View
3
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
Diaspora,AuthenticityandtheImaginedPast
*Dr.DerekBryce.
DepartmentofMarketing
StrathclydeBusinessSchool
UniversityofStrathclyde
199CathedralStreet
Glasgow
Scotland,U.K.
G40QU
Email:derek.bryce@strath.ac.uk
Telephone+44(0)1415536177
Dr.MatthewAlexander.DepartmentofMarketing,UniversityofStrathclyde.
Dr.SamanthaMurdy.DepartmentofMarketing,UniversityofStrathclyde.
*CorrespondingAuthor.
2
ABSTRACT
AncestraltourisminScotland,asectoroftheheritagetourismmarketsensitive
toconsumerpersonalisation,hasparticularpropensitiestowardsprocess-driven
co-createdexperiences.Theseexperiencesoccurwithinexistingcategoriesof
object-basedandexistentialnotionsofauthenticityalongsideanemergent
categoryofthe‘authenticallyimaginedpast’.Thelatterofthesemodesrevealsa
complexinterplaybetweenprofessionallyendorsedvalidationoftheempirical
veracityofobjects,documentsandplacesandthedeeplyheld,authentically
imagined,narrativesof‘home’.Thesenarratives,builtupintheDiasporaover
centuries,drivenewprocessestowardsauthenticityintourism.Weconducted
31re-enactmentinterviewsacross27sitesthroughoutScotlandwithcurators,
archivists,andvolunteerstoexplorethesenotionsofauthenticitywithinthe
ancestraltourismcontext.
Keywords:Diaspora;Heritage;Co-creation;Museums;Ancestry;Scotland
3
INTRODUCTION
AncestraltourismhasbeenidentifiedasakeyareaofgrowthbyScotland’s
NationalTourismOrganisation,VisitScotland,withamarketintheScottish
Diasporaestimatedat50millionpeopleincountriessuchasCanada,theUSA,
AustraliaandNewZealand(VisitScotland,2013).Thispaperrevealshow
ancestraltouristsappearnottoseekauthenticationofthisformofheritage
consumptioninaconventionalsenseofindirectprofessionalassurance,butseek
confirmationoflongstandingancestralnarratives(realandimagined),
developedintheDiasporaitself.Asaresult,touristsseektoproduce
authenticationthroughco-creation,withdirectstaffcontact,participatory
interpretation,andcontributionofandtoarchivalandobject-basedrecords.
Thispresentsheritagepractitionerswithdirect,focused,andpotentiallyrich,
mutuallyproductiveencounterswithtourists,yetalsopresentsethical
challengeswheninterveningtodisproveormodifyoftendeeplyheld,but
empiricallydubious,notionsofpersonal‘imaginedpasts’.
Conceptualdebateson‘authenticity’inthetourismliteraturehavebeenpresent
sinceitsintroductiontothetourismlexiconintheearly1970s(seeMacCannell,
1973).Inparticular,abodyofworkfocussesonauthenticityasaprocess,
negotiated(orrenegotiated)betweenatouristsiteanditsvisitors(Bruner,
1994;Cohen&Cohen,2012;Frisvoll,2013;Daugstad&Kirchengast,2013;Wall
&Xie,2005).Thiscomplexprocessoftentakesplacearoundsitesofstaged
authenticity(e.g.Daugstad&Kirchengast,2013;Frisvoll,2013)andis
increasinglyviewedasaparticipatory,orco-createdprocess(seeCohen&
Cohen,2012).Inparticular,wefocushereonthespecificityofhistorical
relationshipsbetweenzonesofsupplyanddemandthatproducetourists’
notionsof‘authenticity’,sometimesintensionwiththoseheldbyheritage
practitionersinthedestinationitself.Whilenotionslinkingreligiouspilgrimage
andauthenticityamongtouristsarerelatedtoourcontext(Andriotis,2011;
Belhassan,Caton&Stewart,2008),thesearelargelydeterminedbyadherenceto
particularcreedsandinstitutions.Itisarguedthatexperiencesdemandedbythe
4
ancestralsectoroftheheritagemarketoftenrequireintimate,placebound,
origin-basedlevelsofpersonalinteractionwithpractitioners.Theresultofan
increaseddesireforparticularformsof‘authentic’verificationcaneither
reinforceandreproducethecurator/archivistasguarantorofauthenticationor,
inoneimportantsense,disruptit.Assuch,theresearchquestionunderpinning
thisstudyis:doestheintimateengagementbetweenthediasporicmarketand
theheritagesectorattheancestraldestinationproduceexistingandemergent
formsofauthentication?
Thecontestednotionof‘authenticity’asdesired,imagined,performed,
experiencedandconsumedthroughculturalheritagetourismiswellrehearsed
intheliterature(seeBryce,Curran,O’Gorman&Taheri,2015;Cohen,2004;
Lugosi,2016;MacCannell,1999;Salazar,2012;Shackley,1994).Analysishas
beenbroughttobearonheritageprofessionalsasactivists,re-framersand‘re-
authenticators’ofhistory(seeBarker,1999;Bryce&Carnegie,2013;Hein,
2000).
Discussionbeginswithanexaminationofchangingprofessionaldiscourseat
heritagesiteswheremuchancestraltourismisconsumed.Areviewofthe
specificimplicationsoftourismonprofessionalheritagepracticeisundertaken,
aswellasofthenotionof‘authenticity’asafunctionofmarketdemand.The
specificcontextualbackgroundofancestraltourism,nostalgiaandtheimagined-
pastisthenofferedalongsidesomenecessaryhistoricalbackgroundonScotland
andtheScottishDiaspora’sexperienceofemigrationandreturn.Ourdatais
drawnfromaqualitativestudyofancestraltourismdeliveryat27sitesacross
Scotland,pre-identifiedaslocifortheancestraltourismmarketthroughprior
correspondencewithstaff.Analysisisframedontwoexistingthemesidentified
intheliterature,object-basedandexistentialauthenticities,andathirdemergent
theme,theauthenticallyimaginedpast,leadingustoimplicationsofourresearch
forheritagetourismingeneral.
5
ChangingInstitutionalDiscourse,HeritageTourismandtheDesirefor
Authentication
Museums,archivecentresandsiteswhereheritageisconsumedaretraditionally
framed,ascommunitiesofculturalpractice(Wenger,2000).Professionalstaff
seetheirprimaryroleascustodiansandenablersofconservation(Delafons,
1997).They,andtheparticularrepresentationalandinterpretivepraxesthey
adopt,arehistoricallymobilemanifestationsofsocietalchange(Barker,1999;
Hein,2000).Staffareunderpressuretodevelopadaptivestrategiestoincreasing
demandsforindependentrevenuegeneration.However,theyarestillembedded
withinnationalandlocalcontextswhichoftenunderwritetheircoreappealas
repositoriesoffavouredversionsofpastandcurrentvalues(Barr,2005;
Hetherington,2000;Radakrishnan,1994).Collections,therefore,becomevisual
signs‘colonized’bybothtouristandcuratorialgazes(Claessen&Howes,2006:
200),modifiedaroundtheprofessionallylegitimateddiscourseofcuratorsand
archivistsor‘triggering’lessempiricallyinformedideasandimagesfortourists
(Jordanova,1989:23).
Museumsareconsidered“premierattractions”,oftenforminganetworkorlocus
forhowdestinationsareconceived,representedandconsumedinheritageterms
(Kirshenblatt-Gimblett,1998:132).Concernsexistthatthemeaningoftextsand
objectsmaybedecontextualizeddue to thehistoricaldistanceof tourists from
particular events and the commodifying effects of tourism (Pollock & Sharp,
2007).
Intourism,authenticityoftenfunctionsasafixedconcept(Hall,2007)imposing
“aone-dimensionalinterpretation,supportedbyassessmentcriteria”(King,
2007:1143).Ifconsideringauthenticityasenhancingmeasurementsof‘tourist
satisfaction’(Shackley,1994:397)tosupport‘benignlyself-serving’tourist
understandingsof‘theauthentic’(Horne,1986:223-224),thenitisunlikelyto
yieldmuchbeyondmanagerialreductionism.
6
Therefore,Bell(1996:132-133)wonderswhetheronecan“knowifan
[aesthetic]experienceis‘authentic’–i.e.,whetheritistrueandthereforevalid
forallmen?”andtracesalate-modernshiftinthedefiningquality,from
‘authority’vestedin‘masteryofcraft…andknowledgeofform’to‘immediacy’of
intentandreception.ToSlater(1997:94-95)thesearchforauthenticity
constitutes‘scrutinising’people,objectsandaestheticformfora‘consistency’
whichisoftenconfusedwith‘sincerity’.Thisisnearimpossibleinafragmented
socialworldofpluralisticrepresentationandreceptionforandbymultiple
‘audiences’(ibid).Thisinvitesrecognitionofthemanymodesinwhichsubjects
are‘interpellated’inrelationtoobjectsinaplenitudeof‘authenticities’,
manifestedindispersedconsumerculture(Althusser,2008;Collins,1989).
Inacommercial/culturalnexusliketourismthevalorizationof‘authenticity’asa
sociallyformedobjectofdesire,hascrossedthe‘thresholdofformalization’
(Foucault,1989a)andbecomeadiscursive‘positivity’withmaterial
consequences(Shepherd,2011).Inthemovefromtheexperiential‘front’
(false/recreated)to‘back’(true/authentic)(MacCannell,1999),‘inauthentic’
experiences‘staged’inwholeorinpartfortouristconsumptionmay,through
habituationbecomeacceptedas‘authentic’(Cohen,2004;Ryan&Gu,2010),
acquiringpatinasof‘timelessness’(Trevor-Roper,1983).
Claimstoauthenticitycanrarelybeauthenticatedbytouriststhemselves,butare
oftenofferedthroughqualityassuranceofversionsoforiginalobjects,experience
andplaces(Asplett&Cooper,2000;McIntosh,2004;Swanson&Timothy,2012).
Importantly,inthesensethatFoucault(1988)understood‘power’bothas
deployerandproducerofapprovedformsof‘knowledge’,allsuchsecond-order
experiencesmustbe‘authenticated’byasourceperceivedbythemarkettobe
legitimate,i.e.havingarelationtotheoriginalreferent(Henderson,2000;Hsieh
&Chang,2006;Thomson&Tian,2008).
Meanwhile,‘self-connection’withbrands(Park,MacInnes,Priester,Eisingerrich
&Iacobucci,2010),canbeprojectedontoentiredestinationculturesand
experiencesandbeadeterminantoftouristsatisfaction(deRojas&Camarero,
7
2008),hintingthatsometouristsmayhavedonemuchoftheworkof
authenticationinadvance,merelyrequiringthedestinationtoconfirmitina
‘customized’sense(Wang,2007).Severalauthorsnotethat,whilesites,
experiencesorobjectsmaybereproducedor‘staged’,rootedin‘provenance’but
‘mobile’intheirplaceofconsumptionorevenproduced‘creatively’bytourists
themselves,theymayyetevokean‘authentic’second-orderexistential
experience(Gonzalez,2008;Guttentag,2010;Richards&Wilson,2006;Wight&
Lennon,2007).
Theintimaterelationshipsbetweenancestraltouristsandthe‘home’destination
canmuddyconventionaldistinctionsbetween‘objective’and‘existential’modes
ofauthentication.Wang,(1999:351)conceivesofexistentialauthenticityin
both‘personalandinter-subjective’termsinrelationtoarangeofliminal
experiencesconsumedthroughtourism.The‘inter-personal’dimensionofthe
processofexistentialauthenticationthatWang(ibid:364)proposesasemerging
throughsharedtouristicexperiences,suchas‘familyties’and‘communitas’,are
independentoftheexistenceofthedestinationassuch.Wereconcilethiswith
ourowncontextualunderstandingofhowexistentialauthenticityisproduced
andconsumedbydrawingonSteiner’sandReisinger’s(2006:309)proposition
that,thehistoricallyinformedworldiscomprised,inHeidiggerianterms,bya
dyadofone’spersonal(‘heritage’)andcollective(‘destiny’)histories.Inthecase
ofancestraltourism,theobjectiveexistenceofthedestinationasanempirically
verifiableplaceof‘origins’actsasthecatalystbridgingthegapbetween
‘heritage/destiny’inwhichasenseofthe‘trueexistentialself’isrediscoveredin
collectiveterms.
Thismayfindexpressionintherelationshipbetweennotionsof‘objectbased’
and‘existential’authenticities(Kolar&Zabkar,2010),denotingintheformer
relianceonphysicalartifactsandassociationwiththeindividualorcollective
essentialsenseinthelatter.Thephysicalmobilityofculturalobjectsandtheir
historico-culturalmutabilityofreceptionhasledtopragmaticrecognitionof
oftenblurredlinesbetweenthesetwocategories,oratleasttheirlackofmutual
8
exclusivity(Bryceetal.,2015;Lau,2010;Reisinger&Steiner,2006;Rickley-
Boyd,2012).
Ancestraltourismandthe‘ImaginedPast’
Culturalheritageinthebroadestsenseisanarchiveofselectivestoriesthat
particularcultures,nationalitiesorreligions,choosetotellaboutthemselvesto
themselvesandothersor,asLowenthal(2011)andHobsbawmandRanger
(1983)argue,anactoffaithinhowpeopleinthepresentwishorimaginethe
pasttobe.Theincreasingself-conceptionoftourist-consumersasautonomous
subjects,oscillatingbetweenindividualandgroupidentitiesinrelationto
particularsitesisafunctionoflate-capitalistconsumer-culture(e.g.Baudrillard,
1998;Jameson,1991)andheightenedwhenan‘ancestral’stakeispresentor
‘imagined’inrelationtoparticulardestinationsandhistories.Salazar(2012:
865-870)hintsatthiswhenhestates,“anindividual’spropensitytoproduce
imaginingsistheprimaryfact[andthat]touristsareinvitedtoparticipateina
performancethatwillbringanimaginedpastbacktolife”.Severalauthorshave
frameddiscussionofthetourism‘imaginary’,myth-makingandtheconstruction
oftourist-subjectswithreferencetothe‘exotic’andthedesiretoconsume
‘difference’(e.g.Bryce,MacLaren&O’Gorman,2013;Echtner&Prasad,2003;
Salazar,2012).Intheancestralcontext,thecontextisnotsomuchdifferenceasa
felttensionbetweensubjectiveproximityandhistorico-spatialdistance
experiencedbyprofessionalpractitionersand,basedontheiraccounts,by
ancestraltouriststhemselves.
Thistensionis,ofcourse,alsorelatedtothenotionofnostalgiaandemotion
evokedbytourismsuppliersandexperiencedbytourismconsumers.Itmaybe
determinedbyproducinga‘preordained’discourseofplacethatis‘familiar’only
throughtextualreproduction.Frow(1991:125)identifiedthisreproductionas
“aformofknowledgethatcanberecognizedinandhasagreaterforcethanthe
appearancesoftheworld”orindeedthephysicalrealityofthedestinationitself.
Traveltoreengagewithindividualorgroupancestryisnotlimitedtothe
Scottishcontext,withmotivationstoreengagewithformer‘homelands’existing
9
invariousglobalDiasporas(Bandyopadhyay,2008;Jacobson,2002;Kwek,Wang
&Weaver,2014).McCainandRay(2003)note‘legacy’touristsasthosewitha
directculturalorancestralconnectionswithparticulardestinations.Their
motivationtovisitislikenedinheroicorquasi-religioustermstoa‘quest’or
‘crusade’byBasu(2005)whofavourstheterm‘rootstourism’.Otherauthors
identifythetransitionfromdesk-basedancestralresearchtorelatedtourist
consumptionas‘genealogytourism’(Santos&Yan,2010;Savolainen,1995;
Yakel,2004).Inthispaper,‘ancestraltourism’isadheredtoasasuperordinate
term,conceivedofasanembodiedoutcomeofsubjectivelyfeltnostalgiaand
longingfora‘homeland’spatiallyandtemporallyatremovefromDiaspora
communities(referencewithheld).
‘Highlandisation’;inventedtraditionandthe‘authentically’imaginedpast
Rememberingone’sculturalheritageornationalrootsisanoften-febrilemixture
ofthesearchforhistoricalverisimilitudeandwishfulthinking,andisarelatively
recenthistoricalphenomenonemergingfromtheEuropeanEnlightenmentand
‘Modernity’(Anderson,2006;Mee,2007;Rigney,2001;Smith,2008).Scotlandis
asmallNorthernEuropeannationofc.5millioninhabitantsandwasoneof
Europe’soldestindependentstatespriortoitsunionwithEnglandin1707.
Scotlandmaintainsandprojectspowerfulheritagesignifiers,evokingimagesofa
‘timeless’Celticculture,rootedtotheland(McCrone,Morris&Kiely,1995).
TheopportunitiesofferedbyBritain’sexpandingcolonialempireandeconomic
shiftsintheHighlands1providedthenecessaryconditionsforlarge-scale
emigrationfromScotlandfromthelate18thtomid-20thcenturies.Around
60,000Lowlandersbetween1701and1780,and10,000Highlandersbetween
1768and1775,leftScotlandlargelyforBritishNorthAmerica(laterCanada)
andthenascentUnitedStates(Whatley,2000).Whatley(2000:254)argues,“as
thepeoplesoftheHighlandsandIslands…sufferedthedeepestsenseoflossof
place,thecultofHighlandismandnostalgiaforanolderandnoblewayofGaelic
lifewereintheascendant”.Thiswasfollowedby,largelyfromtheindustrial,
1Broadlyunderstoodastheareaabovethegeological‘highlandfaultline’whichseparatesthemorepopulousandindustrialcentralbeltandmoreremotenorthernpartsofScotland
10
urbanLowlandsandprincipallytoCanada,theUSA,AustraliaandNewZealand,
theemigrationof1.84millioneconomicmigrantsbetween1825and1914
(Cameron,2002;Morton,2010).
YetitistheGaelic,Highlandculture,longmarginalizedundersuccessiveScottish
andthenBritishgovernments(Lynch,1992)thathascometoserveasa
synecdocheforthewholeofScotlandinthepopularimagination(Duffield&
Long,1981;Inglis&Holmes,2003;McCroneetal.,1995).Thisdiscourseof
‘Scottishness’wasproducedbytheconvergenceofseveraleventsinwider
Britishcultural,politicalandeconomiclifeinthelate18thandearly-mid19th
centuries.Theseinclude:repealsonlawssuppressingGaeliclanguageand
culture;thegrowingpopularityofScottishliteraturesuchasSirWalterScott’s
novelsandpoetry(whichpresentaromanticisedversionofScotlandandwhich
soldintheirtensofthousands)andtheOssiantext(acycleofepicpoemsof
contestedGaelicprovenance,publishedbythepoetJamesMacpherson)aswell
asGeorgeIV’sprogressthroughhisnorthernkingdominersatz‘Highland’dress
(Trevor-Roper,1983).Therefore,adepopulatedScotland-as-Highlandromantic
‘wilderness’emergedasoneoftheindustrializedworld’sfirstpopulartourist
destinations(Morgan,2001).Subsequently,markersofidentityintheformofSt.
AndrewsSocieties,CaledonianClubs,andSonsandDaughtersofScotland,for
example,wereestablishedbytheDiasporainNorthAmericaandAustralasia
(Morton,2010).
ItisimportanttodistinguishbetweenScotswhostayedathomeandthosewho
Morton(2012:248)calls“ourextendedselves:[people]borninScotland,second
orlatergenerationScotsoraffinityScots”.These‘other’Scotscametoembrace
multiple,overlappingidentitiesinwhichasenseof‘Scottishness’bynomeans
supersededtheiroftenprimaryidentificationasCanadian,American,Australian
orNewZealander(Devine,2011).Itisperhapsmoreusefultolookuponthisas
anentirelynewculturallyinformedsubjectivitythatcertainlyreferstoanidea
called‘Scotland’asasignifierof‘roots’,yetconstructedinquitedistinctiveways
indiasporacommunitiesbecauseoftemporalandspatialseparationfrom
Scotlanditself.These‘otherScotlands’(onemighttransposeanyancestral
11
destinationhere)wereproducedovercenturiesofcollectiveexperienceof
separationandmemoryof‘home’bysustainedculturalproductionineventslike
HighlandGames,Clansocietymembershipandthewearingofversionsof
‘Highland’dress.
Theseembodied(re)productionsof‘Scotland’areinfluencedbythewider
cultures(Canadian,Australianandsoforth)inwhichtheyareembeddedand
mayseemstrange,naïve,orevenfaintlyamusingtoScots-in-Scotland
themselves.Suchabstract,extra-territorialversionsofScottishculturemaymore
correctlybedescribedastheauthenticculturalproductionof‘Scotland-as-
Produced-in-Diaspora’.These,wewillargueinthethirdsectionofthefollowing
analysis,aredirectlyconfrontingandnegotiatingwithactualScotlandthrough
theancestraltourismmarket.Such‘other’Scotlands,whichmayindeedbe
‘inauthentic’inthesensethattheirempiricalrelationtomuchScotshistoryand
presentdayculturemaybetenuous,arenonethelesstheproductsofcenturiesof
authenticliveddiasporicculturalexperienceinwhichanideaofScotlandisa
coresignifierandstimulantofreturn.
METHODS
Giventheinterdisciplinarynatureofastudylikethis,informedbyTourism
Studies,Marketing,aswellasHistoryandCulturalStudies,weacceptDarbellay
andStock’s(2012:453)contentionthattheseareasare“seenascomplementary
[andrequire]organisedcoordinationwithinaresearchprocess”.Therefore,itis
informedbyanintegrationofmethodologicalandcontextuallyappliedsources.
Givenourfocusonthechangingdiscoursesunderpinningcuratorialroles,and
theincreaseddesireforauthenticationwhichmightimpactuponthem,wechose
tofocusourstudysolelyonprovidersofancestraltourism.Weundertooka
sequenceof31semi-structuredinterviewswithheritageprofessionalsand
volunteersdesignedtoelicitparticularlyvividrecollectionsofmemoriesand
experiencesat27national,civicandlocalmuseums,heritagecentresand
archivesacrossScotland(seefigure1).Throughpriorcontactitwasdetermined
12
theselocationsdealtwithancestraltouristsdirectlyorbyenquiryonaregular
basis.Practitionerswereinvitedtoreproduceencounterswithtourists,where
theirownretellingformedtheobjectofourdata(Carlsson,Dahlberg,Lutzen&
Lystrom,2004;Varman&Belk,2009).Althoughtheexperienceofpractitioners
wasourmainfocus,theirtellingallowedustogivesomeconsiderationtothe
experiencesofvisitorsthroughtheproviderassurrogate.The‘serendipitous
encounter’(Foster&Ford,2003)withpotentiallyfruitfuldatauponwhich
theorymightbebuilt,thereafterformedtheprinciplefocusforthispaper.
---
InsertFigure1here
---
TounderstandtheconstructionofmeaningwefollowWeber’snotionof
‘verstehen’,conceivingofrealityasasocialconstructmademanifestbythe
particularmeaningssubjectsattachtoit(Tucker,1965).Thatis,totraceand
reconcilepractitionernotionsoftheirresponsibilitytoempiricallyinformed
interpretationandtheiraccountsoftourists’demandtoco-authenticatetheir
experience.WerefinethisapproachbydrawingonGeertz’s(1973)notionof
‘thickdescription’,arguingthatinordertobuildtheory,onemustnotsimply
codifyconceptualregularities,butalsoaccountforinsightsprovidedbythe
language,philosophy,andsocio-culturalsettingswhichconstructandcreate
meaninginparticulartemporalandspatialcontexts.‘Thickdescription’s’
applicationdependeduponacceptingviewsarticulatedbyresearchparticipants
inordertounderstandbroaderculturalandprofessionalsituations‘astheyare’:
momentsofhistoricalcontingency(Reisinger&Steiner,2005).
Analysis is based on illustrative quotes from our research sites and organised
around two existing (object based and existential authentication) and one
emergent (of the ‘authentically’ imaginedpast) themes.Foucauldiannotionsof
discourse and subjectivity are used, not so much as a ‘method’, but as a
particularsetofattitudes towardsthedata.It isnecessarytotakea ‘historicist’
approach in theFoucauldian sense,which seeks to conceiveof ‘thenow’ as an
artefactofahistoryabouttobewritten.Foucault’s(1989a:182)archaeological
13
metaphor invites analysis based on lateral and oblique relations among
discursiveobjectswithinwhichweventuretoconceiveofaslayersofhistorical
‘sediment’ (Foucault, 1989a). Furthermore, as Rouse (1994: 93) explains, the
emphasis of this Foucauldian approach is not intrinsically on the empirical
veracity of particular statements and the bodies of knowledge to which they
adhere, but the “epistemic context within which those bodies of knowledge
becameintelligibleandauthoritative”.
Thisapproachnecessarilyleadsustoanalyseourdataasthearticulationofboth
practitioners’andtourists’encounterswiththeirownsubjectpositionsasevents
filtered through and made possible by the particular historical conditions
necessitating emigration and contemporary cultural and economic
circumstances enabling return. In other words, the notion of existentialism,
insofarasitisunderstoodtodenotethequestforauthenticitybytheindividual
subject amidst the dislocation ofmodernity, are present in all threemodes of
authenticationwediscussbelow.Yet,whileacknowledgingthisdesire,wereturn
tothenotionthatnoneofitsformscanbeconceivedoforarticulatedthrough,in
this case ancestral tourism consumption, exclusively via one’s autonomous
engagement with one’s historical position but rather the superordinate ‘final
vocabulary’ which make such self-conception and the quest for ancestral
discoverypossible(Hacking,2004:282-283;Rorty,1989:73).
14
RESULTS:PRACTITIONERDISCOURSESANDANCESTRALTOURISTS
“Somefolkcomewiththeknowledgealready…somehavenotgotaclue
why[theirancestors]hadleft…some…thinkitwasworseherethanwhat
itreallywas…youareforcedtoexplaintheeconomicsituationtothem…
thenumberofpeopleinafamily…theydidn’tallstayathomeandeven
todaythatdoesn’thappensowhyshouldithavehappenedbefore?Alotof
peoplecomewitharomanticviewofwhatlifewaslikewhen[their
ancestors]werelivinghereandwhytheyleft”(Meg,DunbeathHeritage
Centre).
Thisstatementcrystallizesthecomplexdiscursivefieldpractitionersnegotiate
containing,asitdoes,theseedsofoursubsequenttripartitecategorizationof
statements.Megfirstexpressestourists’objectbasedneedforauthenticationor
‘toauthenticate’;theirexistentialsenseofverifiablelinksbetweenselfandplace
andthentheiroftenauthenticallyfeltadherencetoanimaginedpast.
‘TheyareVeryScientific’:objectivelyauthenticatedexperience
Itmustbereemphasizedthatmanyancestraltouristsdonotseekapassive
experience,butratheraparticipatoryonesupportingtheirownobject-based
research.Thisleadstospecificassociationswithlocalityandengagement,
allowingtouriststocontributetotheproductionofauthentication.Thus,
professionalstaff,oftentraditionallysituatedatsomeremove(Delafons,1997),
areplacedinintimateproximitywithtourists.Forexample,Martinatthe
GlasgowMuseumsResourceCentre,observedthat:
“Someofitisvery,veryspecific,Iamlookingforthisparticularobjectwith
thisnumber,Iknowthatyouhaveit,canIseeit,theyhaveobviouslydone
theirresearchbeforehandandknowspecificallywhattheyarecomingfor”.
Reinforcingthisnotionofpre-authenticationbroughtbytouristsandthe
expectationofprofessionalsupport,MichelleatTarbatDiscoveryCentrestated
that:
15
“Ifindthepeoplewhodocomeinwithageographicalknowledgeofthis
areahavetracedanddonealotofworkontheirfamilytreeandtheywill
knowthattherealinktosomebodyhere”.
Thesequotesindicateprofessionalreceptivenesstocollaboration.Indeed,
Michellealsoacknowledgedtheseriousintentunderpinningtourists’pre-visit
research:
“Theyareveryscientific…itisaveryseriousobjectivethatmanyofthem
have…peoplefromabroadhavedoneanawfullotofgroundworkbefore
theycomein…probablymoregroundworkthanpeoplehere”.
Thisisenhancedbythefactthatmostofthesitesnecessarytodeliverthe
spatiallyandgenealogicallyspecificnatureofancestraltourismdrawuponlocal
volunteerstosupplementandenhancetouristexperience.Gordonfrom
ApplecrossHeritageCentrerelated:
“Weareveryluckythatwehaveacoupleofvolunteersand…theyare
almostShenachies[traditionalGaelicoralhistorians]intheoldsense…
theyarepeoplewhocanlinkpeopleveryquicklyandtheyareonlyaphone
callaway”.
ThishintsatStylianou-Lambert’s(2011)notionofactive‘gazingfromhome’,
givenconsiderableimpetusbyancestraltourists’desiretounifythisgazewith
thereciprocalgazeof‘home’.Thishappensnotinsequentialterms,butinakind
of‘knittingtogether’ofobjectsanddocumentspreviouslyseparatedtemporally
andspatially.Theverypersonalandlocallyspecificnatureofthisformof
heritageencounterseemstodemandinvolvementandco-creationofexperience
betweentouristandprofessional(Cabiddu,Lui&Piccoli,2013).
Otheraccountsindicatedfrustrationwithancestraltourists,notbecauseofalack
ofwillingnesstodealdirectlywiththem,butbecauseofunpreparednessto
16
engagemeaningfullyindirectcollaboration.Forexample,JulineattheHawick
HeritageHubexpressedfrustrationatlostopportunitiesforobject-based
authenticationwhentouristsarrivewithnaïveunderstandingsofthecapacities
available:
“Whenpeoplehavetoleavefortheirflightandexpecttodotheirentire
familyhistoryinashortperiodoftime…itisoftennotpossibleevenwhen
theydocomewithsomestarterinformation”.
Otherparticipantsexpressedactivewillingnesstosalvagethis,offeringsome
potentiallyusefuladvice;evenifitmaylacksomeoftheobjectiveassurancethat
mightotherwisehavebeenprovided.JacquiatTimespaninHelmsdalestated:
“Ifsomebodycomesandsays,“Iamjusthereforanhour,Iamtravellingup
north,Idon’thavemuchinformation”,therealisticansweristhatIcan’t
reallyhelpyou…but…wetrytofindoutwhatwecanquicklyandgivea
vagueideaofwhatit[familyhistory]mightbeandif[Iam]90%suretheir
ancestorswereinvolvedintheClearances,wecangivethewhole
‘ClearancesExperience’”.
Whatthisindicatesontheonehandisthattheactiveparticipationoftouristsin,
asmuchaspracticable,‘pre-authenticating’whotheirancestorswere,where
theycamefrom,whenandwhytheyleftisexpectedandrequiredbyheritage
practitionersinordertofullyengageprofessionally.Ontheotherhand,thereisa
sensethatthedrivetooptimizetourists’experienceasconsumersmaypush
practitionerstoeitherofferthemaversionofwhatmightbeuseful,ortorush
throughanexercise,whichwould,ideally,benefitfrommoretimeandfocus.This
ledustoreflectonthesignificanceofBaudrillard’s(1998:151-152)notionof
‘freetime’.Inthisconceptualisation,supposed‘free’timeneedstobepurchased
inordertobeconsumed.Theseencounterssuggestthatitisnotsimplytourists
asconsumerswhoaresubjecttothistension,butheritagepractitioners
themselves,increasinglyawareofandsubjecttooftenethicallydisfiguring
17
pressurestomodifyestablishedprofessionalpractiseforcommercialneed
(Pollock&Sharp,2007).
‘Thereisn’tanArtefactforEveryFamilybutHopefullythereisSomething’:
existentiallyauthenticatedexperience
Oftenlessformalauthentication,intheformofreproducedversionsofplace,ofa
widerandloosersenseofconnectionwithculturalheritageissought(Bryceet
al.,2015;Ryan&Gu,2010).Yetitwouldbesimplistictoclaimanabsolute
boundarybetweenthesetheorizedformsinpractitioners’experienceofdealing
withancestraltourists.Instead,wenoteda‘transition’betweenthetwo,typified,
forexamplebyKateyattheNationalTrustforScotland(NTS)Culloden
BattlefieldVisitorCentre:
“YougetthegroupwhoidentifywiththeideaofCullodenandwanttofind
outwheretheirfamilywouldhavestoodatthebattlebasedontheirown
nameorperhapsevengrandparents’name”.
Hereweseethemoreabstractidentificationwithideasofplacesandeventswith
whichtouristsmayidentify,suchassharingasurnamewithsomeoneinthe
battle.Yetthisexperienceisproducedbyprofessionalreassuranceata
reconstructedheritagesite.Suchasearchforexistentialauthenticationmaybe
weightedtowardspartialnotionsofancestralconnection;disregardingthe
complexityoftheeventsthesitemightrepresent(Horne,1986;Pollock&Sharp,
2007).Thisprovokeschallengestocuratorschargedwithproducingafull
historicalinterpretation.Thesemaylikelybeabsorbedanddivertedsomewhat
orintotalbylargenationalorcivicorganisationslikeNTSandNational
MuseumsofScotland(NMS)withoutwardfacing,publicremits,whereDavid
(NMS)statedfirmly:
“Wemakeitclear…thatwereallycan’tanswergenealogicalenquiriesand
so[ancestraltourists]seemtoknowthat.Wecanshowthemthebroader
narrative,thebroadercontextfortheirancestors,thewaytheylived,
workedanddied”.
18
Hereweseethetraditionaldistancebetweencuratorandtouristmaintainedin
nationalinstitutions.However,muchofourresearchtookustosmaller,
communitybasedmuseumsandheritagesiteswherecuratorial,guiding,
managerialandevenretailingresponsibilitieswereconflatedbecauseofboth
scaleandlackoffunding.Again,thismandatedaconsumer-facingroleinwhich
previouslyhierarchicaldivisionsmaydissolve.Onceagain,thedemandfor
‘authentication’asaprocess,inexistentialtermsthistime,presentsboth
opportunitiesandchallengesforstaff(Chhabra,2008).Forexample,one
participant(nameandinstitutionwithheld)related:
“…some[tourists]arenotevensuretheyareconnectedto[thearea],but
theyhaveafamilystorythattheyaremaybefromScotland”.
WhileRachelattheHighlandFolkMuseumrelatedencounterswhereancestral
touristsasked:
“…“haveyouheardofthisgraveyardorname?”…becauseGaelicnames
changesomuchsotheymighthaveanameanditjustdoesnotmean
anythingtothemandtheycannotfinditonamodernmapsotheyare
wonderingdoweknowwherethiswas”.
Onceagainprofessionalpracticeisadaptedtorespondtotheparticularneedsof
ancestraltouriststonotsimply‘gaze’atheritagebuttoseekactive
authenticationofconnection.Thiscanbestimulatedinpartbyopportunities
presentedbyobject-basedevidenceofonefamilytoconstructandauthenticate
wider‘existential’storiesofbelongingfortouristswithperhapslessdefined
connectionstoplace.AsGordonfromApplecrossHeritageCentrerelated:
“[Theywere]averysuccessfulfamilyintermsofacademiaandbusiness
hereinApplecrosswithdescendantsallovertheworld.Soyoucanallow
peoplewhomaybearenotdirectlyconnected…toseethesortof
importancethattheirancestorsmayhaveplaceduponeducationor
19
businesshereandwhatsortoflifepeoplehadhere100/120yearsago,so
thereisnotanartefactforeveryfamilybuthopefullythereissomething
whichindicateswhattheirfamilieslivedlike”.
Similarly,EwenatClanMacphersonMuseum,Newtonmore,sawthevaluein
‘compensating’ancestraltouristsforwhomobject-basedauthenticationwasnot
possiblewithasenseof‘existential’connection,inthiscase,toclanidentity:
“TheDiapsoracoverspeople,Macphersonpeople,whohavegoneoverseas
…somehavedoneprettywellandsomeofthemarequiteordinaryfolkbut
nevertheless,thereisstillarecordhereofwhereandhowtheirancestors
lived”.
ThiswouldseemtoreinforceKirshenblatt-Gimblett’s(1998)contentionthat
tourism’scommercializingeffectonmuseumsandmuseums’statusasprimary
markersofdestinations’heritageidentityaremutuallyreinforcingelements,
throughthepossibilitiesofuseandappropriation’ofthesamediscursive
formation(Foucault,1989a:201).
‘OurRoleistoBreakitGentlytoThem’:authenticatingthe‘imaginedpast’
Thethirdthemewasemergentand,potentially,themostchallengingfromthe
professionalperspectiveofourinterviewees.Itisthe‘authenticallyimagined
pasts’broughtbysomeancestraltouristsandprojecteduponthedestination.
Implicitinthequotepresentedbelow,istheideathatmigrationcreatesa
‘rupture’,betweenemigrantsandthosewhoremained,inexperienceofwhatthe
ancestralhomelandwasandis:
“Alotofpeoplecomewitharomanticviewofwhatlifewaslikewhen[their
ancestors]werelivinghereandwhytheyleft”(Meg,DunbeathHeritage
Centre).
Coevalinthisstatementistheideathatthe‘homeland’isproduced,reproduced
andexperiencedhistoricallyasmultipleversionsofthesameplace.If,as
20
Jacobson(2002:2)writes,“theweightofemigrantculturesperpetuallyenforced
interpretationsofthemove–asdepartureandabsence[withlosthomelands
occupying]aplaceintheimagination[inwhich]thebeleagueredpeoplesleft
behind…retainedacentralpositioninthemigrantsideologicalgeographies
(emphasisadded)”,thenwemustacceptthatspatialandtemporaldistancefrom
‘home’oftenleadstothereconstructionofversionsof‘home’elsewhere.Atthe
coreofmanysuchreproductionsof,inthiscase,Scotland-in-the-Diaspora,are
notionsthatancestorsmusthaveleftundertragiccircumstancesandacertain
‘romance’isoverlaidontalesofclearedcrofters,exiledJacobites,convicts
transportedtothecolonies,orlinkswithclannamesorplacesofheroicrepute.
MaggieatClanDonaldCentreobserved,
“…therearequitealotofpeoplewhocomewithquitealotofromantic
storiesthatyoujustfeelarenotright…andMacDonald’sdidn’tjustcome
fromSkye,sotheyhavemadethetriphereandyouarethinkingwell
actuallytheycamefromsomewhereelse…theyhavemadethistripacross
theAtlanticandtheyhavepickedthistourthatcomestoSkyebecausethat
iswheretheirancestorscomefrom,buttheydon’t”.
Thisindicatesaperceivedneedamongstprofessionalstoactdiplomaticallyin
thefaceofdubioushistoricalliteracywithoneeyeontheimportanceofthis
marketforthemaintenanceofScotland’sheritage.Forexample,Lyndaat
DumfriesFamilyHistoryCentrerelated,
“Recentlywehadatourist–IthinkfromCalifornia-andhewantedto
followhisKirkpatrickancestors.TheKirkpatrickswerealliesof[King
Robert]Bruce(d.1329)andoneofthemwasinvolvedhereinDumfriesin
anactualmurderofarival…andsowearrangedforallthebookshe
wantedwouldbedeliveredtohishotel…andweneversawhimuntilhe
cameinonhislastdaytoreturnthebooksandenthuseaboutallthehelphe
hadbeengiven”.
21
GiventhatreliableScottishParishrecordsoftendon’tstartmuchfurtherback
thanthemid-18thcenturyitisverydoubtfulthatthistouristwouldhavebeen
abletoestablishadirectancestrallinktothe14th.Incasessuchasthese,veracity
becomessecondarytothedesireofmanyancestraltouriststoinscribetheirown
imaginationofthepast,aswellastheirplaceinit,ontothedestinationasakind
ofinertcanvas.Similarly,KateyatCullodenBattlefieldVisitorCentrestated:
“Forsomepeople,asIhavesaid,itcanbeemotional,Imeanwehavehadin
thepastpeopleintearsandsoitisacomplexnegotiation.Wedoanawful
lotofmyth-bustinghere…peoplearepeopleandsometimesthedecisions
theymakehistoricallyarenotpalatabletooursortofworriesorethics
todayandunderstandingthatisokay”.
Theimaginedpastisnotsolelyconcernedwithconnectionstofamousfiguresor
battlesfromScottishhistorybutwithadesireamongstsomeancestraltourists
tolinkthemselvestotragediesvisitedonordinarypeople.MegatDunbeath
HeritageCentre,sensinga‘disappointment’amongstsometouriststhattheir
ancestorshadn’t‘sufferedenough’related:
“…folktendtothinktheClearancesidea[was]thateverybodywasburned
outoftheirhouses.Thisdefinitelydidoccurbutnoteverywhere…butfolk
willonlyreadabouttheplaceswherethatoccurredthereforetheyassume
thatithappenedtotheirpeopleaswell”.
Herewehaveinstancesoftouristslinkingthemselvesdirectlytosomeofthe
greatdramasoftheScottishpastinempiricallydubiousterms.Thiscertainly
maybelinkedwiththeforceofinternationalpopularcultureanditsabilityto
‘induce’tourismwithfilmslikeBraveheart,RobRoyandTVserieslikeOutlander
(e.g.Beeton,2006;O’Connor,Flanagan&Gilbert,2008).However,theway
diasporicScotshaveconstructedandreproduced‘home’inideologicalterms
overcenturies,asKnox(2006)pointsout,through‘Highlandised’notionsofa
romantic,martialpast,meansthatsuchnotionsof‘Scottishness’shouldnotbe
lightlydismissed.Whatwesensedfromourintervieweeswasapragmaticdesire
22
tohelpancestraltouristsseekingtoauthenticateanimaginedpastmakethebest
ofthings.Additionallywesensedthatcuratorialstaffwereawarethatancestral
touristsbringwiththem,notsimplyshallowsimplificationsand
misrepresentationsofthepastbutgenuinelyfeltidentificationwithstoriesof
place.Thesestorieshavecometooccupyakindofontologicalstabilityoften
resistanttoempiricalrefutation.Clearly,manyofourintervieweeshaveadapted
theirprofessionalstanceinaspragmatictermsasethicswillpermit.Gordonat
ApplecrossHeritageCentreobservedthat,
“Somepeoplearefinewithit…somepeoplearenothappyandsomepeople
arevery,veryunhappyandsomepeopleglossoverwhatyouaresayingand
justcarryonbelievingandthatkeepsthemhappyandkeepsushappyas
welliftheyleavewiththeirmoraleintactevenalthoughwehavetriedto
gentlygivethemthecorrectinformation”.
Here,weseenotsomuchadesireamongstprofessionalstohelpancestral
touriststoconsumeorco-createconnectionstoalosthomelandthroughobject-
basedorexistentialauthenticationbut,rathertonegotiatetheencounterofthe
‘authenticallyimagined’Scotlandwiththeexistingplaceandculture.Such
projectionsontothehistoricalandcontemporaryactualitiesof‘place’recallsthe
post-factoreconstructionandmodificationof‘reality’(Foucault,1989b)andthe
‘inventionoftradition’(Trevor-Roper,1983).Itisthetransformationofa
destinationintoalandoforiginsandancientprovenancebyandforthissection
ofancestraltourismdemand.Suchaconceptualisationdependsontheexistence
ofamarketwithhistoricallivedexperienceoftheideaofaspecificancestral
destination.
DISCUSSIONANDCONCLUSION
Thispaperapproachedandcontributedtotheliteratureon‘authenticity’,both
fromhistoricistandprocess-relatedperspectives.Itacceptedthevalueand
validityofthealreadywell-rehearsednotionsofobject-basedandexistential
23
authenticityandofsubsequentinterventionswhichdoubttheutilityofattempts
toarriveatabsoluteassuranceof‘theauthentic’inalargelycommercial,socially
subjectivespheresuchasTourism(Reisinger&Steiner,2006).However,it
interrogatedtheverynotionof‘authenticity’asanobjectofdesire,orwill-to-
knowledge,asahistoricallycontingent‘positivity’indiscourse(Foucault,1989b.
If,asFoucault(1981)argued,discourseisproductiveofknowledgeina
historicallymobilesenseandinstitutionsandinstitutionalpracticerespondand
adaptaccordingly,thenwecanconceiveof‘authentication’asa‘process’aswell
asa‘value’.
Usingextantliteratureandthedatagathered,ancestraltourismshowsparticular
characteristicsthatdistinguishitfromothervarietiesofheritageconsumption.
Theselieinthepersonalorcollectiveattachmentsandassociationsancestral
touristshavewiththedestinationasaplaceofmemory,returnandeven
‘belonging’.Thesecreateoftenmoreintimaterelationshipswiththedestination
thanperhapsthemoreabstractnotionsofconsumingplacethroughthedesire
for‘difference’or‘exoticescape’.Moreover,thefactthatversionsoflong-lost
‘homelands’aremaintained,reproducedandinevitablyadapted,overcenturies
intheScottishcase,withindiasporacommunitiesmeansthattherelationship
betweenancestraltouristandtheplaceofreturnareinevitablymorecomplex
thaninstandardheritagetourismmarkets.Theobjectofthisresearchwasto
exploretheparticularconsequencesofthismarket’sdesireforauthenticationof
theirlinkswitha‘homeland’,realorimagined,alongsidetheethicsandpractice
ofthoseprofessionalsandvolunteerschargedwithmaintainingtheintegrityof
nationalandregionalculturalheritage.Theseaccountsofpractitionersat
heritagesitesacrossScotlanddemonstratethatancestraltouristspre-
authenticatetheirclaimstobelongingwithintheplaceofreturninthreeways.
Thefirstisthroughtheobject-basedcontributiontotheprocessof
authenticationgiventheprovisionoffamilyrecordsorartefactsmaintainedin
thediasporaorpublicallyavailableonline,therebyenablingcollaborativeco-
creationofexperienceatheritagesites.Whilstresearchontheroletouristshave
inco-creatingexperiencesisnotnew(seeMossberg,2007),todateresearchhas
24
focussedmainlyonthetimeandeffortspentbytouristsbefore,duringandafter
vacationsandhowtheseresourcescontributetoperceptionsofexperiencevalue
(e.g.Prebensen&Foss,2010;Prebensen,Vittersø,&Dahl,2013).Ourresearch
revealsahighlypersonalisedformofco-createdexperience,whichisuniqueto
eachvisitor.Thesecondistheexistentialauthenticationproducedbytourists
andprofessionalswhereasenseofverifiablecollectivebelongingistheevident
outcome,butwherepotentiallyethicallyproblematicdrivesto‘compensate’
touristswhohavebeendisappointedbylackofmoreobject-basedassociations
wasalsoapparent.
Thethirdperhapsmostcloselyreflectsthediscursivedivergencebetween
‘Scotland’s’producedat‘home’andthoseinthediaspora.Hereweseean
empiricalexampleofCohenandCohen’s(2012)‘hot’authenticity,stokedinthe
inventedtraditionsandoriginmythsofthediaspora(Bruner,1994)clashing
withthe‘cool’authenticityofScotland’sheritagesector.Wecontributetoextant
literatureonprocessualauthenticityintourismbydrawingattentiontothe
pressurethatcanbeexperiencedbythose‘whoauthenticate’(Wall&Xie,2005).
Inourstudyproviderswerenotconcernedwithhowtostageanexperienceto
provideauthenticationofaplacewhichmeetstheperceivedneedsofparticular
touristsegments(Daugstad&Kirchengast,2013;Frisvoll,2013).Authentication,
inourresearchtakesplaceatagranularlevelaseachindividualtourist’sfamily
historyrequiresunpickingandreconstructedinsuchafashionthatprovides
somekindofsatisfactoryancestraltourismexperience.
Inrelationtothis,werevealthediverserangeofresponsesthatprovidershave
totheauthenticitynegotiationprocess.Someprovidersattempttocompensate
visitorswhoarrivewithlooseaffiliationstoScotlandbyofferingexistential
connectionswitharegion.Otherprovidersfeeldutyboundtoengagein‘myth
busting’withvisitorswhoseknowledgeoftheirancestralheritageisgenerated
throughpopularculture.Wethusobservetheprofoundsenseofresponsibility
feltbysomeproviderstowardstheirvisitorsandwhowishtoavoid
disappointingthem,evenifthismeantturningablindeyetowardsdubious
genealogicalresearch.
25
Thisneednot,however,beazerosumgameforpractitionerswhentheyattempt
totakeseriouslyimaginedpastsashistoricalartefactsthemselvesorasversions
ofidentitydevelopedelsewhere,ostensiblysharingtheecorereferentofthe
‘home’destination.Thereisscopeforpractitionerstorespondthroughthe
sensitivebusinessofworkingwiththissectionofthemarkettogentlysteer
touriststowardsthatwhichisempiricallyverifiablewhilstacknowledgingthe
historicalprovenanceof‘imagined’ancestralnarratives.Whatisvital,however,
istherecognitionthatallthreeoftheseproducedauthenticationsrequirethe
kindofintimate,empatheticcollaborationoftouristandpractitionerandthe
mutualidentificationwiththeaspirationtoauthenticexperience(existentialor
otherwise)of‘theother’calledforbyGnothandWang(2015)anddevelopedby
Tucker(2016).
Davies(2006:11)arguesthatourworldis‘alreadyhistoricized’–thatwe
understandandproducesocialrealityinhistoricalterms.Thecorollarytothisis
thatwemustunderstandthemodesbywhichsocietiesunderstandand
construct‘history’andsubsequentlyitssymbolicandselectivepoorrelation,
‘heritage’ashistoricallycontingentartefactsthemselves.Wehavereinforcedthe
pointthatthesymbolicallyandcommerciallyvitalnotionof‘authenticity’in
tourismandheritageand,byimplication,relatedspheresofconsumption,isa
meaninglesslyahistoricaltermwhennotunderstoodastheproductofthe
historicallymutableprocessofauthentication.
Wehavenotedaparticularlyheightenedexampleofthisheritageproductionin
theco-createdauthentication,inbothofthereceivedacademicconceptsof
object-basedandexistentialterms,ofancestraltourism.Thisproductionof
empiricallysoundlinkswiththepast,producedcollaborativelybyancestral
touristsandheritagepractitioners,hasparticularimplicationsforprofessional
practice.Opportunitiesclearlyexistforheritagesectorsinternationallytobridge
thegapbetweensubjectivebelongingandthetemporal/spatialdistance
betweendiasporasand‘homelands’.Yet,thereseemstobeanethicalcorollaryto
thisinwhichtheheritagesectorofthedestinationmayacknowledgeand
26
integratetheversionsof‘home’producedovertimeelsewhere.Herethesocial
andmanagerialimplicationsofourthird‘emergent’theme,the‘authentically
imaginedpast’presentthemselvesmostvividly:ifthe‘homeland’isimagined,
producedandconsumedintermsobliquetoorradicallydifferenttohowitis
livedathome,yetretainsthesamecoresignifier,thenwhataretheimplications
forprofessionalheritagepractice?Ourdataindicatesthatheritageprofessionals
arelivingthenegotiationsnecessarytoaccommodatethesetwoversionsof
‘home’intheirdailypracticeofproducing‘authenticity’forancestraltourists.
REFERENCES
Althusser,L.(2008).OnIdeology.London:Verso.
Anderson,B.(2006).ImaginedCommunities.London:Verso.
Andriotis,K.(2011).Genresofheritageauthenticity.Denotationsfroma
pilgrimagelandscape.AnnalsofTourismResearch,38(4),1613-1633.
Asplett,M.&Cooper,M.(2000).CulturalDesignsinNewZealandsouvenir
clothing:thequestionofauthenticity.TourismManagement,21(3),307-312.
Bandyopadhyay,R.(2008).Nostalgia,IdentityandTourism:Bollywoodinthe
IndianDiaspora.JournalofTourismandCulturalChange,6(2),79-100.
Barker,E.(1999).TheChangingMuseum.InE.Barker(Ed.),Contemporary
CulturesofDisplay(pp.23-25).London:OpenUniversityPress.
Barr,J.(2005).Dumbingdownintellectualculture.MuseumandSociety,3(2),98–
114.
27
Basu,P.(2005).Rootstourismasreturnmovement:semanticsandtheScottish
diaspora.InM.Harper(Ed.),Emigranthomecomings:thereturnmovementof
emigrants1600-2000(pp.131-150).Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.
Baudrillard,J.(1998).TheConsumerSociety:mythsandstructures.London:
Routledge.
Beeton,S.(2006).Understandingfilm-inducedtourism.TourismAnalysis,11(3),
181-188.
Belhassen,Y.,Caton,K.,&Stewart,W.P.(2008).Thesearchforauthenticityinthe
pilgrimexperience.AnnalsofTourismResearch,35(3),668-689.
Bell,D.(1996).TheCulturalContradictionsofCapitalism.NewYork:BasicBooks.
Bruner,E.M.(1994).AbrahamLincolnasauthenticreproduction:Acritiqueofpostmodernism.Americananthropologist,96(2),397-415.
Bryce,D.&Carnegie,E.(2013).Exhibitingthe‘Orient’:historicisingtheoryand
curatorialpracticeinUKmuseumsandgalleries.EnvironmentandPlanningA,
45(7),1734-1752.
Bryce,D.,Curran,R.,O’Gorman,K.,&Taheri,B.(2015).Visitors’Engagementand
Authenticity:Japaneseheritageconsumption.TourismManagement,46
(February),571-581.
Bryce, D., MacLaren, A., & O’Gorman, K. (2013). Historicising Consumption:
Orientalist expectations of theMiddle East. Consumption, Markets and Culture,
16(1),45-64.
Cabiddu,F.,Lui,T.-W.,&Piccoli,G.(2013).Managingvalueco-creationinthe
tourismindustry.AnnalsofTourismResearch,42(July),86-107.
28
Cameron,E.(2002).TheScottishHighlands.InT.Devine&R.Finlay(Eds.),
Scotlandinthe20thCentury(pp.153-169).Edinburgh:EdinburghUniversity
Press.
Carlsson,G.,Dahlberg,K.,Lutzen,K.,&Nystrom,M.(2004).Violentencountersin
psychiatriccare:aphenomenologicalstudyofembodiedcaringknowledge.
IssuesinMentalHealthNursing,25(2),191-217.
Chhabra,D.(2008).Positioningmuseumsonanauthenticitycontinuum.Annals
ofTourismResearch,35(2),427-447.
Claessen, C. & Howes, D. (2006). The Museum as Sensescape: Western
Sensibilities and Indigenous Artefacts. In E. Edwards, C. Gosden & B. Philips
(Eds.),SensibleObjects:Colonialism,MuseumsandMaterialCulture(pp.199-222).
Oxford:Berg.
Cohen,E.(2004).Authenticityandcommoditizationintourism.InE.Cohen(Ed.),
Contemporarytourism(pp.101–114).Amsterdam:Elsevier.
Cohen,E.&Cohen,S.(2012).Authentication:Hotandcool.AnnalsofTourismResearch,39(3),1295-1314.
Collins,J.(1989).UncommonCultures:popularculturesandpost-modernism.
London:Routledge.
Darbellay,F.&Stock,M.(2012).Tourismascomplexmultidisciplinaryresearch-
object.AnnalsofTourismResearch,39(1),441-458.
Daugstad,K.&Kirchengast,C.(2013).Authenticityandthepseudo-backstageofagri-tourism.AnnalsofTourismResearch,43(1),170-191.
29
Davies,M.(2006).Historics:whyHistorydominatescontemporarysociety.
London:Routledge.
Delafons,J.(1997).PoliticsandPreservation:apolicyhistoryofthebuiltheritage
1882-1996.London:E&FNSpon.
deRojas,C.&Camarero,C.(2008).Visitors’experience,moodandsatisfactionin
aheritagecontext:Evidencefromaninterpretationcenter.Tourism
Management,29(3),525-537.
Devine,T.(2011).TotheEndsoftheEarth:Scotland’sglobalDiaspora–1750-
2010.London:Penguin.
Duffield,B.&Long,J.(1981).TourismintheHighlandsandIslandsofScotland:
rewardsandconflict.AnnalsofTourismResearch,8(3),403-431.
Echtner,C.&Prasad,P.(2003).Thecontextofthirdworldtouristmarketing.
AnnalsofTourismResearch,30(3),660-682.
Foster,A.&Ford,N.(2003).Serendipityandinformationseeking:anempirical
study.JournalofDocumentation.59(3).321-340.
Foucalt,M.(1981).TheOrderofDiscourse.InR.Young(Ed.),UntyingtheText:a
post-structuralistreader(pp.48-78).London:Routledge&KeganPaul.
Foucault, M. (1988) Power, Knowledge: selected interviews and other writings.
1972-1977.NewYork:RandomHouse.
Foucault,M.(1989a).TheArchaeologyofKnowledge.London:Routledge.
Foucault,M.(1989b).TheOrderofThings.London:Routledge.
Samantha Murdy� 1/2/17 09:15Comment [1]: Nobintextbutthereisac?
30
Frisvoll,S.(2013).Conceptualisingauthenticationofruralness.Annalsoftourismresearch,43(2),272-296.
Frow,J.(1991).Tourismandthesemioticsofnostalgia.October,57(Summer
1991),123-151.
Geertz,C.(1973).TheInterpretationofCultures:selectedessays.NewYork:Basic
books.
Gnoth,J.&Wang,N.(2015).Authenticknowledgeandempathyintourism.
AnnalsofTourismResearch,50(2015),170-172.
Gonzalez,M.(2008).Intangibleheritagetourismandidentity.Tourism
Management,29(4),807-810.
Guttentag,D.(2010).Virtualreality:applicationsandimplicationsfortourism.
TourismManagement,31(5),637-651.
Hacking,I.(2004).BetweenMichelFoucaultandErvingGoffman.Economyand
Society,44(3),277-302.
Hall,C.M.(2007).ResponsetoYeomanetal:Thefakeryof‘Theauthentictourist’.
TourismManagement,28(4),1139-1140.
Hein,H.(2000).TheMuseuminTransition:aphilosophicalperspective.
Washington:SmithsonianInstitutionPress.
Henderson,J.(2000).AttractingtouriststoSingapore'sChinatown:acasestudy
inconservationandpromotion.TourismManagement,21(5),525-534.
Hetherington,K.(2000).NewAgeTravellers:vanloadsofuproarioushumanity.
London:Cassell.
31
Hobsbawm,E.&Ranger,T.eds.(1983).TheInventionofTradition.Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Horne,D.(1986).ThePublicCulture:thetriumphofindustrialism.London:Pluto
Press.
Hsieh,A.&Chang,J.(2006).ShoppingandTouristNightMarketsinTaiwan.
TourismManagement,27(1),138-145.
Inglis,D.&Holmes,M.(2003).Highlandotherhaunts:ghostsinScottish
Tourism.AnnalsofTourismResearch,30(1),50-63.
Jacobson,M.F.(2002).SpecialSorrows:theDiasporicimaginationofIrish,Polish
andJewishimmigrantsintheUnitedStates.Berkeley:UniversityofCalifornia
Press.
Jameson,F.(1991).Postmodernism:or,theculturallogicoflatecapitalism.
London:Verso.
Jordanova,L.(1989).ObjectsofKnowledge:AHistoricalPerspectiveon
Museums.InP.Verso(Ed.),TheNewMuseology.London:ReaktionBooks.
King,T.(2007).ResponsetoYeomanetal.:Competitiveadvantagethrough
‘‘authenticity’’:AnassessmentofScotland’stourismprospects.Tourism
Management,28(4),1141-1143.
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett,B.(1998).DestinationCulture:tourism,museumsand
heritage.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Knox,D.(2006).ThesacralizedlandscapesofGlencoe:frommassacretomass
tourism,andbackagain.InternationalJournalofTourismResearch,8(3),185-
197.
32
Kolar,T.&Zabkar,V.(2010).Aconsumer-basedmodelofauthenticity:An
oxymoronorthefoundationofculturalheritagemarketing?Tourism
Management,31(5),652-664.
Kwek,A.,Wang,Y.,&Weaver,D.(2014).RetailtoursforoverseasChinese:soft
powerorhardsell?AnnalsofTourismResearch,44(January),36-52.
Lau,R.(2010).Revisitingauthenticity:asocialrealistapproach.Annalsof
TourismResearch,37(2),478-498.
Lowenthal,D.(2011).TheHeritageCrusadeandtheSpoilsofHistory.Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Lugosi,P.(2016).Socio-technologicalauthentication,AnnalsofTourismResearch,
58(1),100-113.
Lynch,M.(1992).Scotland:anewhistory.London:Pimlico.
MacCannell,D.(1973).Stagedauthenticity:Arrangementsofsocialspacein
touristsettings.AmericanjournalofSociology,79(3),589-603.
MacCannell,D.(1999).TheTourist:anewtheoryoftheleisureclass.Berkeley:
UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
McCain,G.&Ray,N.M.(2003).Legacytourism:Thesearchforpersonalmeaning
inheritagetravel.TourismManagement,24(6),713-717.
McCrone,D.,Morris,A.,&Kiely,R.(1995).ScotlandtheBrand:themakingof
Scottishheritage.Edinburgh:EdinburghUniversityPress.
McIntosh,A.(2004).Tourists’appreciationofMaoricultureinNewZealand.
TourismManagement,25(1),1-15.
33
Mee,J.(2007).MillenarianvisionsandUtopianspeculations.InM.Fitzpatrick,P.
Jones,C.Knellwolf,&I.McCalman(Eds.),TheEnlightenmentWorld(pp.536-
550).Abingdon:Routledge.
Morgan,M.(2001).NationalIdentitiesandTravelinVictorianBritain.
Basingstoke:Palgrave.
Morton,G.(2010).Identityoutofplace.InT.Griffiths&G.Morton(Eds.),A
HistoryofEverydayLifeinScotland,1800to1900(pp.256-287).Edinburgh:
EdinburghUniversityPress.
Morton,G.(2012).OurselvesandOthers:Scotland1832-1914.Edinburgh:
EdinburghUniversityPress.
Mossberg,L.(2007).Amarketingapproachtothetouristexperience.
ScandinavianJournalofHospitalityandTourism,7(1),59-74.
O’Connor,N.,Flanagan,S.,&Gilbert,D.(2008).Theintegrationoffilm-induced
tourismanddestinationbrandinginYorkshire,UK.InternationalJournalof
TourismResearch,10(5),423-437.
Park,C.W.,MacInnis,D.J.,Priester,J.,Eisingerich,A.B.,&Iacobucci,D.(2010).
Brandattachmentandbrandattitudestrength:Conceptualandempirical
differentiationoftwocriticalbrandequitydrivers.JournalofMarketing,74(6),
1–17.
Pollock,V.&Sharp,J.(2007).Constellationsofidentity:place-ma(r)kingbeyond
heritage.EnvironmentandPlanningD:SocietyandSpace,25(6),1061-1078.
Prebensen,K.&Foss,L.(2010).Copingandco-creatingintouristexperiences.
InternationalJournalofTourismResearch,13(1),54-67.
34
Prebensen,K.,Vittersø,J.,&Dahl,T.I.(2013).Valueco-creationsignificanceof
touristresources.AnnalsofTourismResearch,42(July),240-261.
Radhakrishnan,R.(1994).PostmodernismandtheRestoftheWorld.
Organization,1(2),305-340.
Reisinger,Y.&Steiner,C.(2006).Reconceptualisingobjectauthenticity.Annalsof
TourismResearch,33(1),65-86.
Richards,G.&Wilson,J.(2006).Developingcreativityintouristexperiences:A
solutiontotheserialreproductionofculture?TourismManagement,27(6),1209-
1223.
Rickley-Boyd,J.(2012).AuthenticityandAura:aBenjaminianapproachto
tourism.AnnalsofTourismResearch,39(1),269-289.
Rigney,A.(2001).ImperfectHistories:theelusivepastandthelegacyofRomantic
historicism.Ithaca,NY:CornellUniversityPress.
Rorty,R.(1989).Contingency,IronyandSolidarity.Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Rouse, J. (1994). Power/Knowledge. In G. Gutting (Ed.), The Cambridge
CompaniontoFoucault(pp.92-114).Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Ryan,C.&Gu,H.(2010).Constructionismandcultureinresearch:
UnderstandingsofthefourthBuddhistFestival,Wutaishan,China.Tourism
Management,31(2),167-178.
Salazar,N.B.(2012).TourismImaginaries:aconceptualapproach.Annalsof
TourismResearch,39(2),863-882.
35
Savolainen,R.(1995).Everydaylifeinformationseeking:Approaching
informationseekinginthecontextof“wayoflife”.Library&InformationScience
Research,17(3),259-294.
Santos,C.&Yan,G.(2010).Genealogicaltourism:Aphenomenological
examination.JournalofTravelResearch,49(1),56-67.
Shackley,M.(1994).Whenisthepast?Authenticityandthe
commoditizationofheritage.TourismManagement,15(5),396-397.
Shepherd,R.(2011).Historicity,fieldwork,andtheallureofthepost-modern:A
replytoRyanandGu.TourismManagement,32(1),187-190.
Slater,D.(1997).ConsumerCultureandModernity.Cambridge:Polity.
Smith,A.D.(2008).TheCulturalFoundationsofNations.Oxford:Blackwell.
Steiner,C;Reisinger,Y.(2006).Understandingexistentialauthenticity.Annalsof
TourismResearch,33(2),299-318.
Stylianou-Lambert, T. (2011). Gazing from home: cultural tourism and art
museums.AnnalsofTourismResearch,38(2),403-421.
Swanson,K.&Timothy,D.(2012).Souvenirs:Iconsofmeaning,
commercializationandcommoditization.TourismManagement,33(3),489-499.
Thomson,C.&Tian,K.(2008).ReconstructingtheSouth:howcommercialmyths
competeforidentityvaluethroughtheideologicalshapingofpopularmemories
andcountermemories.JournalofConsumerResearch,34(5),595-613.
Trevor-Roper,H.(1983).Theinventionoftradition:theHighlandtraditionof
Scotland.InE.Hobsbawm&T.Ranger(Eds.),TheInventionofTradition(pp.15-
42).Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
36
Tucker,H.(2016).Empathyandtourism:limitsandpossibilities.Annalsof
TourismResearch,57(2016),31-43.
Tucker,W.(1965).MaxWeber’s“Verstehen”.TheSociologicalQuarterly,6(2),
157-165.
Varman,R.&Belk,R.(2009).Nationalismandideologyinananticonsumption
movement.JournalofConsumerResearch,36(4),686-700.
VisitScotland.(2013).SummaryofAncestralResearch2012.Retrieved
November15,2014,fromVisitScotlandwebsite:
http://www.visitscotland.org/pdf/Ancestral%20Research%2016%20Jan%20vs
.org_pptx.pdf
Wall,G.&Xie,P.(2005).Authenticatingethnictourism:Lidancers'perspectives.
AsiaPacificJournalofTourismResearch,10(1),1-21.
Wang,N.(1999).Rethinkingauthenticityintourismexperience.Annalsof
TourismResearch,26(2),349-370.
Wang,Y.(2007).Customizedauthenticitybeginsathome.AnnalsofTourism
Research,34(3),789-804.
Wenger,E.(2000).CommunitiesofPracticeandSocialLearningSystems.
Organization,7(2),225-246.
Whatley,C.A.(2000).ScottishSociety:1707-1830.Manchester:Manchester
UniversityPress.
Wight,A.&Lennon,J.(2007).Selectiveinterpretationandeclectichuman
heritageinLithuania.TourismManagement,28(2),519-529.
37
Yakel,E.(2004).Seekinginformation,seekingconnections,seekingmeaning:
Genealogistsandfamilyhistorians.InformationResearch,10(1).
Recommended