Critical heritage studies and the legacies of the late-twentieth century heritage canon

Kynan Gentry, Laurajane Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In recent years an interest in ‘critical heritage studies’ (CHS) has grown significantly–its differentiation from ‘heritage studies’ rests on its emphasis of cultural heritage as a political, cultural, and social phenomenon. But how original or radical are the concepts and aims of CHS, and why has it apparently become useful or meaningful to talk about critical heritage studies as opposed to simply ‘heritage studies’? Focusing on the canon of the 1980s and 1990s heritage scholarship–and in particular the work of the ‘father of heritage studies’, David Lowenthal–this article offers a historiographical analysis of traditional understandings and approaches to heritage, and the various explanations behind the post-WWII rise of heritage in western culture. By placing this analysing within the wider frames of post-war historical studies and the growth of scholarly interest in memory, the article seeks to highlight the limitations and bias of the much of the traditional heritage canon, and in turn frame the rationale for the critical turn in heritage studies.

Original languageEnglish
JournalInternational Journal of Heritage Studies
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 2 Feb 2019

Fingerprint

cultural heritage
twentieth century
father
trend
analysis
Heritage
Canon
20th century

Cite this

@article{3d473d6ad50449b7b32eb472aea75ef0,
title = "Critical heritage studies and the legacies of the late-twentieth century heritage canon",
abstract = "In recent years an interest in ‘critical heritage studies’ (CHS) has grown significantly–its differentiation from ‘heritage studies’ rests on its emphasis of cultural heritage as a political, cultural, and social phenomenon. But how original or radical are the concepts and aims of CHS, and why has it apparently become useful or meaningful to talk about critical heritage studies as opposed to simply ‘heritage studies’? Focusing on the canon of the 1980s and 1990s heritage scholarship–and in particular the work of the ‘father of heritage studies’, David Lowenthal–this article offers a historiographical analysis of traditional understandings and approaches to heritage, and the various explanations behind the post-WWII rise of heritage in western culture. By placing this analysing within the wider frames of post-war historical studies and the growth of scholarly interest in memory, the article seeks to highlight the limitations and bias of the much of the traditional heritage canon, and in turn frame the rationale for the critical turn in heritage studies.",
keywords = "critical heritage theory, heritage studies, historiography, Lowenthal, memory",
author = "Kynan Gentry and Laurajane Smith",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/13527258.2019.1570964",
language = "English",
journal = "International Journal of Heritage Studies",
issn = "1352-7258",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Critical heritage studies and the legacies of the late-twentieth century heritage canon

AU - Gentry, Kynan

AU - Smith, Laurajane

PY - 2019/2/2

Y1 - 2019/2/2

N2 - In recent years an interest in ‘critical heritage studies’ (CHS) has grown significantly–its differentiation from ‘heritage studies’ rests on its emphasis of cultural heritage as a political, cultural, and social phenomenon. But how original or radical are the concepts and aims of CHS, and why has it apparently become useful or meaningful to talk about critical heritage studies as opposed to simply ‘heritage studies’? Focusing on the canon of the 1980s and 1990s heritage scholarship–and in particular the work of the ‘father of heritage studies’, David Lowenthal–this article offers a historiographical analysis of traditional understandings and approaches to heritage, and the various explanations behind the post-WWII rise of heritage in western culture. By placing this analysing within the wider frames of post-war historical studies and the growth of scholarly interest in memory, the article seeks to highlight the limitations and bias of the much of the traditional heritage canon, and in turn frame the rationale for the critical turn in heritage studies.

AB - In recent years an interest in ‘critical heritage studies’ (CHS) has grown significantly–its differentiation from ‘heritage studies’ rests on its emphasis of cultural heritage as a political, cultural, and social phenomenon. But how original or radical are the concepts and aims of CHS, and why has it apparently become useful or meaningful to talk about critical heritage studies as opposed to simply ‘heritage studies’? Focusing on the canon of the 1980s and 1990s heritage scholarship–and in particular the work of the ‘father of heritage studies’, David Lowenthal–this article offers a historiographical analysis of traditional understandings and approaches to heritage, and the various explanations behind the post-WWII rise of heritage in western culture. By placing this analysing within the wider frames of post-war historical studies and the growth of scholarly interest in memory, the article seeks to highlight the limitations and bias of the much of the traditional heritage canon, and in turn frame the rationale for the critical turn in heritage studies.

KW - critical heritage theory

KW - heritage studies

KW - historiography

KW - Lowenthal

KW - memory

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061030822&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13527258.2019.1570964

DO - 10.1080/13527258.2019.1570964

M3 - Article

JO - International Journal of Heritage Studies

JF - International Journal of Heritage Studies

SN - 1352-7258

ER -