From Re- to Pre- and Back Again

Tracing the complex history of the term ‘reenactment’, back to R.G. Collingwood’s philosophy of history, on the one hand, and popular practices of war reenactments and living history museums, on the other, a survey of its current contribution in art and museum practices highlights the importance of historicity — a category the postmodern was supposed to have vacated — in a wide range of examples, from Rod Dickinson and Jeremey Deller to Alexandra Pirici, Manuel Pelmuş, and Milo Rau. Performance reenactments, in particular, are premised on performance art having become historical, but also threaten to digest history in favour of a mere productivist mobilization for the needs of current attention economies. An alternative could be the attempt to counter historical with dramatic time in order to unlock unrealized possibilities and futures, as the term preenactment promises.

Cultural and geological heritage in time elapsed during historical Kingdoms in Yogyakarta Special Region, Indonesia

Yogyakarta, Indonesia is known for its kingdom government system for all its living history; since 8-10th century Mataram Hindu-Buddhist temples to the present Muslim Ngayogyokarto Hadiningrat. Those stretch of history resulted in many artefacts and chronicles. A cultural imaginary line that linking Merapi Volcano in the north and the Indian Ocean in the south through the Yogyakarta Palace in the middle has a sacral geo-cultural heritage, explaining a prosperity gentle volcanic town, a beautiful scheme of the open panoramic features with several temples standing on the plain and mountainous landscapes in between the rest of earthquakes and the volcanic eruptions. Many temples were partly buried under volcanic materials, and some others show evidence of being shaken several times by earthquakes. Boulders of volcanic materials varying in size and shapes are present in the plain of Yogyakarta, near Cangkiringan, Ngemplak and Ngaglik. Landslides exposed many geological features, such as faults, rock formation and stratigraphy, and some unstable slopes. Cultural and geological heritages at Yogyakarta Region were created over the time.

Word-hoard

This chapter discusses Clark’s ‘Words in War-Time’ as a distinctive project in its own right. Beginning in 1914, it has an intellectual hinterland that reaches into Victorian Oxford, the philological revolution, and the making of the first edition of the Oxford English Dictionary (OED1). Other models of historiography were, however, important, too. The chapter also explores the inspiration Clark drew from his own earlier work on the English Civil War writer Anthony Wood’s Life and Times and John Aubrey’s contemporaneous Brief Lives –especially in relation to their emphasis on the need to register living history with ‘minuteness’ in a process that directs particular attention to its incidental details. Clark’s work on language in World War One proves, in this light, intriguingly experimental, presenting both emulation and resistance in relation to earlier works on language and the narratives of time and change that might be made.

Debunking Ford’s relation to the past: history as “Bunk” in Emersonian perspective

Purpose This paper aims to reconsider the significance of Henry Ford’s claim that “History is more or less bunk”. It argues that this seemingly philistine remark can be understood as a specific historiographical position which informed Ford’s wider worldview, management approach and philosophy of industry. Design/methodology/approach The paper draws on primary philosophical works, secondary criticism and archival evidence. These sources detail the context in which the claim was made, the ideas underpinning its articulation and the conceptual basis on which Ford’s wider perspectives and contributions to historical experience can be interpreted. Findings This paper interprets Ford’s claim as a gesture of allegiance to a deeper cultural sensibility that was informed by Ralph Waldo Emerson’s transcendental view of history. Practical implications In addition to offering a rereading of Ford’s historiographical position, Emerson’s thought is discussed in relation to Ford’s subsequent “living history” project (Greenfield Village), which is considered the materialisation of his historical and industrial worldview. Originality/value This interpretation reveals how a specific historiographical position held by one of the twentieth century’s leading industrialists offers new insights into his wider worldview and philosophy of industry. It contributes to recent studies that challenge taken-for-granted narratives in management history and recent work that has highlighted the influence of transcendental principles on Ford’s philosophy of industry.

Making memories: a consumer-based model of authenticity applied to living history sites

Purpose Underpinned by the consumer-based model of authenticity (CBA), this study aims to investigate whether leisure involvement, object-based and existential authenticity, host sincerity and engagement stimulate positive memorable visitor experiences in a distinctive commercial hospitality setting: a living history site. Design/methodology/approach Quantitative data were gathered from living history site visitors (n = 1,004), with partial least squares structural equation modeling used to test the hypothesized relationships. Findings The results confirm the inclusion of the hypothesized relationships between leisure involvement, sincerity and authenticity, relative to engagement and subsequent memorability. The findings suggest that engagement can be a predictor of a positive memorable experience, contingent on CBA constructs (sincerity; object-based authenticity; existential authenticity). The significant association between object-based authenticity and memorable experience identified herein differs from some published studies, while other results are broadly consistent with extant research. Results also reveal significant differences for visitors who purchased souvenirs when compared to those who did not. Research limitations/implications The research extends the CBA by positing sincere hospitality as a relationship-based encounter between host and guest that influences social interaction, engagement and memorability within the novel living history site context. Further, the ability to differentiate visitors based on their purchases at the site is illustrated. Originality/value Given the ubiquity of engagement and authenticity as precursors to memorable experiences within contemporary commercial hospitality and heritage discourses, the findings apply to hospitality experiences beyond the living history site context examined herein.

Experimental Archaeology

Experimental archaeology is a multifaceted approach employed by a wide and rapidly expanding range of exponents including everybody from lab-based archaeological research scientists through to museum professionals and re-enactment groups. Scientific experiments are trials designed to test a hypothesis which will either be rejected (falsified) or validated. Validation does not imply truth, but demonstrates that the hypothesis is viable, though there may be equally viable alternatives. Experiments are the mainstay of almost all hypothetico-deductive science. Hence, one could define most archaeological science as being a form of experimental archaeology. However, most practitioners of experimental archaeology would view an attempt to replicate past activities and processes using authentic materials as an essential, defining aspect of the field. A laboratory scientist’s approach to experimentation is likely to minimize the variables being investigated at any one time while maximising control over conditions. Other experimental approaches, however, aim to see how processes work within life-like scenarios that involve authentic materials and variables. The term “actualistic” is often applied to such a mode of experimentation, alongside “reconstruction” and “replicative.” The best research often involves both controlled and actualistic experimentation to provide a sound understanding of individual variables and the interaction of many variables within realistic scenarios. These approaches are complementary and on a continuum. While some experimental archaeologists view their approach as an actualistic branch of hypothesis-based archaeological science, where the strict definitions of an experiment apply, others view the field as somewhat broader. Such practitioners value what can be learned from attempting to carry out activities, or even live, in conditions and with the materials that would be available in a particular time or place. This type of activity is often not based upon the testing of particular hypotheses but on experiential learning. Exponents of this approach will gain insights into the potential challenges faced by past peoples that might not otherwise occur to us or be reflected in the ethnographic record. Groups of practitioners that fall into this category might variously identify as being “re-enactors,” exponents of “living history,” “primitive technologists” or even “survivalists.” Thus, experimental archaeology can range from strictly scientific and objective methods to more subjective, experiential approaches, while retaining the essential aim of undertaking experiments which usually include actualistic activities using authentic materials. An additional noteworthy attribute of experimental archaeology is that re-enactment and reconstruction activities lend themselves particularly well to engaging forms of public presentation and education. As such, open-air experimental archaeology museums are currently expanding in number and visitorship. This field is expanding exponentially in almost every branch of archaeology making an individual section on every possible topic impossible, thus our approach is indicative and organized by broad themes of inquiry.