90102 - ANTROPOLOGIA DEL PATRIMONIO

Learning outcomes

Since the adoption of the World Heritage Convention, various definitions have influenced the ways in which heritage is classified, perceived and managed in contemporary global societies. The course aims to underline an interdisciplinary approach to the many tangible and intangible ‘things’ we defined as heritage, looking also to the different ways that in different countries have been selected to make up heritage and to manage it, sometimes against UNESCO Conventions and values. The course attempts to account for the global phenomenon and the industry that has grown up around heritage, and to critically presents a ‘toolkit of concepts’ with which it might be studied.

Course contents

Goals

The module offers the critical lenses of anthropology to analyse identity, political and narrative aspects implied in heritage practices, both on an international level (i.e. UNESCO) and on a local level (such as grassroots heritage activism). The anthropological perspective, particularly the ethnographic method, makes students (prospective professionals in the field of cultural heritage or historians of the Mediterranean Sea and its environment) reflective, critical and aware of the complexity of heritage practices. Furthermore, the module introduces decolonial/postcolonial studies, which students can further investigate within their graduate studies (MA/MSc, MPhil, PhD).

 

Requirements

Students might have a basic knowledge of cultural anthropology and/or history of anthropology. If was is not the case, students are suggested to consult manuals related to anthropology. Students must email the lecturer for bibliographic suggestions on the material to consult. Good English skills are also required for following documentaries and literary sources that are part of the material for final exams.

 

Skills aquired

At the end of the course, students will have a good, basic knowledge of the existing debates in the anthropology of heritage and critical heritage studies. Through interactive presentations in class and/or training at home, students can reflect on the complex dynamics involved in heritage practices and be independent in applying the critical lenses of anthropology to future studies and prospective jobs in the heritage field. Furthermore, students will train their analytical and writing skills and their oral speech in view of their final discussion for their graduation.

 

CONTENTS

The module focuses on deconstructing the concept of cultural heritage as historically developed by the European nation-states and the scholarly disciplines created to define, valorise and maintain cultural heritage, such as the history of art and archaeology. Once contextualised the historical framework within which the concept of heritage and the cultural-political practices connected to cultural heritage, the module deconstructs three assumptions related to cultural heritage:

1. Cultural heritage as a distinct, identitarian element of a circumscribed social community and a “universal” human community (according to UNESCO’s policies);
2. Cultural heritage as a material or immaterial element that must be protected from time usury, natural calamities, oblivion and abandonment;
3. Cultural heritage as an element defined by scientific criteria that are part of the “Western” disciplines and instruments for cataloguing “non-Western” cultures, as observed in colonial historical contexts, such as ethnographic museum collections, and how these narratives on the “Others” and the “other cultures” are still rooted today.

Through the lenses of anthropology, we can observe that:

1. Cultural heritage is not a distinct and “natural” element of “communities”: it is a political selection of specific historical events and sensual memories attached to and evoked by cultural artefacts. As a selective process, cultural heritage is a narrative crafted and performed by specific (elitarian or subaltern) groups or social subjects rather than a homogeneous reflection of “heritage communities”. The module, therefore, focuses on an anthropology of memory, recollection and oblivion;
2. Cultural heritage as a material or immaterial artefact to preserve is functional to maintaining a particular past and, as such, does not necessarily reflect other cultural and knowledge transmission practices within the same communities. Furthermore, a cultural artefact can be destroyed, forgotten or abandoned due to political decisions on what must and must not be preserved. This selection between conservation and (material and symbolic) decay opens a debate on what happens when a cultural artefact is destroyed by a natural calamity or, vice versa, a vandalic or iconoclastic act: which message and challenges are implied in building and maintaining the memory of a community?
3. As a political selection, cultural heritage has implied a sample of the cultural heritage of non-European cultures, exploiting it for the sake of the “universal community” and “civilisation”. This heritage of ethnographic museums reveals more of nation-states and their imperialism than non-European societies. The latter has developed cultural and knowledge transmission means that are alternative to or in contrast with European cultural heritage. What can we learn from other cultures, and how can we include their voice in the European museum and heritage narrative?

The module also investigates how anthropologists and cultural heritage practitioners must deal with “community heritage.”

Programme

1st week: Birth of heritage policies

1. Historical contextualisation of the concept of cultural heritage and its social and cultural impacts;
2. Why an anthropology of heritage?

Assignements for students:

1. First day of the module: presentation of students’ expectations about the module and their idea of cultural heritage developed during their experience and study careers;
2. Second day of the module: oral presentation of a material artefact or a photograph of a ritual/festivity/artisanal practice related to a place in which students grew up and to which students are attached; explain to the class whether and why this artefact/practice is or is not part of heritage policies by the local community.

2nd/3rd week: Heritage communities between memory, oblivion and politics of memory

1. Crafting of memory within communities;
2. Material and immaterial heritage;
3. Selection of heritage and legitimisation of social groups within communities; elitarian and subaltern heritage;
4. Dissonant and difficult heritage within communities;
5. Anthropologists and communities: how can we share our research with communities?

Assignments for students:

1. Written analysis and comment of the reading: Di Michele, Andrea (2020). “Storicizzare in monumenti fascisti. Il caso di Bolzano.” GR/SR 29(2): 149-167;
2. Discussion with the other students in class about the reading.

3rd/4th week: Heritage between conservation and destruction

1. Conservation paradigm within heritage practices and paradoxes with other consumption and production practices within communities;
2. Cultural heritage and (natural/war) disasters;
3. Abandonment of urban districts and villages;
4. Anthropology of ruins;
5. Cultural heritage and iconoclasm;
6. Presentation of an ethnography of ruins and heritage practices in a district of New Taipei City, Taiwan.

Assignments for students:

1. Written analysis and comment of the readings: a) Vietti, Francesco (2019). “Turisti a Lampedusa. Note sul nesso tra mobilità e patrimonio nel Mediterraneo.” Archivio Antropologico Mediterraneo 21(1): 1-16; b) Calzana, Chiara (2022). “”È stata un’altra perdita per noi.” Il Cimitero delle Vittime del Vajont, materia di conflitto.” In Brivio, Alessandra e Claudia Mattalucci (a cura di). La materia per pensare la morte. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.
2. Discussion in class with other students about the readings.

4th/5th week: Heritage and decolonisation

1. Heritage of whom? Restitutions and deconstructions of colonial memories;
2. Imposition of the European concept of cultural heritage to non-European countries, in particular museums as colonial institutions;
3. Alternative cultural heritages in non-European countries that existed before colonialism;
4. Presentation of two case studies: the Tropenmuseum and the Buddhist museums in Taiwan.

Assignments for students:

1. Communication and finalisation of the group presentations (students should contact the reader since the end of the third week, proposing a theme and negotiating the literature necessary for the presentation, but the final decision will be communicated and shared with the rest of the class at the end of the fifth week);
2. Calendar of the presentations for the sixth week

6th week: students’ final presentations

Readings/Bibliography

Attending students must study the following material:

1. Readings that are assigned from the second to the fourth week of the module, on which students have to write a written report that they will discuss in class. Readings will be uploaded on the module’s virtual space and will be the following:
   • Di Michele, Andrea (2020). “Storicizzare in monumenti fascisti. Il caso di Bolzano.” GR/SR 29(2): 149-167. [for the theme on community and memory (dissonant heritage), 2nd-3rd week];
   • Vietti, Francesco (2019). “Turisti a Lampedusa. Note sul nesso tra mobilità e patrimonio nel Mediterraneo.” Archivio Antropologico Mediterraneo 21(1): 1-16. [for the themes on community and memory (dissonant heritage) and heritage, conservation and destruction (dark tourism), 3rd-4th week]
   • Calzana, Chiara (2022). “”È stata un’altra perdita per noi.” Il Cimitero delle Vittime del Vajont, materia di conflitto.” In Brivio, Alessandra e Claudia Mattalucci (a cura di). La materia per pensare la morte, pp. 107-133. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore. [for the themes on community and memory (dissonant heritage) and heritage, conservation and destruction (heritage and disasters)]

   In case international students hardly follow written Italian, they must consult as soon as possible the lecturer to adjust their skills to the class workflow with substitutive readings or other supporting material;

2. Additional readings for the group presentations on various themes related to the decolonization of heritage. Students must email the lecturer and/or book an appointment to prepare the literature for their presentations. Students must communicate their ideas to the lecturer from the third week until the end of the fourth week of the course;
3. Smith, Laura-Jane (2006). Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge, pp. 11-43 and pp. 87-114 (Chapters 1 and 3). This material will be part of the final oral examination of the course, and a digital copy will be uploaded to the virtual space of the module.

Non-attending students must study the following material:

1. Smith, Laura-Jane (2006). Uses of Heritage. Londra: Routledge, pp. 11-114 and pp. 276-308 (Chapters 1, 2, 3 and 8).
2. (for the slide presentation) one ethnographic monograph chosen from this list:

• Herzfeld, Michael (2021). Sfrattati dall’eternità. La ristrutturazione neoliberista a Roma. Milano: Meltemi.
• Palumbo, Berardino (2006). L’UNESCO e il campanile. Antropologia, politica e beni culturali. Milano: Meltemi.
• Lusini, Valentina (2004). Gli oggetti etnografici tra arte e storia l'immaginario postcoloniale e il progetto del Musée du quai Branly a Parigi. Torino: L’Harmattan Italia.

Suppose students may have a case study that is particularly relevant to their studies and is analysed within an ethnographic monograph or a critical heritage studies monograph similar in length and complexity to the three listed. In that case, they can email the lecturer, who will approve students’ choices or guide them towards more suitable work.

For Erasmus students, the lecturer can accept English work or translations of the monographs/readings listed: Herzfeld’s monograph, for instance, is originally written in English. In this case, students must email the lecturer at the beginning of the module and/or book an appointment to discuss this issue.

Teaching methods

The lecturer condenses frontal lectures and seminars with students’ discussions and group work. To what concerns frontal lectures and seminars, the lecturer:

1. Explains the theoretical-critical contents necessary for guiding students along the scholarly debates in the field of anthropology and critical heritage studies, as well as supporting and supervising students’ class work;
2. Briefly presents her ethnographic research as a practical application of theory;
3. Uses movies, documentaries or vocal registrations (i.e. podcasts) to make the theory more concrete;
4. Invites researchers to present their research in the field and according to the main themes of the course (the effective presence of scholars and the calendar of their presentation is to be confirmed).

To what concerns students’ work groups and discussions, students must write a report (1 o 2-page long) for each reading assigned from the second to the fourth week. They must email it to the lecturer (who will establish the deadlines by the 2nd day of the lesson and communicate them to students along with the editorial instructions, uploaded on the virtual space of the module). Students’ reports will be discussed in class afterwards, nurturing a debate on the different views expressed and the possibility of applying the reflection to other case studies encountered along the BA’s courses. It is still to be confirmed the possibility of a visit to an ethnographic museum in the region Emilia-Romagna (because of logistic, bureaucratic and financial reasons).

During the last week of the course, students must give a group presentation (at least three people per group) of around 15 minutes on the decolonization of heritage. Presentations, for instance, can focus on the restitution of ethnographic collections to source communities, decolonization of academic/heritage knowledge, decolonization of permanent collections through art installations, artworks dealing with racial discrimination, migrations, international adoptions, etc.

Assessment methods

Students’ attendance and active lecture participation are highly recommended, given the didactic methodology adopted. A student is considered an attending student if he has followed at least the 70% of the lectures. The lecturer will distribute a list for students to sign at the beginning of each lesson.

By active participants, the lecturer means students who:

1. Participate in the collective debate on the readings without being guided by the lecturer’s questions or inputs, posing questions and commenting on the reading material.
2. Comment upon the lectures’ contents (through 5-minute comments/questions at the beginning and end of each lecture or when the lecturer asks questions).
3. Propose a theme that the course can address and that is related to their studies.

During the group presentations, the lecturer will evaluate the contents, the level of reflexivity and the collaboration between students in each group.

The final evaluation of attending students, therefore, will be based on the following activities, which have the following weight on the final mark itself:

1. Weekly report on the readings [written by each student], 25%
2. Active participation in the lectures, 10%
3. Group presentation in the last week (15/20-minute presentation on a chosen topic related to the theme of decolonization; see the section on didactic methodologies), 30%
4. Final oral exams, where students will discuss with the lecturer their progress and work produced throughout the module and will be examined on some theoric themes contained in the bibliography, 35%

For non-attending students, the final evaluation will focus on the following activities, which will have the following weight on the final mark:

1. Oral examination (15/20 minutes) on the theoretical framework offered by the first part of the bibliography, 50%
2. Oral presentation by using slides (15/20 minutes) on an ethnographic case study chosen from the second part of the bibliography, 50% Instructions for structuring the slide presentation will be uploaded on the virtual space of the module.

Students with disabilities or learning disorders (DSA) must read the section "Teaching tools" for further information.

The final evaluation will also follow the following criteria:

-insufficient: poor knowledge of basic concepts and incorrect analysis of sources and themes;

-sufficient: basic knowledge (18-22 score); correct interpretation of themes and sources but not independent and superficial;

-good (23-27): intermediate knowledge and correct interpretation of themes and sources, but not always precise and independent;

-excellent (28-30 with merit): advanced knowledge; independent and precise interpretation of sources and themes. Excellent oral or written interpretation.

Teaching tools

Pictures from the lecturer’s research; audiovisual material

 

Students who are affected by learning disability (DSA) and in need of special strategies to compensate it, are kindly requested to contact the teacher, in order to be referred to the colleagues in charge and get proper advice and instructions.

Office hours

See the website of Valentina Gamberi