Heritage Politics in Timor-Leste: Ambivalent Perspectives from Venilale
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Heritage Politics in Timor-Leste: Ambivalent Perspectives from Venilale Carolina Maria Sofia Boldoni PhD in Anthropology: Politics and Display of Culture and Museology Supervisors: Doctor Nélia Susana Dias, Associate Professor with Habilitation, ISCTE-IUL Doctor Judith Bovensiepen, Associate Professor, University of Kent December, 2020 Department of Anthropology Heritage Politics in Timor-Leste: Ambivalent Perspectives from Venilale Carolina Maria Sofia Boldoni PhD in Anthropology: Politics and Display of Culture and Museology Jury: Doctor Antónia Lima, Associate Professor with Habilitation, ISCTE- IUL (President) Doctor Catherine Allerton, Associate Professor, London School of Economics Doctor Lúcio Manuel Gomes de Sousa, Associate Professor, Universidade Aberta Doctor Rui Feijó, Research Fellow, Universidade de Coimbra Doctor Maria Cardeira Silva, Associate Professor, Universidade Nova de Lisboa Doctor Miguel Vale de Almeida, Full Professor, ISCTE-IUL Doctor Judith Bovensiepen, Associate Professor, University of Kent December, 2020 Acknowledgments Writing a PhD thesis is a collaborative task. Throughout this process I have received a great deal of support and assistance and I want to thank all the people and institutions involved. I acknowledge Fundação da Ciência e Tecnologia, that funded my PhD (four years PhD grant; Referência PD/BD/113954/2015) and the Doctoral Programme in which I am enrolled, entitled “Programa de Doutoramento FCT: Antropologia: Políticas e Imagens da Cultura e Museologia” (Referência PD/00423/2012). I would like to thank my supervisors. Professor Nélia Dias, whose expertise has been fundamental throughout my PhD journey. I thank her for being such a committed and attentive supervisor and for always being present and supportive, especially in the most difficult situations, such as the last months, during which we have dealt with the COVID-19 pandemic. I thank Professor Judith Bovensiepen, who has accepted to supervise my research and thesis with no hesitation. She has been incredibly supportive during my fieldwork in Timor-Leste. She has always pushed to improve my arguments and supported me in persevere with my ideas. I thank her for welcoming me at the University of Kent and including me in the Social Anthropology department’s writing seminars. Giving a lecture to her students was among the most beautiful and exciting experiences of my PhD. I consider the writing seminars, both at ISCTe and the University of Kent, among the most important moments of the writing process. I thank Professor Rui Graça Feijó and Professor Lúcio Sousa for their helpful insights and comments on the previous drafts of two of the chapters presented in the PhD seminars and included in this thesis. I thank them for dedicating me their time. I thank also Professor João de Pina-Cabral for his kind help and suggestions during my stay at Kent University. I would like to acknowledge Professor Vicente Paulino, who has welcomed me at the Universidade Nasionál Timor Lorosa’e (UNTL) in Dili and who has invited me to all the conferences and seminars held at UNTL during my stay in Timor-Leste. I thank him for his help during my fieldwork and for giving me the opportunity of giving two lectures to his students. It was such an honour for me. I thank the SEAC’s Director for donating me a copy of the volume Hamutuk Prezerva no Salvaguarda Valor Kulturál hodi Promove Sustentabilidade Uma-Lulik iha Timor-Leste and the SEAC and KNTLU representatives who granted me interviews. I thank António, for his translations from Makasae to Tetun. I thank all my interlocutors without whom I would have never written this thesis. I would like to thank the e-Cadernos CES’s editorial board, that allowed me to include some sections of the article “Uma Lulik as Heritage: Authorised Heritage Discourse in Timor-Leste” in this thesis (see Boldoni 2020). I thank Dave Tucker for his meticulous linguistic supervision. I thank the nuns who hosted me in Dili; Father Locatelli, for taking me to the most beautiful places throughout Baukau. I thank him for taking me bread and pasta in Daralata and for teaching me the importance of silence. I thank the two families who hosted me, in Daralata and Waikulale. I will never be able to reciprocate their kindness and the reception they offered me. Most importantly, I thank them for showing me the limits of anthropology. I thank Aulou for offering me a manu hakiak (foster chicken), after mine had died. I would like to acknowledge my peers in Dili. Pelagio, for impeding me taking notes while I was with him. For the stimulating discussions, the beers, the coconuts, the tears, the bakso; for teaching me teki nia lian (the language of the gecko). João for his generosity, for the dinners, the parties and the ukulele together. To Ai, wonderful host, for our funny jokes. Mana Berta, who made me discover the importance of feminism, while I was dealing with a bad mononucleosis. emily, Laura and Tess, my precious fieldwork sisters. To Rendy, who taught me that colours do matter and who has waited me. To my family that have no clue what a PhD is, but will always support me. iii iv Resumo Este trabalho analisa os processos de patrimonialização em Timor-Leste, desde uma perspetiva antropológica. O objetivo da tese é examinar as tensões e ambivalências em relação ao património, tanto a nível institucional como nas práticas culturais quotidianas, centrando-se nas zonas cinzentas e nas intersecções entre as práticas discursivas normativas relativas à criação do património, desenvolvidas quer a nível governamental quer a nível local, nomeadamente na zona de Venilale, na região de Baukau. A investigação baseia-se em 15 meses de trabalho de campo etnográfico multi- situado, entre a sub-região de Venilale, a região e a cidade de Baukau e a capital do país, Díli. Os instrumentos analíticos oferecidos pelo quadro teórico dos ‘Critical Heritage Studies’ (Estudos Críticos do Património) são centrais nesta análise, que reconfigura o património como um conjunto de práticas ativas e processos discursivos desenvolvidos por diferentes atores sociais, entre os quais instituições governamentais, decisores políticos e representantes locais. Os entendimentos locais sobre a transmissão de bens e recursos, permitem ultrapassar as tensões dicotómicas entre o património natural e cultural e o património cultural material e imaterial, subjacentes à perspetiva ocidental sobre o património. Palavras-chave: Património; Timor-Leste; Estudos Críticos do património; património cultural intangível; transmissão do património v vi Abstract This thesis analyses the East Timorese heritage-making process, from an anthropological perspective. The aim of this thesis is to examine the tensions and ambivalences towards heritage, both at an institutional level and in everyday cultural practices, by focusing on the grey areas and intersections between the normative discursive practices developed by governmental apparatuses and local ways of conceiving heritage, particularly in the Venilale area, in the Baukau region. The research is based on 15-month of multi-sited ethnographic fieldwork between the sub-region of Venilale, the region and town of Baukau and the capital city of the country, Dili. The analytical tools offered by the theoretical framework of the Critical Heritage Studies are central in this analysis, which reconfigures heritage as a set of active practices and discursive processes developed by different actors, among which governmental institutions, policymakers and local customary representative. Local understandings regarding the transmission of valuable goods and resources allow to overcome the dichotomic tensions between natural and cultural and tangible and intangible cultural heritage, underlying the Western perspective on heritage. Keywords: Heritage; Timor-Leste; Critical Heritage Studies; Intangible Cultural Heritage; Timor-Leste studies; Heritage transmission vii Table of Contents Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................... iii Resumo .......................................................................................................................................................... v Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................ vii Preliminary linguistic notes ........................................................................................................................... xi Glossaries ..................................................................................................................................................... xiii Institutions’ glossary ........................................................................................................................................ xiii Acronyms .......................................................................................................................................................... xiv Tetun glossary .................................................................................................................................................. xiv Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter I: Translating Concepts ........................................................................................................................