diapora authenticity and the imagined past accepted version · 2017. 5. 30. · ‘imagined’ in...

1

Diaspora,AuthenticityandtheImaginedPast

*Dr.DerekBryce.

DepartmentofMarketing

StrathclydeBusinessSchool

UniversityofStrathclyde

199CathedralStreet

Glasgow

Scotland,U.K.

G40QU

Email:[email protected]

Telephone+44(0)1415536177

Dr.MatthewAlexander.DepartmentofMarketing,UniversityofStrathclyde.

Dr.SamanthaMurdy.DepartmentofMarketing,UniversityofStrathclyde.

*CorrespondingAuthor.

2

ABSTRACT

AncestraltourisminScotland,asectoroftheheritagetourismmarketsensitive

toconsumerpersonalisation,hasparticularpropensitiestowardsprocess-driven

co-createdexperiences.Theseexperiencesoccurwithinexistingcategoriesof

object-basedandexistentialnotionsofauthenticityalongsideanemergent

categoryofthe‘authenticallyimaginedpast’.Thelatterofthesemodesrevealsa

complexinterplaybetweenprofessionallyendorsedvalidationoftheempirical

veracityofobjects,documentsandplacesandthedeeplyheld,authentically

imagined,narrativesof‘home’.Thesenarratives,builtupintheDiasporaover

centuries,drivenewprocessestowardsauthenticityintourism.Weconducted

31re-enactmentinterviewsacross27sitesthroughoutScotlandwithcurators,

archivists,andvolunteerstoexplorethesenotionsofauthenticitywithinthe

ancestraltourismcontext.

Keywords:Diaspora;Heritage;Co-creation;Museums;Ancestry;Scotland

3

INTRODUCTION

AncestraltourismhasbeenidentifiedasakeyareaofgrowthbyScotland’s

NationalTourismOrganisation,VisitScotland,withamarketintheScottish

Diasporaestimatedat50millionpeopleincountriessuchasCanada,theUSA,

AustraliaandNewZealand(VisitScotland,2013).Thispaperrevealshow

ancestraltouristsappearnottoseekauthenticationofthisformofheritage

consumptioninaconventionalsenseofindirectprofessionalassurance,butseek

confirmationoflongstandingancestralnarratives(realandimagined),

developedintheDiasporaitself.Asaresult,touristsseektoproduce

authenticationthroughco-creation,withdirectstaffcontact,participatory

interpretation,andcontributionofandtoarchivalandobject-basedrecords.

Thispresentsheritagepractitionerswithdirect,focused,andpotentiallyrich,

mutuallyproductiveencounterswithtourists,yetalsopresentsethical

challengeswheninterveningtodisproveormodifyoftendeeplyheld,but

empiricallydubious,notionsofpersonal‘imaginedpasts’.

Conceptualdebateson‘authenticity’inthetourismliteraturehavebeenpresent

sinceitsintroductiontothetourismlexiconintheearly1970s(seeMacCannell,

1973).Inparticular,abodyofworkfocussesonauthenticityasaprocess,

negotiated(orrenegotiated)betweenatouristsiteanditsvisitors(Bruner,

1994;Cohen&Cohen,2012;Frisvoll,2013;Daugstad&Kirchengast,2013;Wall

&Xie,2005).Thiscomplexprocessoftentakesplacearoundsitesofstaged

authenticity(e.g.Daugstad&Kirchengast,2013;Frisvoll,2013)andis

increasinglyviewedasaparticipatory,orco-createdprocess(seeCohen&

Cohen,2012).Inparticular,wefocushereonthespecificityofhistorical

relationshipsbetweenzonesofsupplyanddemandthatproducetourists’

notionsof‘authenticity’,sometimesintensionwiththoseheldbyheritage

practitionersinthedestinationitself.Whilenotionslinkingreligiouspilgrimage

andauthenticityamongtouristsarerelatedtoourcontext(Andriotis,2011;

Belhassan,Caton&Stewart,2008),thesearelargelydeterminedbyadherenceto

particularcreedsandinstitutions.Itisarguedthatexperiencesdemandedbythe

4

ancestralsectoroftheheritagemarketoftenrequireintimate,placebound,

origin-basedlevelsofpersonalinteractionwithpractitioners.Theresultofan

increaseddesireforparticularformsof‘authentic’verificationcaneither

reinforceandreproducethecurator/archivistasguarantorofauthenticationor,

inoneimportantsense,disruptit.Assuch,theresearchquestionunderpinning

thisstudyis:doestheintimateengagementbetweenthediasporicmarketand

theheritagesectorattheancestraldestinationproduceexistingandemergent

formsofauthentication?

Thecontestednotionof‘authenticity’asdesired,imagined,performed,

experiencedandconsumedthroughculturalheritagetourismiswellrehearsed

intheliterature(seeBryce,Curran,O’Gorman&Taheri,2015;Cohen,2004;

Lugosi,2016;MacCannell,1999;Salazar,2012;Shackley,1994).Analysishas

beenbroughttobearonheritageprofessionalsasactivists,re-framersand‘re-

authenticators’ofhistory(seeBarker,1999;Bryce&Carnegie,2013;Hein,

2000).

Discussionbeginswithanexaminationofchangingprofessionaldiscourseat

heritagesiteswheremuchancestraltourismisconsumed.Areviewofthe

specificimplicationsoftourismonprofessionalheritagepracticeisundertaken,

aswellasofthenotionof‘authenticity’asafunctionofmarketdemand.The

specificcontextualbackgroundofancestraltourism,nostalgiaandtheimagined-

pastisthenofferedalongsidesomenecessaryhistoricalbackgroundonScotland

andtheScottishDiaspora’sexperienceofemigrationandreturn.Ourdatais

drawnfromaqualitativestudyofancestraltourismdeliveryat27sitesacross

Scotland,pre-identifiedaslocifortheancestraltourismmarketthroughprior

correspondencewithstaff.Analysisisframedontwoexistingthemesidentified

intheliterature,object-basedandexistentialauthenticities,andathirdemergent

theme,theauthenticallyimaginedpast,leadingustoimplicationsofourresearch

forheritagetourismingeneral.

5

ChangingInstitutionalDiscourse,HeritageTourismandtheDesirefor

Authentication

Museums,archivecentresandsiteswhereheritageisconsumedaretraditionally

framed,ascommunitiesofculturalpractice(Wenger,2000).Professionalstaff

seetheirprimaryroleascustodiansandenablersofconservation(Delafons,

1997).They,andtheparticularrepresentationalandinterpretivepraxesthey

adopt,arehistoricallymobilemanifestationsofsocietalchange(Barker,1999;

Hein,2000).Staffareunderpressuretodevelopadaptivestrategiestoincreasing

demandsforindependentrevenuegeneration.However,theyarestillembedded

withinnationalandlocalcontextswhichoftenunderwritetheircoreappealas

repositoriesoffavouredversionsofpastandcurrentvalues(Barr,2005;

Hetherington,2000;Radakrishnan,1994).Collections,therefore,becomevisual

signs‘colonized’bybothtouristandcuratorialgazes(Claessen&Howes,2006:

200),modifiedaroundtheprofessionallylegitimateddiscourseofcuratorsand

archivistsor‘triggering’lessempiricallyinformedideasandimagesfortourists

(Jordanova,1989:23).

Museumsareconsidered“premierattractions”,oftenforminganetworkorlocus

forhowdestinationsareconceived,representedandconsumedinheritageterms

(Kirshenblatt-Gimblett,1998:132).Concernsexistthatthemeaningoftextsand

objectsmaybedecontextualizeddue to thehistoricaldistanceof tourists from

particular events and the commodifying effects of tourism (Pollock & Sharp,

2007).

Intourism,authenticityoftenfunctionsasafixedconcept(Hall,2007)imposing

“aone-dimensionalinterpretation,supportedbyassessmentcriteria”(King,

2007:1143).Ifconsideringauthenticityasenhancingmeasurementsof‘tourist

satisfaction’(Shackley,1994:397)tosupport‘benignlyself-serving’tourist

understandingsof‘theauthentic’(Horne,1986:223-224),thenitisunlikelyto

yieldmuchbeyondmanagerialreductionism.

6

Therefore,Bell(1996:132-133)wonderswhetheronecan“knowifan

[aesthetic]experienceis‘authentic’–i.e.,whetheritistrueandthereforevalid

forallmen?”andtracesalate-modernshiftinthedefiningquality,from

‘authority’vestedin‘masteryofcraft…andknowledgeofform’to‘immediacy’of

intentandreception.ToSlater(1997:94-95)thesearchforauthenticity

constitutes‘scrutinising’people,objectsandaestheticformfora‘consistency’

whichisoftenconfusedwith‘sincerity’.Thisisnearimpossibleinafragmented

socialworldofpluralisticrepresentationandreceptionforandbymultiple

‘audiences’(ibid).Thisinvitesrecognitionofthemanymodesinwhichsubjects

are‘interpellated’inrelationtoobjectsinaplenitudeof‘authenticities’,

manifestedindispersedconsumerculture(Althusser,2008;Collins,1989).

Inacommercial/culturalnexusliketourismthevalorizationof‘authenticity’asa

sociallyformedobjectofdesire,hascrossedthe‘thresholdofformalization’

(Foucault,1989a)andbecomeadiscursive‘positivity’withmaterial

consequences(Shepherd,2011).Inthemovefromtheexperiential‘front’

(false/recreated)to‘back’(true/authentic)(MacCannell,1999),‘inauthentic’

experiences‘staged’inwholeorinpartfortouristconsumptionmay,through

habituationbecomeacceptedas‘authentic’(Cohen,2004;Ryan&Gu,2010),

acquiringpatinasof‘timelessness’(Trevor-Roper,1983).

Claimstoauthenticitycanrarelybeauthenticatedbytouriststhemselves,butare

oftenofferedthroughqualityassuranceofversionsoforiginalobjects,experience

andplaces(Asplett&Cooper,2000;McIntosh,2004;Swanson&Timothy,2012).

Importantly,inthesensethatFoucault(1988)understood‘power’bothas

deployerandproducerofapprovedformsof‘knowledge’,allsuchsecond-order

experiencesmustbe‘authenticated’byasourceperceivedbythemarkettobe

legitimate,i.e.havingarelationtotheoriginalreferent(Henderson,2000;Hsieh

&Chang,2006;Thomson&Tian,2008).

Meanwhile,‘self-connection’withbrands(Park,MacInnes,Priester,Eisingerrich

&Iacobucci,2010),canbeprojectedontoentiredestinationculturesand

experiencesandbeadeterminantoftouristsatisfaction(deRojas&Camarero,

7

2008),hintingthatsometouristsmayhavedonemuchoftheworkof

authenticationinadvance,merelyrequiringthedestinationtoconfirmitina

‘customized’sense(Wang,2007).Severalauthorsnotethat,whilesites,

experiencesorobjectsmaybereproducedor‘staged’,rootedin‘provenance’but

‘mobile’intheirplaceofconsumptionorevenproduced‘creatively’bytourists

themselves,theymayyetevokean‘authentic’second-orderexistential

experience(Gonzalez,2008;Guttentag,2010;Richards&Wilson,2006;Wight&

Lennon,2007).

Theintimaterelationshipsbetweenancestraltouristsandthe‘home’destination

canmuddyconventionaldistinctionsbetween‘objective’and‘existential’modes

ofauthentication.Wang,(1999:351)conceivesofexistentialauthenticityin

both‘personalandinter-subjective’termsinrelationtoarangeofliminal

experiencesconsumedthroughtourism.The‘inter-personal’dimensionofthe

processofexistentialauthenticationthatWang(ibid:364)proposesasemerging

throughsharedtouristicexperiences,suchas‘familyties’and‘communitas’,are

independentoftheexistenceofthedestinationassuch.Wereconcilethiswith

ourowncontextualunderstandingofhowexistentialauthenticityisproduced

andconsumedbydrawingonSteiner’sandReisinger’s(2006:309)proposition

that,thehistoricallyinformedworldiscomprised,inHeidiggerianterms,bya

dyadofone’spersonal(‘heritage’)andcollective(‘destiny’)histories.Inthecase

ofancestraltourism,theobjectiveexistenceofthedestinationasanempirically

verifiableplaceof‘origins’actsasthecatalystbridgingthegapbetween

‘heritage/destiny’inwhichasenseofthe‘trueexistentialself’isrediscoveredin

collectiveterms.

Thismayfindexpressionintherelationshipbetweennotionsof‘objectbased’

and‘existential’authenticities(Kolar&Zabkar,2010),denotingintheformer

relianceonphysicalartifactsandassociationwiththeindividualorcollective

essentialsenseinthelatter.Thephysicalmobilityofculturalobjectsandtheir

historico-culturalmutabilityofreceptionhasledtopragmaticrecognitionof

oftenblurredlinesbetweenthesetwocategories,oratleasttheirlackofmutual

8

exclusivity(Bryceetal.,2015;Lau,2010;Reisinger&Steiner,2006;Rickley-

Boyd,2012).

Ancestraltourismandthe‘ImaginedPast’

Culturalheritageinthebroadestsenseisanarchiveofselectivestoriesthat

particularcultures,nationalitiesorreligions,choosetotellaboutthemselvesto

themselvesandothersor,asLowenthal(2011)andHobsbawmandRanger

(1983)argue,anactoffaithinhowpeopleinthepresentwishorimaginethe

pasttobe.Theincreasingself-conceptionoftourist-consumersasautonomous

subjects,oscillatingbetweenindividualandgroupidentitiesinrelationto

particularsitesisafunctionoflate-capitalistconsumer-culture(e.g.Baudrillard,

1998;Jameson,1991)andheightenedwhenan‘ancestral’stakeispresentor

‘imagined’inrelationtoparticulardestinationsandhistories.Salazar(2012:

865-870)hintsatthiswhenhestates,“anindividual’spropensitytoproduce

imaginingsistheprimaryfact[andthat]touristsareinvitedtoparticipateina

performancethatwillbringanimaginedpastbacktolife”.Severalauthorshave

frameddiscussionofthetourism‘imaginary’,myth-makingandtheconstruction

oftourist-subjectswithreferencetothe‘exotic’andthedesiretoconsume

‘difference’(e.g.Bryce,MacLaren&O’Gorman,2013;Echtner&Prasad,2003;

Salazar,2012).Intheancestralcontext,thecontextisnotsomuchdifferenceasa

felttensionbetweensubjectiveproximityandhistorico-spatialdistance

experiencedbyprofessionalpractitionersand,basedontheiraccounts,by

ancestraltouriststhemselves.

Thistensionis,ofcourse,alsorelatedtothenotionofnostalgiaandemotion

evokedbytourismsuppliersandexperiencedbytourismconsumers.Itmaybe

determinedbyproducinga‘preordained’discourseofplacethatis‘familiar’only

throughtextualreproduction.Frow(1991:125)identifiedthisreproductionas

“aformofknowledgethatcanberecognizedinandhasagreaterforcethanthe

appearancesoftheworld”orindeedthephysicalrealityofthedestinationitself.

Traveltoreengagewithindividualorgroupancestryisnotlimitedtothe

Scottishcontext,withmotivationstoreengagewithformer‘homelands’existing

9

invariousglobalDiasporas(Bandyopadhyay,2008;Jacobson,2002;Kwek,Wang

&Weaver,2014).McCainandRay(2003)note‘legacy’touristsasthosewitha

directculturalorancestralconnectionswithparticulardestinations.Their

motivationtovisitislikenedinheroicorquasi-religioustermstoa‘quest’or

‘crusade’byBasu(2005)whofavourstheterm‘rootstourism’.Otherauthors

identifythetransitionfromdesk-basedancestralresearchtorelatedtourist

consumptionas‘genealogytourism’(Santos&Yan,2010;Savolainen,1995;

Yakel,2004).Inthispaper,‘ancestraltourism’isadheredtoasasuperordinate

term,conceivedofasanembodiedoutcomeofsubjectivelyfeltnostalgiaand

longingfora‘homeland’spatiallyandtemporallyatremovefromDiaspora

communities(referencewithheld).

‘Highlandisation’;inventedtraditionandthe‘authentically’imaginedpast

Rememberingone’sculturalheritageornationalrootsisanoften-febrilemixture

ofthesearchforhistoricalverisimilitudeandwishfulthinking,andisarelatively

recenthistoricalphenomenonemergingfromtheEuropeanEnlightenmentand

‘Modernity’(Anderson,2006;Mee,2007;Rigney,2001;Smith,2008).Scotlandis

asmallNorthernEuropeannationofc.5millioninhabitantsandwasoneof

Europe’soldestindependentstatespriortoitsunionwithEnglandin1707.

Scotlandmaintainsandprojectspowerfulheritagesignifiers,evokingimagesofa

‘timeless’Celticculture,rootedtotheland(McCrone,Morris&Kiely,1995).

TheopportunitiesofferedbyBritain’sexpandingcolonialempireandeconomic

shiftsintheHighlands1providedthenecessaryconditionsforlarge-scale

emigrationfromScotlandfromthelate18thtomid-20thcenturies.Around

60,000Lowlandersbetween1701and1780,and10,000Highlandersbetween

1768and1775,leftScotlandlargelyforBritishNorthAmerica(laterCanada)

andthenascentUnitedStates(Whatley,2000).Whatley(2000:254)argues,“as

thepeoplesoftheHighlandsandIslands…sufferedthedeepestsenseoflossof

place,thecultofHighlandismandnostalgiaforanolderandnoblewayofGaelic

lifewereintheascendant”.Thiswasfollowedby,largelyfromtheindustrial,

1Broadlyunderstoodastheareaabovethegeological‘highlandfaultline’whichseparatesthemorepopulousandindustrialcentralbeltandmoreremotenorthernpartsofScotland

10

urbanLowlandsandprincipallytoCanada,theUSA,AustraliaandNewZealand,

theemigrationof1.84millioneconomicmigrantsbetween1825and1914

(Cameron,2002;Morton,2010).

YetitistheGaelic,Highlandculture,longmarginalizedundersuccessiveScottish

andthenBritishgovernments(Lynch,1992)thathascometoserveasa

synecdocheforthewholeofScotlandinthepopularimagination(Duffield&

Long,1981;Inglis&Holmes,2003;McCroneetal.,1995).Thisdiscourseof

‘Scottishness’wasproducedbytheconvergenceofseveraleventsinwider

Britishcultural,politicalandeconomiclifeinthelate18thandearly-mid19th

centuries.Theseinclude:repealsonlawssuppressingGaeliclanguageand

culture;thegrowingpopularityofScottishliteraturesuchasSirWalterScott’s

novelsandpoetry(whichpresentaromanticisedversionofScotlandandwhich

soldintheirtensofthousands)andtheOssiantext(acycleofepicpoemsof

contestedGaelicprovenance,publishedbythepoetJamesMacpherson)aswell

asGeorgeIV’sprogressthroughhisnorthernkingdominersatz‘Highland’dress

(Trevor-Roper,1983).Therefore,adepopulatedScotland-as-Highlandromantic

‘wilderness’emergedasoneoftheindustrializedworld’sfirstpopulartourist

destinations(Morgan,2001).Subsequently,markersofidentityintheformofSt.

AndrewsSocieties,CaledonianClubs,andSonsandDaughtersofScotland,for

example,wereestablishedbytheDiasporainNorthAmericaandAustralasia

(Morton,2010).

ItisimportanttodistinguishbetweenScotswhostayedathomeandthosewho

Morton(2012:248)calls“ourextendedselves:[people]borninScotland,second

orlatergenerationScotsoraffinityScots”.These‘other’Scotscametoembrace

multiple,overlappingidentitiesinwhichasenseof‘Scottishness’bynomeans

supersededtheiroftenprimaryidentificationasCanadian,American,Australian

orNewZealander(Devine,2011).Itisperhapsmoreusefultolookuponthisas

anentirelynewculturallyinformedsubjectivitythatcertainlyreferstoanidea

called‘Scotland’asasignifierof‘roots’,yetconstructedinquitedistinctiveways

indiasporacommunitiesbecauseoftemporalandspatialseparationfrom

Scotlanditself.These‘otherScotlands’(onemighttransposeanyancestral

11

destinationhere)wereproducedovercenturiesofcollectiveexperienceof

separationandmemoryof‘home’bysustainedculturalproductionineventslike

HighlandGames,Clansocietymembershipandthewearingofversionsof

‘Highland’dress.

Theseembodied(re)productionsof‘Scotland’areinfluencedbythewider

cultures(Canadian,Australianandsoforth)inwhichtheyareembeddedand

mayseemstrange,naïve,orevenfaintlyamusingtoScots-in-Scotland

themselves.Suchabstract,extra-territorialversionsofScottishculturemaymore

correctlybedescribedastheauthenticculturalproductionof‘Scotland-as-

Produced-in-Diaspora’.These,wewillargueinthethirdsectionofthefollowing

analysis,aredirectlyconfrontingandnegotiatingwithactualScotlandthrough

theancestraltourismmarket.Such‘other’Scotlands,whichmayindeedbe

‘inauthentic’inthesensethattheirempiricalrelationtomuchScotshistoryand

presentdayculturemaybetenuous,arenonethelesstheproductsofcenturiesof

authenticliveddiasporicculturalexperienceinwhichanideaofScotlandisa

coresignifierandstimulantofreturn.

METHODS

Giventheinterdisciplinarynatureofastudylikethis,informedbyTourism

Studies,Marketing,aswellasHistoryandCulturalStudies,weacceptDarbellay

andStock’s(2012:453)contentionthattheseareasare“seenascomplementary

[andrequire]organisedcoordinationwithinaresearchprocess”.Therefore,itis

informedbyanintegrationofmethodologicalandcontextuallyappliedsources.

Givenourfocusonthechangingdiscoursesunderpinningcuratorialroles,and

theincreaseddesireforauthenticationwhichmightimpactuponthem,wechose

tofocusourstudysolelyonprovidersofancestraltourism.Weundertooka

sequenceof31semi-structuredinterviewswithheritageprofessionalsand

volunteersdesignedtoelicitparticularlyvividrecollectionsofmemoriesand

experiencesat27national,civicandlocalmuseums,heritagecentresand

archivesacrossScotland(seefigure1).Throughpriorcontactitwasdetermined

12

theselocationsdealtwithancestraltouristsdirectlyorbyenquiryonaregular

basis.Practitionerswereinvitedtoreproduceencounterswithtourists,where

theirownretellingformedtheobjectofourdata(Carlsson,Dahlberg,Lutzen&

Lystrom,2004;Varman&Belk,2009).Althoughtheexperienceofpractitioners

wasourmainfocus,theirtellingallowedustogivesomeconsiderationtothe

experiencesofvisitorsthroughtheproviderassurrogate.The‘serendipitous

encounter’(Foster&Ford,2003)withpotentiallyfruitfuldatauponwhich

theorymightbebuilt,thereafterformedtheprinciplefocusforthispaper.

---

InsertFigure1here

---

TounderstandtheconstructionofmeaningwefollowWeber’snotionof

‘verstehen’,conceivingofrealityasasocialconstructmademanifestbythe

particularmeaningssubjectsattachtoit(Tucker,1965).Thatis,totraceand

reconcilepractitionernotionsoftheirresponsibilitytoempiricallyinformed

interpretationandtheiraccountsoftourists’demandtoco-authenticatetheir

experience.WerefinethisapproachbydrawingonGeertz’s(1973)notionof

‘thickdescription’,arguingthatinordertobuildtheory,onemustnotsimply

codifyconceptualregularities,butalsoaccountforinsightsprovidedbythe

language,philosophy,andsocio-culturalsettingswhichconstructandcreate

meaninginparticulartemporalandspatialcontexts.‘Thickdescription’s’

applicationdependeduponacceptingviewsarticulatedbyresearchparticipants

inordertounderstandbroaderculturalandprofessionalsituations‘astheyare’:

momentsofhistoricalcontingency(Reisinger&Steiner,2005).

Analysis is based on illustrative quotes from our research sites and organised

around two existing (object based and existential authentication) and one

emergent (of the ‘authentically’ imaginedpast) themes.Foucauldiannotionsof

discourse and subjectivity are used, not so much as a ‘method’, but as a

particularsetofattitudes towardsthedata.It isnecessarytotakea ‘historicist’

approach in theFoucauldian sense,which seeks to conceiveof ‘thenow’ as an

artefactofahistoryabouttobewritten.Foucault’s(1989a:182)archaeological

13

metaphor invites analysis based on lateral and oblique relations among

discursiveobjectswithinwhichweventuretoconceiveofaslayersofhistorical

‘sediment’ (Foucault, 1989a). Furthermore, as Rouse (1994: 93) explains, the

emphasis of this Foucauldian approach is not intrinsically on the empirical

veracity of particular statements and the bodies of knowledge to which they

adhere, but the “epistemic context within which those bodies of knowledge

becameintelligibleandauthoritative”.

Thisapproachnecessarilyleadsustoanalyseourdataasthearticulationofboth

practitioners’andtourists’encounterswiththeirownsubjectpositionsasevents

filtered through and made possible by the particular historical conditions

necessitating emigration and contemporary cultural and economic

circumstances enabling return. In other words, the notion of existentialism,

insofarasitisunderstoodtodenotethequestforauthenticitybytheindividual

subject amidst the dislocation ofmodernity, are present in all threemodes of

authenticationwediscussbelow.Yet,whileacknowledgingthisdesire,wereturn

tothenotionthatnoneofitsformscanbeconceivedoforarticulatedthrough,in

this case ancestral tourism consumption, exclusively via one’s autonomous

engagement with one’s historical position but rather the superordinate ‘final

vocabulary’ which make such self-conception and the quest for ancestral

discoverypossible(Hacking,2004:282-283;Rorty,1989:73).

14

RESULTS:PRACTITIONERDISCOURSESANDANCESTRALTOURISTS

“Somefolkcomewiththeknowledgealready…somehavenotgotaclue

why[theirancestors]hadleft…some…thinkitwasworseherethanwhat

itreallywas…youareforcedtoexplaintheeconomicsituationtothem…

thenumberofpeopleinafamily…theydidn’tallstayathomeandeven

todaythatdoesn’thappensowhyshouldithavehappenedbefore?Alotof

peoplecomewitharomanticviewofwhatlifewaslikewhen[their

ancestors]werelivinghereandwhytheyleft”(Meg,DunbeathHeritage

Centre).

Thisstatementcrystallizesthecomplexdiscursivefieldpractitionersnegotiate

containing,asitdoes,theseedsofoursubsequenttripartitecategorizationof

statements.Megfirstexpressestourists’objectbasedneedforauthenticationor

‘toauthenticate’;theirexistentialsenseofverifiablelinksbetweenselfandplace

andthentheiroftenauthenticallyfeltadherencetoanimaginedpast.

‘TheyareVeryScientific’:objectivelyauthenticatedexperience

Itmustbereemphasizedthatmanyancestraltouristsdonotseekapassive

experience,butratheraparticipatoryonesupportingtheirownobject-based

research.Thisleadstospecificassociationswithlocalityandengagement,

allowingtouriststocontributetotheproductionofauthentication.Thus,

professionalstaff,oftentraditionallysituatedatsomeremove(Delafons,1997),

areplacedinintimateproximitywithtourists.Forexample,Martinatthe

GlasgowMuseumsResourceCentre,observedthat:

“Someofitisvery,veryspecific,Iamlookingforthisparticularobjectwith

thisnumber,Iknowthatyouhaveit,canIseeit,theyhaveobviouslydone

theirresearchbeforehandandknowspecificallywhattheyarecomingfor”.

Reinforcingthisnotionofpre-authenticationbroughtbytouristsandthe

expectationofprofessionalsupport,MichelleatTarbatDiscoveryCentrestated

that:

15

“Ifindthepeoplewhodocomeinwithageographicalknowledgeofthis

areahavetracedanddonealotofworkontheirfamilytreeandtheywill

knowthattherealinktosomebodyhere”.

Thesequotesindicateprofessionalreceptivenesstocollaboration.Indeed,

Michellealsoacknowledgedtheseriousintentunderpinningtourists’pre-visit

research:

“Theyareveryscientific…itisaveryseriousobjectivethatmanyofthem

have…peoplefromabroadhavedoneanawfullotofgroundworkbefore

theycomein…probablymoregroundworkthanpeoplehere”.

Thisisenhancedbythefactthatmostofthesitesnecessarytodeliverthe

spatiallyandgenealogicallyspecificnatureofancestraltourismdrawuponlocal

volunteerstosupplementandenhancetouristexperience.Gordonfrom

ApplecrossHeritageCentrerelated:

“Weareveryluckythatwehaveacoupleofvolunteersand…theyare

almostShenachies[traditionalGaelicoralhistorians]intheoldsense…

theyarepeoplewhocanlinkpeopleveryquicklyandtheyareonlyaphone

callaway”.

ThishintsatStylianou-Lambert’s(2011)notionofactive‘gazingfromhome’,

givenconsiderableimpetusbyancestraltourists’desiretounifythisgazewith

thereciprocalgazeof‘home’.Thishappensnotinsequentialterms,butinakind

of‘knittingtogether’ofobjectsanddocumentspreviouslyseparatedtemporally

andspatially.Theverypersonalandlocallyspecificnatureofthisformof

heritageencounterseemstodemandinvolvementandco-creationofexperience

betweentouristandprofessional(Cabiddu,Lui&Piccoli,2013).

Otheraccountsindicatedfrustrationwithancestraltourists,notbecauseofalack

ofwillingnesstodealdirectlywiththem,butbecauseofunpreparednessto

16

engagemeaningfullyindirectcollaboration.Forexample,JulineattheHawick

HeritageHubexpressedfrustrationatlostopportunitiesforobject-based

authenticationwhentouristsarrivewithnaïveunderstandingsofthecapacities

available:

“Whenpeoplehavetoleavefortheirflightandexpecttodotheirentire

familyhistoryinashortperiodoftime…itisoftennotpossibleevenwhen

theydocomewithsomestarterinformation”.

Otherparticipantsexpressedactivewillingnesstosalvagethis,offeringsome

potentiallyusefuladvice;evenifitmaylacksomeoftheobjectiveassurancethat

mightotherwisehavebeenprovided.JacquiatTimespaninHelmsdalestated:

“Ifsomebodycomesandsays,“Iamjusthereforanhour,Iamtravellingup

north,Idon’thavemuchinformation”,therealisticansweristhatIcan’t

reallyhelpyou…but…wetrytofindoutwhatwecanquicklyandgivea

vagueideaofwhatit[familyhistory]mightbeandif[Iam]90%suretheir

ancestorswereinvolvedintheClearances,wecangivethewhole

‘ClearancesExperience’”.

Whatthisindicatesontheonehandisthattheactiveparticipationoftouristsin,

asmuchaspracticable,‘pre-authenticating’whotheirancestorswere,where

theycamefrom,whenandwhytheyleftisexpectedandrequiredbyheritage

practitionersinordertofullyengageprofessionally.Ontheotherhand,thereisa

sensethatthedrivetooptimizetourists’experienceasconsumersmaypush

practitionerstoeitherofferthemaversionofwhatmightbeuseful,ortorush

throughanexercise,whichwould,ideally,benefitfrommoretimeandfocus.This

ledustoreflectonthesignificanceofBaudrillard’s(1998:151-152)notionof

‘freetime’.Inthisconceptualisation,supposed‘free’timeneedstobepurchased

inordertobeconsumed.Theseencounterssuggestthatitisnotsimplytourists

asconsumerswhoaresubjecttothistension,butheritagepractitioners

themselves,increasinglyawareofandsubjecttooftenethicallydisfiguring

17

pressurestomodifyestablishedprofessionalpractiseforcommercialneed

(Pollock&Sharp,2007).

‘Thereisn’tanArtefactforEveryFamilybutHopefullythereisSomething’:

existentiallyauthenticatedexperience

Oftenlessformalauthentication,intheformofreproducedversionsofplace,ofa

widerandloosersenseofconnectionwithculturalheritageissought(Bryceet

al.,2015;Ryan&Gu,2010).Yetitwouldbesimplistictoclaimanabsolute

boundarybetweenthesetheorizedformsinpractitioners’experienceofdealing

withancestraltourists.Instead,wenoteda‘transition’betweenthetwo,typified,

forexamplebyKateyattheNationalTrustforScotland(NTS)Culloden

BattlefieldVisitorCentre:

“YougetthegroupwhoidentifywiththeideaofCullodenandwanttofind

outwheretheirfamilywouldhavestoodatthebattlebasedontheirown

nameorperhapsevengrandparents’name”.

Hereweseethemoreabstractidentificationwithideasofplacesandeventswith

whichtouristsmayidentify,suchassharingasurnamewithsomeoneinthe

battle.Yetthisexperienceisproducedbyprofessionalreassuranceata

reconstructedheritagesite.Suchasearchforexistentialauthenticationmaybe

weightedtowardspartialnotionsofancestralconnection;disregardingthe

complexityoftheeventsthesitemightrepresent(Horne,1986;Pollock&Sharp,

2007).Thisprovokeschallengestocuratorschargedwithproducingafull

historicalinterpretation.Thesemaylikelybeabsorbedanddivertedsomewhat

orintotalbylargenationalorcivicorganisationslikeNTSandNational

MuseumsofScotland(NMS)withoutwardfacing,publicremits,whereDavid

(NMS)statedfirmly:

“Wemakeitclear…thatwereallycan’tanswergenealogicalenquiriesand

so[ancestraltourists]seemtoknowthat.Wecanshowthemthebroader

narrative,thebroadercontextfortheirancestors,thewaytheylived,

workedanddied”.

18

Hereweseethetraditionaldistancebetweencuratorandtouristmaintainedin

nationalinstitutions.However,muchofourresearchtookustosmaller,

communitybasedmuseumsandheritagesiteswherecuratorial,guiding,

managerialandevenretailingresponsibilitieswereconflatedbecauseofboth

scaleandlackoffunding.Again,thismandatedaconsumer-facingroleinwhich

previouslyhierarchicaldivisionsmaydissolve.Onceagain,thedemandfor

‘authentication’asaprocess,inexistentialtermsthistime,presentsboth

opportunitiesandchallengesforstaff(Chhabra,2008).Forexample,one

participant(nameandinstitutionwithheld)related:

“…some[tourists]arenotevensuretheyareconnectedto[thearea],but

theyhaveafamilystorythattheyaremaybefromScotland”.

WhileRachelattheHighlandFolkMuseumrelatedencounterswhereancestral

touristsasked:

“…“haveyouheardofthisgraveyardorname?”…becauseGaelicnames

changesomuchsotheymighthaveanameanditjustdoesnotmean

anythingtothemandtheycannotfinditonamodernmapsotheyare

wonderingdoweknowwherethiswas”.

Onceagainprofessionalpracticeisadaptedtorespondtotheparticularneedsof

ancestraltouriststonotsimply‘gaze’atheritagebuttoseekactive

authenticationofconnection.Thiscanbestimulatedinpartbyopportunities

presentedbyobject-basedevidenceofonefamilytoconstructandauthenticate

wider‘existential’storiesofbelongingfortouristswithperhapslessdefined

connectionstoplace.AsGordonfromApplecrossHeritageCentrerelated:

“[Theywere]averysuccessfulfamilyintermsofacademiaandbusiness

hereinApplecrosswithdescendantsallovertheworld.Soyoucanallow

peoplewhomaybearenotdirectlyconnected…toseethesortof

importancethattheirancestorsmayhaveplaceduponeducationor

19

businesshereandwhatsortoflifepeoplehadhere100/120yearsago,so

thereisnotanartefactforeveryfamilybuthopefullythereissomething

whichindicateswhattheirfamilieslivedlike”.

Similarly,EwenatClanMacphersonMuseum,Newtonmore,sawthevaluein

‘compensating’ancestraltouristsforwhomobject-basedauthenticationwasnot

possiblewithasenseof‘existential’connection,inthiscase,toclanidentity:

“TheDiapsoracoverspeople,Macphersonpeople,whohavegoneoverseas

…somehavedoneprettywellandsomeofthemarequiteordinaryfolkbut

nevertheless,thereisstillarecordhereofwhereandhowtheirancestors

lived”.

ThiswouldseemtoreinforceKirshenblatt-Gimblett’s(1998)contentionthat

tourism’scommercializingeffectonmuseumsandmuseums’statusasprimary

markersofdestinations’heritageidentityaremutuallyreinforcingelements,

throughthepossibilitiesofuseandappropriation’ofthesamediscursive

formation(Foucault,1989a:201).

‘OurRoleistoBreakitGentlytoThem’:authenticatingthe‘imaginedpast’

Thethirdthemewasemergentand,potentially,themostchallengingfromthe

professionalperspectiveofourinterviewees.Itisthe‘authenticallyimagined

pasts’broughtbysomeancestraltouristsandprojecteduponthedestination.

Implicitinthequotepresentedbelow,istheideathatmigrationcreatesa

‘rupture’,betweenemigrantsandthosewhoremained,inexperienceofwhatthe

ancestralhomelandwasandis:

“Alotofpeoplecomewitharomanticviewofwhatlifewaslikewhen[their

ancestors]werelivinghereandwhytheyleft”(Meg,DunbeathHeritage

Centre).

Coevalinthisstatementistheideathatthe‘homeland’isproduced,reproduced

andexperiencedhistoricallyasmultipleversionsofthesameplace.If,as

20

Jacobson(2002:2)writes,“theweightofemigrantculturesperpetuallyenforced

interpretationsofthemove–asdepartureandabsence[withlosthomelands

occupying]aplaceintheimagination[inwhich]thebeleagueredpeoplesleft

behind…retainedacentralpositioninthemigrantsideologicalgeographies

(emphasisadded)”,thenwemustacceptthatspatialandtemporaldistancefrom

‘home’oftenleadstothereconstructionofversionsof‘home’elsewhere.Atthe

coreofmanysuchreproductionsof,inthiscase,Scotland-in-the-Diaspora,are

notionsthatancestorsmusthaveleftundertragiccircumstancesandacertain

‘romance’isoverlaidontalesofclearedcrofters,exiledJacobites,convicts

transportedtothecolonies,orlinkswithclannamesorplacesofheroicrepute.

MaggieatClanDonaldCentreobserved,

“…therearequitealotofpeoplewhocomewithquitealotofromantic

storiesthatyoujustfeelarenotright…andMacDonald’sdidn’tjustcome

fromSkye,sotheyhavemadethetriphereandyouarethinkingwell

actuallytheycamefromsomewhereelse…theyhavemadethistripacross

theAtlanticandtheyhavepickedthistourthatcomestoSkyebecausethat

iswheretheirancestorscomefrom,buttheydon’t”.

Thisindicatesaperceivedneedamongstprofessionalstoactdiplomaticallyin

thefaceofdubioushistoricalliteracywithoneeyeontheimportanceofthis

marketforthemaintenanceofScotland’sheritage.Forexample,Lyndaat

DumfriesFamilyHistoryCentrerelated,

“Recentlywehadatourist–IthinkfromCalifornia-andhewantedto

followhisKirkpatrickancestors.TheKirkpatrickswerealliesof[King

Robert]Bruce(d.1329)andoneofthemwasinvolvedhereinDumfriesin

anactualmurderofarival…andsowearrangedforallthebookshe

wantedwouldbedeliveredtohishotel…andweneversawhimuntilhe

cameinonhislastdaytoreturnthebooksandenthuseaboutallthehelphe

hadbeengiven”.

21

GiventhatreliableScottishParishrecordsoftendon’tstartmuchfurtherback

thanthemid-18thcenturyitisverydoubtfulthatthistouristwouldhavebeen

abletoestablishadirectancestrallinktothe14th.Incasessuchasthese,veracity

becomessecondarytothedesireofmanyancestraltouriststoinscribetheirown

imaginationofthepast,aswellastheirplaceinit,ontothedestinationasakind

ofinertcanvas.Similarly,KateyatCullodenBattlefieldVisitorCentrestated:

“Forsomepeople,asIhavesaid,itcanbeemotional,Imeanwehavehadin

thepastpeopleintearsandsoitisacomplexnegotiation.Wedoanawful

lotofmyth-bustinghere…peoplearepeopleandsometimesthedecisions

theymakehistoricallyarenotpalatabletooursortofworriesorethics

todayandunderstandingthatisokay”.

Theimaginedpastisnotsolelyconcernedwithconnectionstofamousfiguresor

battlesfromScottishhistorybutwithadesireamongstsomeancestraltourists

tolinkthemselvestotragediesvisitedonordinarypeople.MegatDunbeath

HeritageCentre,sensinga‘disappointment’amongstsometouriststhattheir

ancestorshadn’t‘sufferedenough’related:

“…folktendtothinktheClearancesidea[was]thateverybodywasburned

outoftheirhouses.Thisdefinitelydidoccurbutnoteverywhere…butfolk

willonlyreadabouttheplaceswherethatoccurredthereforetheyassume

thatithappenedtotheirpeopleaswell”.

Herewehaveinstancesoftouristslinkingthemselvesdirectlytosomeofthe

greatdramasoftheScottishpastinempiricallydubiousterms.Thiscertainly

maybelinkedwiththeforceofinternationalpopularcultureanditsabilityto

‘induce’tourismwithfilmslikeBraveheart,RobRoyandTVserieslikeOutlander

(e.g.Beeton,2006;O’Connor,Flanagan&Gilbert,2008).However,theway

diasporicScotshaveconstructedandreproduced‘home’inideologicalterms

overcenturies,asKnox(2006)pointsout,through‘Highlandised’notionsofa

romantic,martialpast,meansthatsuchnotionsof‘Scottishness’shouldnotbe

lightlydismissed.Whatwesensedfromourintervieweeswasapragmaticdesire

22

tohelpancestraltouristsseekingtoauthenticateanimaginedpastmakethebest

ofthings.Additionallywesensedthatcuratorialstaffwereawarethatancestral

touristsbringwiththem,notsimplyshallowsimplificationsand

misrepresentationsofthepastbutgenuinelyfeltidentificationwithstoriesof

place.Thesestorieshavecometooccupyakindofontologicalstabilityoften

resistanttoempiricalrefutation.Clearly,manyofourintervieweeshaveadapted

theirprofessionalstanceinaspragmatictermsasethicswillpermit.Gordonat

ApplecrossHeritageCentreobservedthat,

“Somepeoplearefinewithit…somepeoplearenothappyandsomepeople

arevery,veryunhappyandsomepeopleglossoverwhatyouaresayingand

justcarryonbelievingandthatkeepsthemhappyandkeepsushappyas

welliftheyleavewiththeirmoraleintactevenalthoughwehavetriedto

gentlygivethemthecorrectinformation”.

Here,weseenotsomuchadesireamongstprofessionalstohelpancestral

touriststoconsumeorco-createconnectionstoalosthomelandthroughobject-

basedorexistentialauthenticationbut,rathertonegotiatetheencounterofthe

‘authenticallyimagined’Scotlandwiththeexistingplaceandculture.Such

projectionsontothehistoricalandcontemporaryactualitiesof‘place’recallsthe

post-factoreconstructionandmodificationof‘reality’(Foucault,1989b)andthe

‘inventionoftradition’(Trevor-Roper,1983).Itisthetransformationofa

destinationintoalandoforiginsandancientprovenancebyandforthissection

ofancestraltourismdemand.Suchaconceptualisationdependsontheexistence

ofamarketwithhistoricallivedexperienceoftheideaofaspecificancestral

destination.

DISCUSSIONANDCONCLUSION

Thispaperapproachedandcontributedtotheliteratureon‘authenticity’,both

fromhistoricistandprocess-relatedperspectives.Itacceptedthevalueand

validityofthealreadywell-rehearsednotionsofobject-basedandexistential

23

authenticityandofsubsequentinterventionswhichdoubttheutilityofattempts

toarriveatabsoluteassuranceof‘theauthentic’inalargelycommercial,socially

subjectivespheresuchasTourism(Reisinger&Steiner,2006).However,it

interrogatedtheverynotionof‘authenticity’asanobjectofdesire,orwill-to-

knowledge,asahistoricallycontingent‘positivity’indiscourse(Foucault,1989b.

If,asFoucault(1981)argued,discourseisproductiveofknowledgeina

historicallymobilesenseandinstitutionsandinstitutionalpracticerespondand

adaptaccordingly,thenwecanconceiveof‘authentication’asa‘process’aswell

asa‘value’.

Usingextantliteratureandthedatagathered,ancestraltourismshowsparticular

characteristicsthatdistinguishitfromothervarietiesofheritageconsumption.

Theselieinthepersonalorcollectiveattachmentsandassociationsancestral

touristshavewiththedestinationasaplaceofmemory,returnandeven

‘belonging’.Thesecreateoftenmoreintimaterelationshipswiththedestination

thanperhapsthemoreabstractnotionsofconsumingplacethroughthedesire

for‘difference’or‘exoticescape’.Moreover,thefactthatversionsoflong-lost

‘homelands’aremaintained,reproducedandinevitablyadapted,overcenturies

intheScottishcase,withindiasporacommunitiesmeansthattherelationship

betweenancestraltouristandtheplaceofreturnareinevitablymorecomplex

thaninstandardheritagetourismmarkets.Theobjectofthisresearchwasto

exploretheparticularconsequencesofthismarket’sdesireforauthenticationof

theirlinkswitha‘homeland’,realorimagined,alongsidetheethicsandpractice

ofthoseprofessionalsandvolunteerschargedwithmaintainingtheintegrityof

nationalandregionalculturalheritage.Theseaccountsofpractitionersat

heritagesitesacrossScotlanddemonstratethatancestraltouristspre-

authenticatetheirclaimstobelongingwithintheplaceofreturninthreeways.

Thefirstisthroughtheobject-basedcontributiontotheprocessof

authenticationgiventheprovisionoffamilyrecordsorartefactsmaintainedin

thediasporaorpublicallyavailableonline,therebyenablingcollaborativeco-

creationofexperienceatheritagesites.Whilstresearchontheroletouristshave

inco-creatingexperiencesisnotnew(seeMossberg,2007),todateresearchhas

24

focussedmainlyonthetimeandeffortspentbytouristsbefore,duringandafter

vacationsandhowtheseresourcescontributetoperceptionsofexperiencevalue

(e.g.Prebensen&Foss,2010;Prebensen,Vittersø,&Dahl,2013).Ourresearch

revealsahighlypersonalisedformofco-createdexperience,whichisuniqueto

eachvisitor.Thesecondistheexistentialauthenticationproducedbytourists

andprofessionalswhereasenseofverifiablecollectivebelongingistheevident

outcome,butwherepotentiallyethicallyproblematicdrivesto‘compensate’

touristswhohavebeendisappointedbylackofmoreobject-basedassociations

wasalsoapparent.

Thethirdperhapsmostcloselyreflectsthediscursivedivergencebetween

‘Scotland’s’producedat‘home’andthoseinthediaspora.Hereweseean

empiricalexampleofCohenandCohen’s(2012)‘hot’authenticity,stokedinthe

inventedtraditionsandoriginmythsofthediaspora(Bruner,1994)clashing

withthe‘cool’authenticityofScotland’sheritagesector.Wecontributetoextant

literatureonprocessualauthenticityintourismbydrawingattentiontothe

pressurethatcanbeexperiencedbythose‘whoauthenticate’(Wall&Xie,2005).

Inourstudyproviderswerenotconcernedwithhowtostageanexperienceto

provideauthenticationofaplacewhichmeetstheperceivedneedsofparticular

touristsegments(Daugstad&Kirchengast,2013;Frisvoll,2013).Authentication,

inourresearchtakesplaceatagranularlevelaseachindividualtourist’sfamily

historyrequiresunpickingandreconstructedinsuchafashionthatprovides

somekindofsatisfactoryancestraltourismexperience.

Inrelationtothis,werevealthediverserangeofresponsesthatprovidershave

totheauthenticitynegotiationprocess.Someprovidersattempttocompensate

visitorswhoarrivewithlooseaffiliationstoScotlandbyofferingexistential

connectionswitharegion.Otherprovidersfeeldutyboundtoengagein‘myth

busting’withvisitorswhoseknowledgeoftheirancestralheritageisgenerated

throughpopularculture.Wethusobservetheprofoundsenseofresponsibility

feltbysomeproviderstowardstheirvisitorsandwhowishtoavoid

disappointingthem,evenifthismeantturningablindeyetowardsdubious

genealogicalresearch.

25

Thisneednot,however,beazerosumgameforpractitionerswhentheyattempt

totakeseriouslyimaginedpastsashistoricalartefactsthemselvesorasversions

ofidentitydevelopedelsewhere,ostensiblysharingtheecorereferentofthe

‘home’destination.Thereisscopeforpractitionerstorespondthroughthe

sensitivebusinessofworkingwiththissectionofthemarkettogentlysteer

touriststowardsthatwhichisempiricallyverifiablewhilstacknowledgingthe

historicalprovenanceof‘imagined’ancestralnarratives.Whatisvital,however,

istherecognitionthatallthreeoftheseproducedauthenticationsrequirethe

kindofintimate,empatheticcollaborationoftouristandpractitionerandthe

mutualidentificationwiththeaspirationtoauthenticexperience(existentialor

otherwise)of‘theother’calledforbyGnothandWang(2015)anddevelopedby

Tucker(2016).

Davies(2006:11)arguesthatourworldis‘alreadyhistoricized’–thatwe

understandandproducesocialrealityinhistoricalterms.Thecorollarytothisis

thatwemustunderstandthemodesbywhichsocietiesunderstandand

construct‘history’andsubsequentlyitssymbolicandselectivepoorrelation,

‘heritage’ashistoricallycontingentartefactsthemselves.Wehavereinforcedthe

pointthatthesymbolicallyandcommerciallyvitalnotionof‘authenticity’in

tourismandheritageand,byimplication,relatedspheresofconsumption,isa

meaninglesslyahistoricaltermwhennotunderstoodastheproductofthe

historicallymutableprocessofauthentication.

Wehavenotedaparticularlyheightenedexampleofthisheritageproductionin

theco-createdauthentication,inbothofthereceivedacademicconceptsof

object-basedandexistentialterms,ofancestraltourism.Thisproductionof

empiricallysoundlinkswiththepast,producedcollaborativelybyancestral

touristsandheritagepractitioners,hasparticularimplicationsforprofessional

practice.Opportunitiesclearlyexistforheritagesectorsinternationallytobridge

thegapbetweensubjectivebelongingandthetemporal/spatialdistance

betweendiasporasand‘homelands’.Yet,thereseemstobeanethicalcorollaryto

thisinwhichtheheritagesectorofthedestinationmayacknowledgeand

26

integratetheversionsof‘home’producedovertimeelsewhere.Herethesocial

andmanagerialimplicationsofourthird‘emergent’theme,the‘authentically

imaginedpast’presentthemselvesmostvividly:ifthe‘homeland’isimagined,

producedandconsumedintermsobliquetoorradicallydifferenttohowitis

livedathome,yetretainsthesamecoresignifier,thenwhataretheimplications

forprofessionalheritagepractice?Ourdataindicatesthatheritageprofessionals

arelivingthenegotiationsnecessarytoaccommodatethesetwoversionsof

‘home’intheirdailypracticeofproducing‘authenticity’forancestraltourists.

REFERENCES

Althusser,L.(2008).OnIdeology.London:Verso.

Anderson,B.(2006).ImaginedCommunities.London:Verso.

Andriotis,K.(2011).Genresofheritageauthenticity.Denotationsfroma

pilgrimagelandscape.AnnalsofTourismResearch,38(4),1613-1633.

Asplett,M.&Cooper,M.(2000).CulturalDesignsinNewZealandsouvenir

clothing:thequestionofauthenticity.TourismManagement,21(3),307-312.

Bandyopadhyay,R.(2008).Nostalgia,IdentityandTourism:Bollywoodinthe

IndianDiaspora.JournalofTourismandCulturalChange,6(2),79-100.

Barker,E.(1999).TheChangingMuseum.InE.Barker(Ed.),Contemporary

CulturesofDisplay(pp.23-25).London:OpenUniversityPress.

Barr,J.(2005).Dumbingdownintellectualculture.MuseumandSociety,3(2),98–

114.

27

Basu,P.(2005).Rootstourismasreturnmovement:semanticsandtheScottish

diaspora.InM.Harper(Ed.),Emigranthomecomings:thereturnmovementof

emigrants1600-2000(pp.131-150).Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

Baudrillard,J.(1998).TheConsumerSociety:mythsandstructures.London:

Routledge.

Beeton,S.(2006).Understandingfilm-inducedtourism.TourismAnalysis,11(3),

181-188.

Belhassen,Y.,Caton,K.,&Stewart,W.P.(2008).Thesearchforauthenticityinthe

pilgrimexperience.AnnalsofTourismResearch,35(3),668-689.

Bell,D.(1996).TheCulturalContradictionsofCapitalism.NewYork:BasicBooks.

Bruner,E.M.(1994).AbrahamLincolnasauthenticreproduction:Acritiqueofpostmodernism.Americananthropologist,96(2),397-415.

Bryce,D.&Carnegie,E.(2013).Exhibitingthe‘Orient’:historicisingtheoryand

curatorialpracticeinUKmuseumsandgalleries.EnvironmentandPlanningA,

45(7),1734-1752.

Bryce,D.,Curran,R.,O’Gorman,K.,&Taheri,B.(2015).Visitors’Engagementand

Authenticity:Japaneseheritageconsumption.TourismManagement,46

(February),571-581.

Bryce, D., MacLaren, A., & O’Gorman, K. (2013). Historicising Consumption:

Orientalist expectations of theMiddle East. Consumption, Markets and Culture,

16(1),45-64.

Cabiddu,F.,Lui,T.-W.,&Piccoli,G.(2013).Managingvalueco-creationinthe

tourismindustry.AnnalsofTourismResearch,42(July),86-107.

28

Cameron,E.(2002).TheScottishHighlands.InT.Devine&R.Finlay(Eds.),

Scotlandinthe20thCentury(pp.153-169).Edinburgh:EdinburghUniversity

Press.

Carlsson,G.,Dahlberg,K.,Lutzen,K.,&Nystrom,M.(2004).Violentencountersin

psychiatriccare:aphenomenologicalstudyofembodiedcaringknowledge.

IssuesinMentalHealthNursing,25(2),191-217.

Chhabra,D.(2008).Positioningmuseumsonanauthenticitycontinuum.Annals

ofTourismResearch,35(2),427-447.

Claessen, C. & Howes, D. (2006). The Museum as Sensescape: Western

Sensibilities and Indigenous Artefacts. In E. Edwards, C. Gosden & B. Philips

(Eds.),SensibleObjects:Colonialism,MuseumsandMaterialCulture(pp.199-222).

Oxford:Berg.

Cohen,E.(2004).Authenticityandcommoditizationintourism.InE.Cohen(Ed.),

Contemporarytourism(pp.101–114).Amsterdam:Elsevier.

Cohen,E.&Cohen,S.(2012).Authentication:Hotandcool.AnnalsofTourismResearch,39(3),1295-1314.

Collins,J.(1989).UncommonCultures:popularculturesandpost-modernism.

London:Routledge.

Darbellay,F.&Stock,M.(2012).Tourismascomplexmultidisciplinaryresearch-

object.AnnalsofTourismResearch,39(1),441-458.

Daugstad,K.&Kirchengast,C.(2013).Authenticityandthepseudo-backstageofagri-tourism.AnnalsofTourismResearch,43(1),170-191.

29

Davies,M.(2006).Historics:whyHistorydominatescontemporarysociety.

London:Routledge.

Delafons,J.(1997).PoliticsandPreservation:apolicyhistoryofthebuiltheritage

1882-1996.London:E&FNSpon.

deRojas,C.&Camarero,C.(2008).Visitors’experience,moodandsatisfactionin

aheritagecontext:Evidencefromaninterpretationcenter.Tourism

Management,29(3),525-537.

Devine,T.(2011).TotheEndsoftheEarth:Scotland’sglobalDiaspora–1750-

2010.London:Penguin.

Duffield,B.&Long,J.(1981).TourismintheHighlandsandIslandsofScotland:

rewardsandconflict.AnnalsofTourismResearch,8(3),403-431.

Echtner,C.&Prasad,P.(2003).Thecontextofthirdworldtouristmarketing.

AnnalsofTourismResearch,30(3),660-682.

Foster,A.&Ford,N.(2003).Serendipityandinformationseeking:anempirical

study.JournalofDocumentation.59(3).321-340.

Foucalt,M.(1981).TheOrderofDiscourse.InR.Young(Ed.),UntyingtheText:a

post-structuralistreader(pp.48-78).London:Routledge&KeganPaul.

Foucault, M. (1988) Power, Knowledge: selected interviews and other writings.

1972-1977.NewYork:RandomHouse.

Foucault,M.(1989a).TheArchaeologyofKnowledge.London:Routledge.

Foucault,M.(1989b).TheOrderofThings.London:Routledge.

Samantha Murdy� 1/2/17 09:15Comment [1]: Nobintextbutthereisac?

30

Frisvoll,S.(2013).Conceptualisingauthenticationofruralness.Annalsoftourismresearch,43(2),272-296.

Frow,J.(1991).Tourismandthesemioticsofnostalgia.October,57(Summer

1991),123-151.

Geertz,C.(1973).TheInterpretationofCultures:selectedessays.NewYork:Basic

books.

Gnoth,J.&Wang,N.(2015).Authenticknowledgeandempathyintourism.

AnnalsofTourismResearch,50(2015),170-172.

Gonzalez,M.(2008).Intangibleheritagetourismandidentity.Tourism


Guttentag,D.(2010).Virtualreality:applicationsandimplicationsfortourism.

TourismManagement,31(5),637-651.

Hacking,I.(2004).BetweenMichelFoucaultandErvingGoffman.Economyand

Society,44(3),277-302.

Hall,C.M.(2007).ResponsetoYeomanetal:Thefakeryof‘Theauthentictourist’.


Hein,H.(2000).TheMuseuminTransition:aphilosophicalperspective.

Washington:SmithsonianInstitutionPress.

Henderson,J.(2000).AttractingtouriststoSingapore'sChinatown:acasestudy

inconservationandpromotion.TourismManagement,21(5),525-534.

Hetherington,K.(2000).NewAgeTravellers:vanloadsofuproarioushumanity.

London:Cassell.

31

Hobsbawm,E.&Ranger,T.eds.(1983).TheInventionofTradition.Cambridge:

CambridgeUniversityPress.

Horne,D.(1986).ThePublicCulture:thetriumphofindustrialism.London:Pluto

Press.

Hsieh,A.&Chang,J.(2006).ShoppingandTouristNightMarketsinTaiwan.


Inglis,D.&Holmes,M.(2003).Highlandotherhaunts:ghostsinScottish

Tourism.AnnalsofTourismResearch,30(1),50-63.

Jacobson,M.F.(2002).SpecialSorrows:theDiasporicimaginationofIrish,Polish

andJewishimmigrantsintheUnitedStates.Berkeley:UniversityofCalifornia

Press.

Jameson,F.(1991).Postmodernism:or,theculturallogicoflatecapitalism.

London:Verso.

Jordanova,L.(1989).ObjectsofKnowledge:AHistoricalPerspectiveon

Museums.InP.Verso(Ed.),TheNewMuseology.London:ReaktionBooks.

King,T.(2007).ResponsetoYeomanetal.:Competitiveadvantagethrough

‘‘authenticity’’:AnassessmentofScotland’stourismprospects.Tourism

Management,28(4),1141-1143.

Kirshenblatt-Gimblett,B.(1998).DestinationCulture:tourism,museumsand

heritage.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Knox,D.(2006).ThesacralizedlandscapesofGlencoe:frommassacretomass

tourism,andbackagain.InternationalJournalofTourismResearch,8(3),185-

197.

32

Kolar,T.&Zabkar,V.(2010).Aconsumer-basedmodelofauthenticity:An

oxymoronorthefoundationofculturalheritagemarketing?Tourism


Kwek,A.,Wang,Y.,&Weaver,D.(2014).RetailtoursforoverseasChinese:soft

powerorhardsell?AnnalsofTourismResearch,44(January),36-52.

Lau,R.(2010).Revisitingauthenticity:asocialrealistapproach.Annalsof

TourismResearch,37(2),478-498.

Lowenthal,D.(2011).TheHeritageCrusadeandtheSpoilsofHistory.Cambridge:

CambridgeUniversityPress.

Lugosi,P.(2016).Socio-technologicalauthentication,AnnalsofTourismResearch,

58(1),100-113.

Lynch,M.(1992).Scotland:anewhistory.London:Pimlico.

MacCannell,D.(1973).Stagedauthenticity:Arrangementsofsocialspacein

touristsettings.AmericanjournalofSociology,79(3),589-603.

MacCannell,D.(1999).TheTourist:anewtheoryoftheleisureclass.Berkeley:

UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

McCain,G.&Ray,N.M.(2003).Legacytourism:Thesearchforpersonalmeaning

inheritagetravel.TourismManagement,24(6),713-717.

McCrone,D.,Morris,A.,&Kiely,R.(1995).ScotlandtheBrand:themakingof

Scottishheritage.Edinburgh:EdinburghUniversityPress.

McIntosh,A.(2004).Tourists’appreciationofMaoricultureinNewZealand.


33

Mee,J.(2007).MillenarianvisionsandUtopianspeculations.InM.Fitzpatrick,P.

Jones,C.Knellwolf,&I.McCalman(Eds.),TheEnlightenmentWorld(pp.536-

550).Abingdon:Routledge.

Morgan,M.(2001).NationalIdentitiesandTravelinVictorianBritain.

Basingstoke:Palgrave.

Morton,G.(2010).Identityoutofplace.InT.Griffiths&G.Morton(Eds.),A

HistoryofEverydayLifeinScotland,1800to1900(pp.256-287).Edinburgh:

EdinburghUniversityPress.

Morton,G.(2012).OurselvesandOthers:Scotland1832-1914.Edinburgh:

EdinburghUniversityPress.

Mossberg,L.(2007).Amarketingapproachtothetouristexperience.

ScandinavianJournalofHospitalityandTourism,7(1),59-74.

O’Connor,N.,Flanagan,S.,&Gilbert,D.(2008).Theintegrationoffilm-induced

tourismanddestinationbrandinginYorkshire,UK.InternationalJournalof


Park,C.W.,MacInnis,D.J.,Priester,J.,Eisingerich,A.B.,&Iacobucci,D.(2010).

Brandattachmentandbrandattitudestrength:Conceptualandempirical

differentiationoftwocriticalbrandequitydrivers.JournalofMarketing,74(6),

1–17.

Pollock,V.&Sharp,J.(2007).Constellationsofidentity:place-ma(r)kingbeyond

heritage.EnvironmentandPlanningD:SocietyandSpace,25(6),1061-1078.

Prebensen,K.&Foss,L.(2010).Copingandco-creatingintouristexperiences.

InternationalJournalofTourismResearch,13(1),54-67.

34

Prebensen,K.,Vittersø,J.,&Dahl,T.I.(2013).Valueco-creationsignificanceof

touristresources.AnnalsofTourismResearch,42(July),240-261.

Radhakrishnan,R.(1994).PostmodernismandtheRestoftheWorld.

Organization,1(2),305-340.

Reisinger,Y.&Steiner,C.(2006).Reconceptualisingobjectauthenticity.Annalsof


Richards,G.&Wilson,J.(2006).Developingcreativityintouristexperiences:A

solutiontotheserialreproductionofculture?TourismManagement,27(6),1209-

1223.

Rickley-Boyd,J.(2012).AuthenticityandAura:aBenjaminianapproachto

tourism.AnnalsofTourismResearch,39(1),269-289.

Rigney,A.(2001).ImperfectHistories:theelusivepastandthelegacyofRomantic

historicism.Ithaca,NY:CornellUniversityPress.

Rorty,R.(1989).Contingency,IronyandSolidarity.Cambridge:Cambridge

UniversityPress.

Rouse, J. (1994). Power/Knowledge. In G. Gutting (Ed.), The Cambridge

CompaniontoFoucault(pp.92-114).Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Ryan,C.&Gu,H.(2010).Constructionismandcultureinresearch:

UnderstandingsofthefourthBuddhistFestival,Wutaishan,China.Tourism


Salazar,N.B.(2012).TourismImaginaries:aconceptualapproach.Annalsof


35

Savolainen,R.(1995).Everydaylifeinformationseeking:Approaching

informationseekinginthecontextof“wayoflife”.Library&InformationScience

Research,17(3),259-294.

Santos,C.&Yan,G.(2010).Genealogicaltourism:Aphenomenological

examination.JournalofTravelResearch,49(1),56-67.

Shackley,M.(1994).Whenisthepast?Authenticityandthe

commoditizationofheritage.TourismManagement,15(5),396-397.

Shepherd,R.(2011).Historicity,fieldwork,andtheallureofthepost-modern:A

replytoRyanandGu.TourismManagement,32(1),187-190.

Slater,D.(1997).ConsumerCultureandModernity.Cambridge:Polity.

Smith,A.D.(2008).TheCulturalFoundationsofNations.Oxford:Blackwell.

Steiner,C;Reisinger,Y.(2006).Understandingexistentialauthenticity.Annalsof


Stylianou-Lambert, T. (2011). Gazing from home: cultural tourism and art

museums.AnnalsofTourismResearch,38(2),403-421.

Swanson,K.&Timothy,D.(2012).Souvenirs:Iconsofmeaning,

commercializationandcommoditization.TourismManagement,33(3),489-499.

Thomson,C.&Tian,K.(2008).ReconstructingtheSouth:howcommercialmyths

competeforidentityvaluethroughtheideologicalshapingofpopularmemories

andcountermemories.JournalofConsumerResearch,34(5),595-613.

Trevor-Roper,H.(1983).Theinventionoftradition:theHighlandtraditionof

Scotland.InE.Hobsbawm&T.Ranger(Eds.),TheInventionofTradition(pp.15-

42).Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

36

Tucker,H.(2016).Empathyandtourism:limitsandpossibilities.Annalsof


Tucker,W.(1965).MaxWeber’s“Verstehen”.TheSociologicalQuarterly,6(2),

157-165.

Varman,R.&Belk,R.(2009).Nationalismandideologyinananticonsumption

movement.JournalofConsumerResearch,36(4),686-700.

VisitScotland.(2013).SummaryofAncestralResearch2012.Retrieved

November15,2014,fromVisitScotlandwebsite:

http://www.visitscotland.org/pdf/Ancestral%20Research%2016%20Jan%20vs

.org_pptx.pdf

Wall,G.&Xie,P.(2005).Authenticatingethnictourism:Lidancers'perspectives.

AsiaPacificJournalofTourismResearch,10(1),1-21.

Wang,N.(1999).Rethinkingauthenticityintourismexperience.Annalsof


Wang,Y.(2007).Customizedauthenticitybeginsathome.AnnalsofTourism

Research,34(3),789-804.

Wenger,E.(2000).CommunitiesofPracticeandSocialLearningSystems.

Organization,7(2),225-246.

Whatley,C.A.(2000).ScottishSociety:1707-1830.Manchester:Manchester

UniversityPress.

Wight,A.&Lennon,J.(2007).Selectiveinterpretationandeclectichuman

heritageinLithuania.TourismManagement,28(2),519-529.

37

Yakel,E.(2004).Seekinginformation,seekingconnections,seekingmeaning:

Genealogistsandfamilyhistorians.InformationResearch,10(1).

diapora authenticity and the imagined past accepted version · 2017. 5. 30. · ‘imagined’ in...

Documents