks after submission

Examination(s)
None.
Assignment submission
Online Submission: Assignments are submitted using Turnitin in the course Wattle site.
You will be required to electronically sign a declaration as part of the submission of your
assignment. Please keep a copy of the assignment for your records.

Extensions and penalties

Extensions and late submission of assessment pieces are covered by the Student Assessment
(Coursework) Policy and Procedure.
The Course Convener may grant extensions for assessment pieces that are not examinations or
take-home examinations. If you need an extension, you must request it in writing on or before the
due date. If you have documented and appropriate medical evidence that demonstrates you were
not able to request an extension on or before the due date, you may be able to request it afte r the
due date.
Late submission of assessment tasks without an extension are penalised at the rate of 5% of the
possible marks available per working day or part thereof. Late submission of assessment tasks is
not accepted after 10 working days after the due date, or on or after the date specified in the
course outline for the return of the assessment item.

Returning assignments
Assignments will either be returned in hard copy in class or emailed to you on the advertised
return date.

Resubmission of assignments
Assignments will not normally be resubmitted.

Referencing requirements
Referencing is a vital part of all academic writing. You must reference in the text of your essay ALL
information and ideas derived from your reading, not just those parts which are direct quotations.
This is an important part of academic professional practice.

In Heritage and Museum Studies the Harvard system of referencing is followed, not the footnoting
system used by some other disciplines. For example:

Heritage has become important for working-class communities in Britain grappling with the impacts
of unemployment and deindustrialisation (Samuel 1994: 238)

Alternatively, the author’s surname may be integrated into the text, followed immediately by the
year of publication, in brackets. For example:

Samuel (1994: 238) argues that heritage has become important for working-class communities in
Britain grappling with the impacts of unemployment and deindustrialisation.

When you use a direct quotation, or refer to a specific idea, you need to include the page
number(s) in the text reference after a colon.

If more than one work is cited, they should be referenced as follows:

Samuel (1994) and Lowethal (1987) fundamentally disagree…
Previous authors (Lowenthal 1985; Hewison 1987) have considered....

In the case of work that has more than three authors, only the surname of the first listed author is
used, followed by the expression “et al.” (meaning “and others”). For example, a work by Graham,
Tunbridge and Ashworth becomes:

Graham et al. (2000) have found....

It has been found (Graham et al. 2000) that....

If you want to quote a long passage from another publication, it should be indented with no
quotation marks. Please use quotes sparingly – they should be used to support a point you are
making in your essay or other assignment and should not be used to make a point for you.

You then list all the books and articles to which you have referred in the text of your essay under
the heading “References”/”Reference List” (not “Bibliography,” which would also include everything
you have read regardless of whether you use it in the text or not) at the end of your essay. These
references must be arranged in alphabetical order by first author surname/family name.
The following examples illustrate one format for dealing with various types of source material in
your References. If you look at references in any journal article or book you will see that many
specific formats can be used - the essence is to be consistent.

For a book:
Macdonald, S. 2013. Memorylands. London: Routledge.

For a book by more than one author:

Keightley, E. and Pickering, M. 2012. The Mnemonic Imagination: Remembering as
Creative Practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

For an edited volume:

Labadi, S. and Long, C. (eds). 2010. Heritage and Globalisation. London: Routledge.

For an article in an edited volume:

Labadi, S. 2010. World Heritage, authenticity and post-authenticity: International and
national perspectives. In Labadi, S. and Long, C. (eds) Heritage and Globalisation.
London: Routledge.

For an article in a journal:

Brandellero, A. and Janssen, S. 2014 Popular music as cultural heritage: Scoping out the
field of practice. International Journal of Heritage Studies 20(3): 224-240.

Note that the journal title, NOT the article title is italicised, and the volume number and issue or
part of the volume are indicated before the page number.

For a website:
Parker Pearson, M. 2010. Stonehenge riverside project homepage. University of Sheffiel d,
[last accessed 2 Feb. 2012]. Available from http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/archaeology
/research/stonehenge.

TUTORIAL SHEDULE and WEEKLY READINGS

Week 1: No tutorial
Week 2: Is heritage ‘bogus history’ (Hewison 1987) that results in a ‘loathsome collection of
theme parks and dead values’ (Tom Paulin, poet) or is there something more complex and
democratic going on?
Required reading:
Gentry, K. 2015. ‘The Pathos of Conservation’ - Raphael Samuel and the Politics of
Heritage, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 21(6):561-576.
Harrison, R. 2013. Heritage: Critical Approaches. (chapter 5). London: Routledge.
Hewison, R, 2007 [1987]. Brideshead revisited. In L. Smith (ed) Cultural Heritage: Critical
Concepts in Media and Cultural Studies, London: Routledge.
Samuel, R. 1994. Theatres of Memory. London: Verso, pp. 259-285.

Supplementary Reading
Davidson, G. 1991. The meanings of ‘heritage’. In G. Davidson and C. McConville (eds) A
Heritage Handbook, North Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Gentry, K. and Smith, L. 2019 Critical heritage studies and the legacies of the late-twentieth
century heritage canon. International Journal of Heritage Studies:
doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2019.1570964.
Lowenthal, D. 2015. The Past is a Foreign Country, Cambridge: CUP. (Second edition)
Smith, L. (ed) 2007. Cultural Heritage: Critical Concepts in Media and Cultural Studies,
Volume III, Part 7. London: Routledge.
Wright, P. 1985. On Living in an Old Country. London: Verso.

Week 3: Is all Heritage Intangible? Does the traditional emphasis on heritage as material
culture from the past facilitate a misunderstanding of the nature of heritage?
Required reading:
Harvey, D. 2001 Heritage pasts and heritage presents: Temporality, meaning and the scope
of heritage studies, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 7 (4): 319-338.
Macdonald, S. 2013 Memorylands, London: Routledge (chapter 2)
Smith, L. 2006 Uses Of Heritage, London Routledge (chapter 2).

Supplementary Reading
Byrne, D. 2009. A critique of unfeeling heritage. In L. Smith and N. Akagawa (eds) Intangible
Heritage, London: Routledge.
Dicks, B. 2003. Heritage, governance and marketization: A case study from Wales, Museum
and Society, 1 (1): 30-44.
Jackson, A. and Kidd, J., 2012. Performing Heritage. Manchester University Press,
Manchester.
Haldrup, M. and Bœrenholdt, J.O., 2015. Heritage as performance. In E. Waterton and S.
Watson The Palgrave handbook of contemporary heritage research (pp. 52-68).
Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. 1998. Destination Culture: Tourism, Museums and Heritage.
Berkeley.
Munjeri, D. 2004. Tangible and intangible heritage: from difference to convergence. Museum
International 56 (1-2): 12-20.

Week 4: In 2004, Kirshenblatt-Gimblett warned that the development of an Intangible

Heritage list based on state sponsored nominations had the potential to create a list that was
‘a list of that which is not indigenous, not minority, and not non-Western, though no less
intangible’ (2004:57). Has this prediction been realised? Has UNESCO simply created
another World Heritage List and if so, what are the implications for understanding both local
and global heritage?
Required reading:
Blake, J. UNESCO’s 2003 Convention on Intangible Heritage: The implication of community
involvement in ‘safeguarding’. In In L. Smith and N. Akagawa (eds) Intangible
Heritage, London: Routledge.
Caust, J. and Vecco, M., 2017. Is UNESCO World Heritage recognition a blessing or
burden? Evidence from developing Asian countries. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 27,
pp.1-9.
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. 2004. Intangible heritage as metacultural production, Museum
International, 56 (1-2): 52-64.

Supplementary Reading
Aikawa, N. 2004. An historical overview of the preparation of the UNESCO International
Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage', Museum International, 56
(1-2): 137-149.
Akagawa, N. and L. Smith (eds) 2018 Safeguarding Intangible Heritage: Practices and
Politics, London: Routledge. (Various chapters)
Lenzerini, F. 2011. Intangible cultural heritage: The living culture of peoples. The European
Journal of International Law, 22(1):101-120.
Lixinski, L. 2011. Selecting heritage: the interplay of art, politics and identity. The European
Journal of International Law, 22(1):81-100.
Smith, L. and Akagawa, N. 2009. (eds) Intangible Heritage. London: Routledge. (various
chapters).
Winter, T. 2014 Beyond Eurocentrism? Heritage conservation and the politics of difference.
International Journal of Heritage Studies, 20(2):123-137.

Week 5: How might heritage be defined as a political resource? Apply the insights offered by
Fraser’s discussion of the politics of recognition to heritage conflicts. What does this tell us
about the nature and meaning of heritage?
Required reading:
Crooke, E. 2010. The politics of community heritage: motivations, authority and control.
International Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(1-2):16-29.
Fraser, N. 2001. Recognition without ethics? Theory, Culture and Society 18(2-3):21-42.
Hall, S. 2007 [1999]. Whose Heritage? Un-settling 'The Heritage', Re-imaging the post-
nation. In L. Smith (ed) Cultural Heritage: Critical Concepts in Media and Cultural
Studies, London: Routledge.
Littler, J. and Naidoo, R. 2007 [2004]. White Past, Multicultural Present: Heritage and
National Stories. In L. Smith (ed) Cultural Heritage: Critical Concepts in Media and
Cultural Studies, London: Routledge.

Supplementary Reading
Fraser, N. 2000. Rethinking Recognition. New Left Review 3, May-June, 107-120.
Robertson, I. (ed) 2012. Heritage from Below. Ashgate. (Various chapters).
Marschall, S. 2019. The long shadow of apartheid: a critical assessment of heritage
transformation in South Africa 25 years on. International Journal of Heritage Studies,
https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2019.1608459
Smith, L., P.A. Shackel and G. Campbell (eds) 2011. Heritage, Labour and the Working
Class, London: Routledge. (Various chapters).
Smith, L. and E. Waterton 2009 Heritage, Communities and Archaeology. London:
Duckworth. Chapter 4.
Waterton, E. and L. Smith 2010 The recognition and misrecognition of community heritage.
International Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(1-2): 4-15.
Winter, T. 2014 Beyond Eurocentrism? Heritage conservation and the politics of difference.
International Journal of Heritage Studies, 20(2):123-137.

Week 6: David Lowenthal (2006) has argued that heritage has become the preserve of
those enmeshed in a sense of victimhood. Indeed, he argues that heritage encourages
tribalism and the special pleadings of ethnic groups. Is this a reasonable assessment?
Following on from last week’s discussion how might we incorporate an understanding of the
political uses of heritage on traditional ideas of heritage and museum stewardship?
Required reading:
Harrison, R. and Hughes, L. 2010. Heritage, colonialism and postcolonialism. In In R.
Harrison (ed) Understanding the Politics of Heritage, Manchester: Manchester
University Press.
Hemming, S. and Rigney, D. 2010. Decentring the new protectors: Transforming Aboriginal
heritage in South Australia, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(1-2):90-106
Langford, R. 1983 ‘Our heritage - your playground’, Australian Archaeology, 16:1-6.
Lowenthal, D. 2006. Heritage wars, spiked.
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/254/ (accessed 11 July 2014).

Supplementary Reading
Andrews, T.D. and Buggey, S. 2012. Canadian Aboriginal cultural landscapes in praxis. In K.
Taylor and J. Lennon (eds) Managing Cultural Landscapes, Routledge.
Greer, S. 2010. Heritage and empowerment: Community-based Indigenous cultural heritage
in northern Australia. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(1-2):45-58.
Hølleland, H. and Skrede, J., 2018. What’s wrong with heritage experts? An interdisciplinary
discussion of experts and expertise in heritage studies. International Journal of
Heritage Studies, https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2018.1552613
Smith, L., Morgan, A. and van der Meer, A. 2003. Community-driven research in cultural
heritage management: The Waanyi Women’s History Project. International Journal of
Heritage Studies, 9(1):65-80.
Smith, L. Uses of Heritage, London: Routledge, chapter 8.

Week 7: no tutorial – writing week.

Week 8: What role if any does emotion play in the way people engage with museums and
heritage sites? What insights, if any, does the consideration of emotion and its engagement
with memory afford our understanding of heritage and the way it is used?
Required reading:
Bagnall, G. 2003. Performance and performativity at heritage sites, Museum and Society,
1(2): 87-103.
Dhalin, J. 2018. Labour of love and devotion? The search for the lost soldiers of Russia. In L.
Smith, M. Wetherell and G. Campbell (eds) Emotion, affective practices and the past in
the present. London: Routledge

Supplementary Reading
Davidson, L. 2015. Visitor Studies: Toward a culture of reflective practice and critical
museology for the visitor-centred museum. In C. McCarthy (ed) The International
Handbooks of Museum Studies: Museum Practice, London: John Wiley and Sons.
Gable, E. and R. Handler 1996. After Authenticity at an American heritage Site. American
Anthropologist 98(3): 568-78.
Sather-Wagstaff, J. 2011. Heritage that Hurts: Tourists in the memoryscapes of September
11. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
Schorch, P. 2015 Museum encounters and narrative engagements. In A. Witcomb and K.
Message (eds) The International Hand books of Museum Studies: Museum Theory,
London: John Wiley and Sons.
Smith, L. 2006 Uses of Heritage, London: Routledge.
Smith, L. and G. Campbell 2016 The elephant in the room: heritage, affect and emotion. In
W. Logan, M Nic Craith, U. Kockel (eds) A Companion to Heritage Studies.
Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Smith, L., M. Wetherell and G. Campbell (eds) 2018. Emotion, affective practices and the
past in the present. London: Routledge
Watson, S. 2015. Emotion in the history museum. In A. Witcomb and K. Message (eds) The
International Hand books of Museum Studies: Museum Theory, London: John Wiley
and Sons.
Week 9: Poria, Butler and Airey note that people go to heritage sites to ‘feel’. Tourism has
also been defined as the search for the authentic. However, it is also observed that as soon
as the tourist arrives at a cultural heritage destination that authenticity is destroyed. Can
there be any authentic emotional tourist experience?
Required reading:
Poria, Y. R. Butler, and Airey, D. 2003. The core of heritage tourism, Annals of Tourism
Research, 30(1): 238-254
Zhu, Y. 2012. Performing heritage: Rethinking authenticity in tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research, 39(3)1495-1513

Supplementary Reading
Bagnall, G., 2003. Performance and performativity at heritage sites. Museum and society,
1(2), pp.87-103.
Salazar N. and Zhu, Y. 2015. Heritage and tourism, in Lynn Meskell (ed.) Heritage Ethics: An
Anthropological Reader, 240-259, New York: Wiley-Blackwell
Smith, L., M. Wetherell and G. Campbell (eds) 2018. Emotion, affective practices and the
past in the present. London: Routledge (various chapters)
Tolia-Kelly, D.P., Waterton, E. and Watson, S. (eds) 2016. Heritage, affect and emotion:
politics, practices and infrastructures. Routledge.
Wang, N. 1999. Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience. Annals of Tourism Research,
26(2): 349-370
Waterton, E. and Watson, S., 2014. The semiotics of heritage tourism (Vol. 35). Channel
View Publications.
Winter, T. 2010. Heritage Tourism: the dawn of a new era? In S. Labadi and C. Long (eds)
Heritage and Globalisation. London: Routledge.

Week 10: Are heritage and nostalgia inherently conservative as the ‘heritage industry’
critique argued in the 1980s? Are we seeing their critique of the uses of heritage by Margret
Thatcher in the 1980s being replicated in the ‘Make America Great Again’ and Brexit
campaigns?

Required reading:
Hewison, R, 2007 [1987]. Brideshead revisited. In L. Smith (ed) Cultural Heritage: Critical
Concepts in Media and Cultural Studies, London: Routledge.
Bonnett, A. 2010. Radicalism, Antiracism, and Nostalgia: The Burden of Loss in Search for
Convivial Culture. Environment and Planning A 42: 2351-2369.

Supplementary Reading:
Bonnett, A. 2010. Left in the Past: Radicalism and the Politics of Nostalgia. New York:
Continuum.
Bonnett, A. 2016 The Geography of Nostalgia: Global and Local Perspectives on Modernity
and Loss. Abingdon: Routledge.
Boym, Svetlana. 2001. The Future of Nostalgia. Basic Books.
Gentry, K. and Smith, L. 2019 Critical heritage studies and the legacies of the late-twentieth
century heritage canon. International Journal of Heritage Studies:
doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2019.1570964.
Gómez Villar, J. and Canessa, F., 2018. Indigenous heritage and healing nostalgia:
Mapuche’s lof in Rehue Romopulli, Port Saavedra, Chile. International Journal of
Heritage Studies, 24(8), pp.843-856.
Harrison, R., 2018. Critical heritage studies beyond epistemic popularism. Antiquity, 92(365).
Orr, R., 2017. The nostalgic native? The politics and terms of heritage and remembrance in
two communities. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 23(7), pp.643-653.
Reynié, D., 2016. ‘Heritage Populism’ and France's National Front. Journal of Democracy,
27(4), pp.47-57.
Smith, L. and Campbell, G. 2017 ‘Nostalgia for the future’: memory, nostalgia and the politics
of class, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 23(7): 612–627, DOI:
10.1080/13527258.2017.1321034

Week 11: Sometimes visiting and interpreting heritage of violence or conflict can be
confronting. How should we address painful pasts? What role, if any, does empathy play in
museum and heritage interpretation? Compare and contrast responses to the issues of
interpreting difficult and painful history discussed in the readings by Lowenthal, Magelssen
and Willis. What implications do the issues raised in these readings pose for museum and
heritage professionals?
Required reading:
Lowenthal, D. 2009. Patrons, populists, apologists: crises in museum stewardship. L. Gibson
and J. Pendleberry (eds) Valuing Historic Environments. Ashgate.
Magelssen, S. 2012. ‘You No Longer Need to Imagine’: Bus Touring through South central
Los Angeles Gangland. In L. Smith, W. Waterton and S. Watson (eds) The Cultural
Moment in Tourism, London: Routledge.
Wills, S. 2009. Between the hotel and the detention centre: possible trajectories of migrant
pain and shame in Australia. In W. Logan and K. Reeves (eds) Places of Pain and
Shame: Dealing with ‘Difficult Heritage’, London: Routledge.

Supplementary Reading:
Appleton, J. 2007. Museums for ‘The People’? In S. Watson (ed) Museums and their
Communities, London: Routledge.
Byrne, D. 2009 ‘A critique of unfeeling heritage’, in L. Smith and N. Akagawa (eds) Intangible
Heritage, London: Routledge.
Casey, D. 2001. Museum as agents for social and political change. Curator, 44 (3): 230-6.
Sather-Wagstaff, J. 2011. Heritage that Hurts: Tourists in the memoryscapes of September
11. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
Sandell, R. 2007 [2002]. Museums and the Combating of Social Inequality: Roles,
Responsibilities, Resistance. In S. Watson (ed) Museums and their Communities.
London: Routledge.
Smith, L. 2010. ‘Man’s inhumanity to man’ and other platitudes of avoidance and
misrecognition: an analysis of visitor responses to exhibitions marking the 1807
bicentenary, Museum and Society 8(3):193-214
Utaka, Y 2009. The Hiroshima ‘Peace Memorial’: transforming legacy memories and
landscapes. In W. Logan and K. Reeves (eds) Places of Pain and Shame: Dealing
with ‘Difficult Heritage’, London: Routledge.

Week 12: Course Review – student led discussion

SUPPORT FOR STUDENTS

The University offers a number of support services for students. Information on these is
available online from http://students.anu.edu.au/studentlife/