scholarly journals Hard and Soft Power and the Cultural Heritage Industry: an Australian example.

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
David Tutchener

This paper will address the question: Does development-based archaeological work in the Pilbara lead to management outcomes that adequately protect Indigenous heritage values? This question will be addressed from three perspectives; firstly from that of the developers, secondly from the heritage community and thirdly from the position of Indigenous stakeholders. The overall scope of this argument will be based on recent archaeological consultancy work in the Pilbara, Western Australia.The key component of this discussion is the application of Nye’s neo-realist concept of power relationships, as normally applied to nation states, to the heritage industry in Australia, drawing upon heritage work in the Pilbara as an example. The application of this paradigm to the heritage industry will also be discussed in regards to positivist and negativist approaches to power. 

Author(s):  
Pilar Luna Erreguerena

Mexico's underwater cultural heritage represents a vast and splendid universe varying from prehistoric to modern remains. But one of its main cultural riches is contained in its coastal and open-sea waters, where hundreds of ships have wrecked since the sixteenth century. Most of the underwater archaeological work undertaken since the 1980s has been in marine waters, especially the Gulf of Mexico. This article explains the discourse of maritime archaeology in Mexico through various phases such as the pre Colombian navigation, the European navigation, and stages of underwater recovery and underwater archaeology in the Mexican waters. In Mexico, the effective management of submerged heritage sites has proved difficult. Although it has no specific laws, Mexico has gained a better awareness regarding the importance of preserving its submerged cultural heritage and has signed and ratified diverse international treaties and the future looks promising.


2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriella Voss

Abstract Concurrent with the inception of the nation states of Indonesia and Malaysia in the middle of the twentieth century, ethnic policies were put into practice to destroy the Chinese cultural heritage that had hitherto been regarded as a vital part of the region’s heterogeneous cultural landscapes. Chinese language, organisations, and religious practices were banned, and architecture and artefacts with Chinese symbols or insignia either looted or destroyed. To what extent have these discriminatory agendas further influenced and shaped contemporary Chinese cultural heritage discourse? To answer this question this article starts with an introduction to the anti-Chinese agenda from Independence onwards, which is followed by two case studies from the field of cultural heritage: the organisation Boen Hian Tong in Semarang on Java in Indonesia, and the NGO Penang Heritage Trust in Malaysia. The research is based on fieldwork carried out in Indonesia and Malaysia in 2014–2015.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 749-755
Author(s):  
Shaohui Zheng

Intangible cultural heritage is the core of Guangzhou’s cultural “soft power”. The Chinese-English translation of intangible cultural heritage is an important way to promote Guangzhou’s culture and to arouse the awareness of protecting intangible cultural heritage in the whole society. The culture-specific items in the publicity texts of intangible cultural heritage reflect the charm and heterogeneity of Guangzhou’s culture. This paper proposes that while translating cultural-specific items of Guangzhou’s intangible cultural heritage, in order to ensure that the translation can retain the cultural characteristics of the source language and be understood and accepted by the target language readers, translators should combine the translation strategies of Domestication and Foreignization and flexibly adopt seven methods, i.e., literal translation, literal translation plus transliteration, literal translation plus explanation, transliteration plus explanation, transliteration plus category words, transliteration plus intra-text explanation and transliteration plus free translation. Suggestions are also given aiming to provide reference for the researches and practice of the translation of intangible cultural heritage in Guangzhou and other cities. It is also hoped that this study can provide some implications for pedagogical application and be helpful for those who follow closely the translation of intangible cultural heritage.


Author(s):  
Theodore C. Bestor

This chapter analyzes the politics of cultural heritage and gastrodiplomacy, or official efforts at “edible nation branding” designed to increase trade, tourism, and national soft power. It explains how and why most Japanese conceive of washoku as a conceptual category in contrast with yōshoku, or Euro-American cuisine. Tracing Japan's pursuit of a UNESCO designation for washoku as an intangible cultural treasure, the chapter details how officials sought the award for both foreign recognition and to encourage the domestic public to consume more traditional foodstuffs. It also describes how a failed earlier effort to strictly regulate Japanese restaurants abroad, ridiculed as “the sushi police,” has led state agencies to adopt softer and more inclusive campaigns to promote washoku.


Author(s):  
ZAPRUDSKY S. ◽  
◽  
BELOUSOV R. ◽  
MILYAEV G. ◽  
LEONOV A. ◽  
...  

The article considers the main results of the work of the Archaeology Sector of the Department of State Supervision in the Department of State Protection of the Cultural Heritage of the Altai Region, created in 2019. The most important areas of activity of the Archaeology Sector within the framework ofthe transferred federal powers are systematic observation of objects of archaeological heritage, identification of damage because of illegal and unauthorized archaeological work and the implementation of measures for the preservation and protection of archaeological sites. As a result, an external visual inspection and photographic recording of892 objects of the archaeological heritage were conducted. Several facts of damage to objects of archaeological heritage because of illegal archaeological and unauthorized excavation have been established. The article highlights the work of the staff of the Archaeology Sector in the legal and practical sphere of the protection of cultural heritage in 2019-2020. Keywords: sector of archaeology, objects of cultural heritage, settlement, burial mound, cultural layer, ceramic vessel, archaeological items


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document