Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Carley Williams
(University of Aberdeen)
Tóta Árnadóttir (University of Iceland)
Fabio Mugnaini (Università di Siena)
Send message to Convenors
- Discussant:
-
Michael Foster
(University of California, Davis)
- Formats:
- Panel
- Stream:
- Heritage
- Sessions:
- Tuesday 22 June, -
Time zone: Europe/Helsinki
Short Abstract:
This panel will explore professional experiences with official safeguarding efforts - dilemmas scholars face when engaging with the 2003 UNESCO Convention on ICH, and how they attempt to (re)solve them? Can "rules and measures" be symbiotic with healthy ICH, and if not, then what is the alternative?
Long Abstract:
The word "rule" refers to the verb meaning "enforcing power" and the simple instrument ensuring that straight lines are drawn and accurate measurements are made. As countries attempt to implement the UNESCO 2003 Convention on ICH, using its lists as regulated ways to "take the measure of" their respective cultural heritage, scholars may find themselves being professionally engaged to go against basic assumptions of our field. These include essential understandings of "culture in peril", often based on the perceived need to assess and describe ICH in definitive ways, to ensure that safeguarding initiatives are carried out "in the right way".
Some scholars reject involvement in processes of regulation and measures of standardization, and find themselves watching a growing "heritage enterprise" from the outside; others work within the system, bringing a critical academic perspective, contributing alternative ways of engaging with ICH. As governments become more involved in safeguarding, professional opportunities increase for scholars within our fields; many of us already experience the dual role of "official expert defining rules" and "critical observer opposing rules". How do we navigate these roles in diverse contexts, whilst attempting to interpret the ethnological oxymoron "good safeguarding practices"? Inspired by discussions during the 2020 SIEF Summer School, this panel will bring forward a variety of case studies and offer insight into the debates around measuring and ruling over living culture.
This Panel proposal is sponsored by the SIEF Working Group on Cultural Heritage and Property in conjunction with the Roundtable proposal 'ICH and Higher Education'.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Tuesday 22 June, 2021, -Paper short abstract:
The paper questions how the rules for the inventorying of ICH are put into administrative practice, what are the implications of expert status in co-producing knowledge on ICH and what practices of patterning the discourse on ICH, such as accumulating ‘inappropriate vocabulary’, can be observed.
Paper long abstract:
Since several years, a corpus of ‘inappropriate vocabulary’ has been accumulating in the decisions taken at UNESCO on nominations to the international lists of intangible cultural heritage (ICH). It encompasses inter alia terms relating to authenticity, uniqueness, ownership and origin. This far it has not reached ‘folklore’ although concerns on the varieties of its meaning and connotations have been raised. These practices of patterning the discourse on ICH at international level are grounded on the concerns to be consistent with the principles of the UNESCO 2003 Convention. Such and other considerations in patterning the discourse can be observed also at national level in the way ICH inventories are being established and gradually expanded.
The role of researchers is prominent in some decision-making structures, while more observant in others – in drafting nominations, evaluating them, participating in fine-tuning narratives etc. This invites to ask what the level of inclusiveness in such inventories is, and what are the dynamics and implications of expert status in co-producing knowledge on ICH. The paper will be based on the postdoctoral research project ‘Intangible Cultural Heritage as Resource for Sustainable Development in Northern Europe: Rights-Based Approach’ (No.: 1.1.1.2/VIAA/3/19/476) and will reflect in particular the experiences of ICH inventory-making and respective expertise practices in Latvia, Finland, Norway and Sweden, questioning how the domestic rules for the inventorying of ICH are put into administrative practice of patterning.
Paper short abstract:
As a country with a strong folkloristic legacy, and participating in the ICH inventorying and safeguarding mechanisms according to the 2003 Convention, Romania provides examples of folklorists struggling to transcend the traditional rules of their discipline and create public folklore initiatives.
Paper long abstract:
As a country with a strong folkloristic legacy, and participating in the ICH inventorying and safeguarding mechanisms according to the 2003 Convention, Romania provides examples of folklorists struggling to transcend the traditional rules of their discipline and create public folklore initiatives. The paper highlights recent trials and tribulations of Romanian folklorists and ethnologists, working also as ICH experts while trying to implement the UNESCO 2003 Convention. From small community-based projects to debates over appropriate terminology and vocabulary and endless negotiations with connected fields, Romanian ICH expertise provides meaningful grassroot experiences. This ICH-connected challenges affected both the traditional discipline of folklore and how scholars translated into practice the UNESCO recommendations and guidance. Did the ICH experts in Romania truly adapt and integrate the UNESCO vision into their daily folkloristic projects, or are they still preserving the distance between their two professional pathways? The author provides an example of her recent participation in drafting a multinational nomination file for the Representative List. She gives her insight on the need for a middle ground between traditional folkloristics and the theory and practice of assessing living heritage. The specific ICH topic showcases the capacity of folklore scholarship in Romania to generate data, tools and vision for the elements inscribed in the UNESCO Representative List, and it may thus become a good practice for greater efforts to change and break the old rules of the discipline.
Paper short abstract:
This paper explores some of the discussions and challenges within the appointed panel for assessment of suggestions for the national inventory of ICH of the Faroe Islands, balancing between desiring a “bottom up” approach, whilst rejecting the role as mules for specific agendas.
Paper long abstract:
As the Faroe Islands ratified the 2003 UNESCO convention in 2018 and immediately began to develop a National Inventory, the Ministry of Culture appointed “expert” representatives of the National Museum and the University for a small panel that was to asses and possibly assist in editing suggestions for this list of examples of local ICH. As a rule, the inventory is supposed to reflect local understandings of valuable practises and a representative variation of ICH is desirable. However, being presented with suggestions for entries that were clearly intended to reaffirm specific ideas on “Faroese culture” proved challenging from an academic perspective and raised several questions. How do should we assess entries for inventories? What criteria are valid? Is it desirable for scholars to participate in the process, should we strive to bring nuance, context and perspective into the inventories or is any involvement, editing and pruning against the intention of the convention? The paper will explore some of the cases and discuss this issue in a context of community, ownership, and agency.