Page 40 - Studia Universitatis Hereditati, vol 10(2) (2022)
P. 40
performance of authenticity (Umbach andstudia universitatis her editati, letnik 10 (2022), številk a 2 / volume 10 (2022), number 2 40accessible (Vasile et al. 2015). And further they
Humphrey 2018). stimulated all the senses allowing the consump-
hereditati tion of the information in both terms of educa-
Consequently, we can define heritage tour- tion and entertainment (Addis 2005).
ism more narrowly as a phenomenon based on
visitors’ motivations and perceptions rather than It is exactly the ICT devices that in a spe-
on specific site attributes. This means that herit- cific area of cultural heritage consumption, in
age tourism is not only tourism in places catego- our focus in the case of archaeology, can ena-
rized as heritage or historic places based purely ble, when discussing the involvement of persons
on the fact that they present history, but histo- with disabilities the shift form the discussion
ry featured is part of the experience and partial- about minorized identities towards a common
ly links it with motivations for the trip (Poria, experience. Since disability is not a personal
Butler and Airey 2003). In this sense, authen- trait that an individual possesses but a way of
ticity is actually performed, and through the seeing things, consuming information, that in-
term performative authenticity authors linked cludes the whole of society (Fraser 2018, 12–20).
the two positions that have emerged in tourism And in the moment when the presentation, this
studies with respect to the concept of authen- is the consumption of cultural heritage is trans-
ticity – on one side object related (authentici- formed from “authentic” material environments
ty synonymous to original and trace) and sub- in to the hyper-realistic digital ones the differ-
ject related modes of authenticity (existential ences between the capacities for consumption
authenticity covering bodily feelings, emotion- between different members of the society be-
al ties, identity construction and narration relat- come reduced. Modernizing the presentation of
ed to place) (Knudsen and Waade 2010). The lat- cultural heritage becomes “normalization” of the
er corresponding to the evolution of the modern consuming society.
cultural tourist that was transformed from con-
suming the vision about past history, passing to Implementing virtual heritage technologies
consuming past cultural, historical and natural can, beside advertising the archaeological sites
resources as well as intangible heritage and at- and promoting the events on them, be used as
tractions to finally actively performing a struc- means documenting the heritage and reducing
tured decision-making process based on criteria its vulnerability, caused by exposure of access.
of desirable leisure experiences such as engaging But most important it allows to resurrect the
in social interaction, doing something worth- complexity of destroyed or not accessible sites
while, feeling comfortable and at ease in one’s and items (Farid and Ezzat 2018). Information
surrounding, being challenged by new experi- and communication technology in the role of as-
ences, having the opportunity to learn and par- sistive technologies forms a collective and inter-
ticipating actively (Sheng and Chen 2012; Di Pi- active support for knowledge and performs dif-
etro et al. 2014). Especially the young generation ferent roles pursuant to the type of disability to
asked for a different cultural consumption mod- enable the consumption of cultural information
el – knowledge-based activities that are partici- and to address the question of authenticity of in-
pative in situ (Papathanasiou-Zuhrt and Weiss- formation provided.
Ibáñez 2014). Especially in this population the
use of modern ICT devices, included in to the Summary
daily activities, enabled the changes in cultural
consumptions. Not that the only facilitated the In the period of last 50 years, the discussion of what au-
broad information remotely but also facilitated thenticity really means changed from questions about
the access and consumption for categories of as- realism, representation and reality in aesthetics and me-
sets that were previously considered being less dia studies, to “authenticity as idea” related to national
identity and cultural heritage, as well as “authenticity as
strategy” in marketing and place branding. All these dis-
Humphrey 2018). stimulated all the senses allowing the consump-
hereditati tion of the information in both terms of educa-
Consequently, we can define heritage tour- tion and entertainment (Addis 2005).
ism more narrowly as a phenomenon based on
visitors’ motivations and perceptions rather than It is exactly the ICT devices that in a spe-
on specific site attributes. This means that herit- cific area of cultural heritage consumption, in
age tourism is not only tourism in places catego- our focus in the case of archaeology, can ena-
rized as heritage or historic places based purely ble, when discussing the involvement of persons
on the fact that they present history, but histo- with disabilities the shift form the discussion
ry featured is part of the experience and partial- about minorized identities towards a common
ly links it with motivations for the trip (Poria, experience. Since disability is not a personal
Butler and Airey 2003). In this sense, authen- trait that an individual possesses but a way of
ticity is actually performed, and through the seeing things, consuming information, that in-
term performative authenticity authors linked cludes the whole of society (Fraser 2018, 12–20).
the two positions that have emerged in tourism And in the moment when the presentation, this
studies with respect to the concept of authen- is the consumption of cultural heritage is trans-
ticity – on one side object related (authentici- formed from “authentic” material environments
ty synonymous to original and trace) and sub- in to the hyper-realistic digital ones the differ-
ject related modes of authenticity (existential ences between the capacities for consumption
authenticity covering bodily feelings, emotion- between different members of the society be-
al ties, identity construction and narration relat- come reduced. Modernizing the presentation of
ed to place) (Knudsen and Waade 2010). The lat- cultural heritage becomes “normalization” of the
er corresponding to the evolution of the modern consuming society.
cultural tourist that was transformed from con-
suming the vision about past history, passing to Implementing virtual heritage technologies
consuming past cultural, historical and natural can, beside advertising the archaeological sites
resources as well as intangible heritage and at- and promoting the events on them, be used as
tractions to finally actively performing a struc- means documenting the heritage and reducing
tured decision-making process based on criteria its vulnerability, caused by exposure of access.
of desirable leisure experiences such as engaging But most important it allows to resurrect the
in social interaction, doing something worth- complexity of destroyed or not accessible sites
while, feeling comfortable and at ease in one’s and items (Farid and Ezzat 2018). Information
surrounding, being challenged by new experi- and communication technology in the role of as-
ences, having the opportunity to learn and par- sistive technologies forms a collective and inter-
ticipating actively (Sheng and Chen 2012; Di Pi- active support for knowledge and performs dif-
etro et al. 2014). Especially the young generation ferent roles pursuant to the type of disability to
asked for a different cultural consumption mod- enable the consumption of cultural information
el – knowledge-based activities that are partici- and to address the question of authenticity of in-
pative in situ (Papathanasiou-Zuhrt and Weiss- formation provided.
Ibáñez 2014). Especially in this population the
use of modern ICT devices, included in to the Summary
daily activities, enabled the changes in cultural
consumptions. Not that the only facilitated the In the period of last 50 years, the discussion of what au-
broad information remotely but also facilitated thenticity really means changed from questions about
the access and consumption for categories of as- realism, representation and reality in aesthetics and me-
sets that were previously considered being less dia studies, to “authenticity as idea” related to national
identity and cultural heritage, as well as “authenticity as
strategy” in marketing and place branding. All these dis-
