Industrial Heritage: Regeneration or Preservation
This blog is part of my university assignment about global and cyber heritage, I have decided to look at the issue of industrial heritage and its preservation and if this can be combined with regeneration.
Industrial heritage gives us connection to our past and future in a way that more traditional forms of heritage cannot. Industrial heritage is the story of the people who made nations.
Welcome
Please follow the link below, watch the presentation and then follow the link back to the blog to register your views and answer the questions that were posed in it. Please feel free to share this blog with others you feel have an interest in the preservation of industrial heritage.
You can navigate through the presentation using the arrows which will appear at the bottom of the screen, if you want to look at the images in more detail just click on them. Moving the cursor back to the bottom of the screen will return you to the navigation arrows.
There are links in the presentation which may not work if it is not run in the 'Full Screen' mode, to do this, click on the 'More' button in the bottom right hand corner of the screen and select 'Full Screen'.
Engagement, (especially if it preserves 'heritage')is essential and tourism is a sort of engagement that provides a raison d'etre and a cash cow to allow more serious study of areas beyond those on show. It is also in a proportion of cases truly educational.
Tourism is therefore a good thing. Would we be able to see the tin mines in Cornwall had not people decided to conserve the sites and machinery? We might also need tin again!
See my answer to last question! Just dont eat your sandwiches too close to the exhibit! A serious point would be that how are we going to teach future generations if we dont have these sites?
I don't think it matters at all as without it as mentioned above society wouldn't have these things at all if it wasn't for tourism. Money to preserve and develop the interpretation must come from somewhere after all. Doesn't the point that visitors are willing to put their hands in their pockets prove that it doesn't demean the sites importance? Quite the opposite I think, it gives people the opportunity to feel they are contributing to the sites future ( after you tell them to stop moaning about the entry fee and explain their money helps it keep going of course lol).
I think that this really depends on what kind of distance we have in terms of time.
If we're talking about sites where people have lived, died and suffered in recent memory then it may well be difficult and insensitive to create a tourist attraction out of it, however these kinds of things can be done with taste and dignity, but does that turn off your visitors? It's very difficult to balance the reality of these conflicting perspectives.
it depends on your own perception. i think the phase 'tourist attractions' give an image of a theme park rather than something that is maybe meant as something more educational. But this doesnt mean that appealing to tourists is a bad thing. A cities industrial heritage can be worn like a badge of honour and can be what it is best known for.
Gotta fund it somehow - there could even be cross-overs - Disney operations in Orlando and Annaheim could become tourism industrial heritage sites - think about it. In all seriousness, most would / should be reliant on private funding and in no way demeans their importance
No, it is inevitable that I. H. sites will and should become attractions. They are a vital part of Britain's "heritage" and shows to younger generations why Britain became Great and for 200 years led the World. It is not demeaning to celebrate our heritage or history, no more so than it is to display broken artefacts at the site of a Roman Fort where life was considered primitive by today's standards.
Turning the industrial workplace in to an adventure playground (as at Magna) may well be seen as demeaning to the memory of those involved in the industry, but if it allows the site to remain viable and maintain a genuinely respectful connection to the site’s former use, then do it. Sometimes practicality will have to overcome purism.
If the heritage wasn't there as a tourist attraction, would there be any other reason for keeping it at all? Yes, they do sometimes appear demeaning but is the alternative to wipe them out completely? They are important to society in their depiction of how this country developed.
Heritage has no place without tourism. The idea of a place, a site, an item or location without an additional attraction other than itself will fail in its ability to attract any interest.
Engagement, (especially if it preserves 'heritage')is essential and tourism is a sort of engagement that provides a raison d'etre and a cash cow to allow more serious study of areas beyond those on show. It is also in a proportion of cases truly educational.
ReplyDeleteTourism is therefore a good thing. Would we be able to see the tin mines in Cornwall had not people decided to conserve the sites and machinery? We might also need tin again!
See my answer to last question! Just dont eat your sandwiches too close to the exhibit! A serious point would be that how are we going to teach future generations if we dont have these sites?
ReplyDeleteI don't think it matters at all as without it as mentioned above society wouldn't have these things at all if it wasn't for tourism. Money to preserve and develop the interpretation must come from somewhere after all. Doesn't the point that visitors are willing to put their hands in their pockets prove that it doesn't demean the sites importance? Quite the opposite I think, it gives people the opportunity to feel they are contributing to the sites future ( after you tell them to stop moaning about the entry fee and explain their money helps it keep going of course lol).
ReplyDeleteI think that this really depends on what kind of distance we have in terms of time.
ReplyDeleteIf we're talking about sites where people have lived, died and suffered in recent memory then it may well be difficult and insensitive to create a tourist attraction out of it, however these kinds of things can be done with taste and dignity, but does that turn off your visitors? It's very difficult to balance the reality of these conflicting perspectives.
it depends on your own perception. i think the phase 'tourist attractions' give an image of a theme park rather than something that is maybe meant as something more educational. But this doesnt mean that appealing to tourists is a bad thing. A cities industrial heritage can be worn like a badge of honour and can be what it is best known for.
ReplyDeleteGotta fund it somehow - there could even be cross-overs - Disney operations in Orlando and Annaheim could become tourism industrial heritage sites - think about it.
ReplyDeleteIn all seriousness, most would / should be reliant on private funding and in no way demeans their importance
No, it is inevitable that I. H. sites will and should become attractions. They are a vital part of Britain's "heritage" and shows to younger generations why Britain became Great and for 200 years led the World. It is not demeaning to celebrate our heritage or history, no more so than it is to display broken artefacts at the site of a Roman Fort where life was considered primitive by today's standards.
ReplyDeleteTurning the industrial workplace in to an adventure playground (as at Magna) may well be seen as demeaning to the memory of those involved in the industry, but if it allows the site to remain viable and maintain a genuinely respectful connection to the site’s former use, then do it. Sometimes practicality will have to overcome purism.
ReplyDeleteIf the heritage wasn't there as a tourist attraction, would there be any other reason for keeping it at all? Yes, they do sometimes appear demeaning but is the alternative to wipe them out completely? They are important to society in their depiction of how this country developed.
ReplyDeleteHeritage has no place without tourism. The idea of a place, a site, an item or location without an additional attraction other than itself will fail in its ability to attract any interest.
ReplyDelete