Exploring cultural heritage in the context of museums, archives and libraries

Abstract:

The exploration of the vast subject of cultural heritage in the context of museums, archives and libraries begins with the need to find an understanding and working definition of what is meant by the term "cultural heritage." Following that, the critical role that memory and contested history have to play in cultural heritage is highlighted. Perspectives from museums, archives and libraries are examined in terms of theory and practice, as a contextual exploration into mapping the domain for the development of a generic model with which to teach information literacy and cultural heritage for lifelong learning.

Key words

cultural production

cultural heritage

cultural heritage in museums

archives and libraries

postmodernism

documentary cultural heritage

contested history

memory

identity

censorship

multiculturalism

Definitions and concepts

In seeking a definition for cultural heritage, and one that is applicable in the context of museums, archives and libraries, it has been found that the meaning is fluid, complex and evolves constantly.

Cultural heritage is located in the field of what is known as cultural production. In outlining Bourdieu's theories on the field of cultural production, Johnson noted Bourdieu's argument that the consideration of works of art and culture is part of the work of art as an object of contemplation. Also part of the work of art was the contextual institution in which it is developed, namely, public galleries and museums, and the development of the professionals who were appointed to work there (Bourdieu, 1993: 36). Thus, works of art, literature and cultural production need to be understood as manifestations of the entire field of artists and creators, critics, dealers, patrons, publishers, gallery directors and academics (ibid.: 37). Johnson summarized Bourdieu's definition of cultural capital as a form of knowledge with an internalized code of cognitive decipher that equips the social agent with the ability to have empathy with, appreciate and be competent in the deciphering of cultural relations and cultural artifacts (ibid.: 7). It is in this overall context that we now seek to explore the notions and concepts of cultural heritage in the field of museums, archives and libraries.

The search began with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). UNESCO ratified its convention concerning the protection of world cultural and natural heritage in 1972, and identified monuments, groups of buildings and sites that were considered to have universal value from the perspective of history, art, aesthetics, ethnology, anthropology or science to be deemed as cultural heritage for the purpose of the convention (UNESCO, 1972: 2). This led to a long held view that cultural heritage was contained in buildings and places, and in the material.

In 2003, UNESCO expanded the focus of cultural heritage to include intangible cultural heritage. Intangible cultural heritage was defined as the practices, expressions, knowledge and skills including instruments, objects and spaces that were transmitted through the generations in response to the environment (natural and historical) by individuals, groups and communities. The convention noted that intangible cultural heritage provided people with a sense of identity and continuity, and promoted respect for cultural diversity. Aspects of intangible cultural heritage were identified as oral tradition and expression (including language), performing arts, social practices, rituals, knowledge and practices concerning the natural environment and the universe, and traditional craftsmanship (UNESCO, 2003). The elements defined and described in the 2003 convention fit better with the understanding of cultural heritage in the context of museums, libraries and archives.

Champion observed that the original UNESCO definition in 1972 was rooted in the material, and was considered to be of universal value, while the later 2003 definition was not limited to materiality, was integrated with the living, and was considered to be of value by the users themselves (Champion, 2008: 186). Champion suggested that cultural heritage can be considered to consist of both the tangible and the intangible, and that it is considered valuable in the context of the use and meaning given to it by its creators, and to those unfamiliar with a particular culture (ibid.: 187).

In examining the broader notion of what heritage itself constitutes, Howard posited that heritage can be considered to be everything that people want to save and pass on to future generations and this can include elements from both material culture and nature (Howard, 2003: 1).

Considering culture itself as a force in human affairs, it is worth including Mazrui's seminal outline of the seven functions of culture in world affairs. Firstly, he posited that culture contributes the forming lenses of perception and cognition of experience; secondly, that culture drives human motivation; thirdly, that culture provides evaluative frameworks (in terms of what is considered to be good or bad, moral or immoral); fourthly, and very importantly, he identified that culture provides a sense of identity, and that this can be a unifying or a divisive force in world affairs; fifthly, he conceived culture to be a mode of communication (expressed through art, music and ideas); sixthly, he considered culture to provide a basis for the definition of social stratification (rank, class, status) (Mazrui, 1990: 7); and, seventhly, he considered culture to be a system of production and consumption (ibid.: 8). From this, it can be seen that cultural forces have significant impact on the shaping of human consciousness and endeavor.

The conceptualization of cultural imperialism as a school of thought is an important development to consider in juxtaposition with the notion of what or whose culture is "inherited." While many scholars dismiss the concept of cultural imperialism as being rooted in Marxism (which is a straw man refutation), it is necessary to include an outline of it. Tomlinson identified four ways in which to consider cultural imperialism, and these were the frames of media (Tomlinson, 1991: 20), nationality (ibid.: 23), a critique of global capitalism (ibid.: 24) and a critique on modernism and modernity (ibid.: 26). In essence, while avoiding definition, Tomlinson posited that cultural imperialism can be seen as a clash between "how we live" and a threat that "how they live" will be imposed on "us" (ibid.: 90). Tomlinson noted the irony that his book was written in English, which is considered to be the main imperialist language in the world, and pointed to this as an illustration of the problem of representation, raising questions as to who speaks in the discourse on imperialism (ibid.: 28). He further noted the irony of discussing the rights of individual cultures to define themselves in terms of their own experience, and then expecting them to adhere to critical categories not defined by them (ibid.: 29). He described how it was problematic to discuss cultural imperialism in terms of the domination of one national culture by another (ibid.: 68), since within nation states themselves there can be cultural identities different from each other, and even in conflict with what the nation state defines as national culture (ibid.: 69).

Tomlinson further noted that within UNESCO discussions on culture were dualistic - since UNESCO itself was composed of representation from nation states (ibid.: 70) but yet claimed to refer to culture as being for all people - thus there is a tension and paradox within UNESCO discourse between speaking for pluralism (culture for all of humanity), and nationalism (defined cultures of nation states which do not necessarily represent all of their citizens). He also noted the very challenging problem of why all cultural practices should be tolerated, when some of them are considered by some to be harmful to humanity, such as cannibalism and female genital circumcision (ibid.: 71). Tomlinson identified further problems with the notion of preserving culture as cultural heritage - in "freezing" cultural tradition it obscures the fact that cultural traditions are dynamic processes that evolve and change through time (ibid.: 90), and the preserved items are in fact only constructs, not the things themselves (ibid.: 92). Finally, he noted that in the context of globalization, many people found their lives more influenced by agencies beyond their national institutions, and thus the sense of belonging to a secure culture is eroded (ibid.: 176).

It is proposed that in fact, this can be applied conversely as well - people feeling marginalized within their own nation states can turn to external agents for a sense of community, and this is especially manifest with the advent of social media and the cross-border networking that social media enables.

The above overview gives an idea of what cultural heritage as a general concept is considered to be. However, the problem of what constitutes cultural heritage in libraries, specifically, remains. The focus on libraries is necessary since in positing a model to teach information literacy,...