Our focus is the interplay between status and mobility in the processes that construct cultural heritage. What happens in the circulation of cultural stuff as certain elements are ascribed with status as cultural heritage? What does it mean in terms of further mobility for those cultural elements?
This panel focuses on the relationships between cultural heritage, status and mobility. Cultural heritage can be understood as a certain status that is ascribed to selected cultural elements or natural sites. Status should here be understood as a value-added position within a certain group of people. Still, cultural heritage status does not always imply official appointment. Rather, certain groups or individuals can construct or uphold heritage status for a chosen cultural element.
The creation of cultural heritage status has close ties to aspects of mobility and circulation, as ancientness is often a desired quality in cultural heritage. Even though cultural heritage as a phenomenon is a new mode of cultural production in the present, it still has recourse to the past (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett 1998, 149). Circulation, in this manner, can mean re-appropriation of ancient buildings or objects, various types of re-enactments of folklore or local traditions, as well as cultural re-framing of natural sites or landscapes. But how does cultural heritage status affect the possibility of further mobility for the selected cultural elements?
Discussions concerning concepts such as mobility, gentrification, orchestration and re-vitalization of cultural elements are encouraged as part of the panel. Also, if cultural heritage implies circulation and the mobility of cultural elements, is it possible to identify certain positions within the cultural heritage process, and what do the relations between these positions imply?
Participants working with varying aspects of material, immaterial and natural heritage are all welcome to send in abstracts for and participate in this panel!