Page 80 - Hrobat Virloget, Katja, et al., eds. (2015). Stone narratives: heritage, mobility, performance. University of Primorska Press, Koper.
P. 80
stone narratives
It was in the 1980s as a Countryside Ranger and then Manager of Shipley Country
Park, a 300 hectare publicly accessible tract of landscape in the East Midlands, that I was
introduced to the pioneering work of Freeman Tilden (1977) and of Steve Van Matre (1979;
1990) in bringing to life, in interpreting, natural and cultural landscapes for local people
and visitors. Shipley Country Park had as its core a historic landscape, managed as an aris-
tocratic estate from the 17th to the early 20th centuries, subsequently extensively opencast
mined for coal, then restored and landscaped as a Country Park for the recreational use of
the nearby urban populations of Nottingham and Derby and surrounding towns. Over
200,000 people used the Country Park each year and interpreting the story of the Park’s
landscape to these visitors and to local people was a core function of the Park’s countryside
rangers. I and my staff learned the principles and approaches developed by Tilden and Van
Matre through a series of courses taught by the Peak District National Park countryside
training centre at Losehill Hall where Sue Cross was an inspirational tutor.
Freeman Tilden was born in 1883 and died in 1980. Through his work for the USA
National Park Service he developed a set of core interpretation principles which under-
pin modern approaches to interpretation in the English speaking world and which he pub-
lished in his 1957 book Interpreting Our Heritage (Tilden, 1977).
It is important here to digress a little to explore the use of the word interpretation by
heritage interpreters on the one hand and by many archaeologists and curators on the oth-
er. For archaeologists and curators interpretation is used to refer to the academic explana-
tion of scientific information. The interpretation of an archaeological site for instance is
taken to mean the academic explanation of the site on the basis of the archaeological and
other evidence (or information) associated with it. Tilden uses the word interpretation in
a slightly different way. For him interpretation is more than explanation or the unadorned
presentation of information; interpretation encompasses the idea of bringing to life what
is being explained in ways that will engage and interest the public. Interpretation in this
sense is nonetheless still anchored in the evidence itself and in scientific explanation – it
simply goes further in focusing on those aspects and the techniques of presenting the in-
formation that are most likely to engage visitors. As expressed by Tilden in his first princi-
ple of interpretation:
»Information as such is not interpretation. Interpretation is revelation based upon in-
formation. But they are entirely different things. However, all interpretation includes infor-
mation.« (Tilden, 1977, p. 9).
For Tilden, interpretation is a means or process of engaging people with what is being
presented, so they understand rather than simply being passively informed:
»Through interpretation, understanding; through understanding, appreciation;
through appreciation, protection.« (Tilden, 1977, p. 9).
Good interpretation achieves understanding by enabling the visitor to relate to what
is being interpreted:
»Any interpretation that does not somehow relate what is being displayed or described
to something within the personality or experience of the visitor will be sterile.« (Tilden, 1977,
p. 9)
78
It was in the 1980s as a Countryside Ranger and then Manager of Shipley Country
Park, a 300 hectare publicly accessible tract of landscape in the East Midlands, that I was
introduced to the pioneering work of Freeman Tilden (1977) and of Steve Van Matre (1979;
1990) in bringing to life, in interpreting, natural and cultural landscapes for local people
and visitors. Shipley Country Park had as its core a historic landscape, managed as an aris-
tocratic estate from the 17th to the early 20th centuries, subsequently extensively opencast
mined for coal, then restored and landscaped as a Country Park for the recreational use of
the nearby urban populations of Nottingham and Derby and surrounding towns. Over
200,000 people used the Country Park each year and interpreting the story of the Park’s
landscape to these visitors and to local people was a core function of the Park’s countryside
rangers. I and my staff learned the principles and approaches developed by Tilden and Van
Matre through a series of courses taught by the Peak District National Park countryside
training centre at Losehill Hall where Sue Cross was an inspirational tutor.
Freeman Tilden was born in 1883 and died in 1980. Through his work for the USA
National Park Service he developed a set of core interpretation principles which under-
pin modern approaches to interpretation in the English speaking world and which he pub-
lished in his 1957 book Interpreting Our Heritage (Tilden, 1977).
It is important here to digress a little to explore the use of the word interpretation by
heritage interpreters on the one hand and by many archaeologists and curators on the oth-
er. For archaeologists and curators interpretation is used to refer to the academic explana-
tion of scientific information. The interpretation of an archaeological site for instance is
taken to mean the academic explanation of the site on the basis of the archaeological and
other evidence (or information) associated with it. Tilden uses the word interpretation in
a slightly different way. For him interpretation is more than explanation or the unadorned
presentation of information; interpretation encompasses the idea of bringing to life what
is being explained in ways that will engage and interest the public. Interpretation in this
sense is nonetheless still anchored in the evidence itself and in scientific explanation – it
simply goes further in focusing on those aspects and the techniques of presenting the in-
formation that are most likely to engage visitors. As expressed by Tilden in his first princi-
ple of interpretation:
»Information as such is not interpretation. Interpretation is revelation based upon in-
formation. But they are entirely different things. However, all interpretation includes infor-
mation.« (Tilden, 1977, p. 9).
For Tilden, interpretation is a means or process of engaging people with what is being
presented, so they understand rather than simply being passively informed:
»Through interpretation, understanding; through understanding, appreciation;
through appreciation, protection.« (Tilden, 1977, p. 9).
Good interpretation achieves understanding by enabling the visitor to relate to what
is being interpreted:
»Any interpretation that does not somehow relate what is being displayed or described
to something within the personality or experience of the visitor will be sterile.« (Tilden, 1977,
p. 9)
78
