Heritage Tourism in Taiwan's Desinicized Nationalism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Vol. 8 Nº2 págs. 277-292. 2010 www.pasosonline.org https://doi.org/10.25145/j.pasos.2010.08.020 Heritage Tourism in Taiwan’s Desinicized Nationalism Duarte B. Moraisii The Pennsylvania State University (EEUU) Su-Hsin Leeiii National Taiwan Normal University (Taiwan) Jing-Shoung Houiv Tung-Hai University (Taiwan) Chung-Hsien Linv Feng-Chia University (Taiwan) Careen M. Yarnalvi The Pennsylvania State University (EEUU) Garry Chickvii The Pennsylvania State University (EEUU) Abstract: In postmodern societies, the touristic consumption of symbols of identity contributes to the formation of national identities. The purpose of this study was to examine residents’ and tourists’ pers- pectives on the meanings attached to and impacts caused by heritage tourism development. Data col- lected through structured interviews and field observations in Lu-Kang, Taiwan revealed that the local heritage is seen as personally meaningful not only by local residents and culture brokers but also by domestic visitors. Tourism development is reported to bring economic and cultural revitalization but is also blamed for crowding, commercialization and environmental pollution. Lu-Kang, is thus a space for the dissemination of extant symbols of a Desinicized national identity; symbols that accentuate Taiwan’s history of colonization and ethnic diversity, and that situate the nation’s origin with the arrival of mi- grants from the Mainland. Key words: Nationalism; Heritage; Taiwanization. ii Associate Professor of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management. The Pennsylvania State University. 801 Ford, University Park, PA 16802. 814-865-5614. FAX.814-867-1751. E-mail: [email protected]. iii Professor of Geography. National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan. E-mail: [email protected]. iv Professor of Landscape Architecture. Tung-Hai University, 407, Taiwan. E-mail: [email protected]. v Associate Professor of Land Management. Feng-Chia University, Taichung 403, Taiwan. E-mail: [email protected] vi Assistant Professor of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management. The Pennsylvania State. University, University Park, PA 16802. E-mail: [email protected] vii Professor of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management. The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802. E-mail: [email protected] © PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. ISSN 1695-7121 278 Heritage Tourism in Taiwan’s Desinicized Nationalism... Resumen: En las sociedades posmodernas, el consumo turístico de los símbolos de la identidad contri- buye a la formación de las identidades nacionales. El propósito de este estudio fue examinar las perspec- tivas de residentes y turistas sobre los significados asociados a y los impactos causados por el desarrollo del patrimonio turístico. Los datos recogidos mediante entrevistas estructuradas y observaciones de cam- po en Lu-Kang (Taiwan) pusieron de manifiesto que el patrimonio local es visto como significativo no sólo por los residentes locales y los agentes culturales, sino también por los visitantes nacionales. El desarrollo del turismo ha traído la revitalización económica y cultural, pero también hacinamiento, co- mercialización cultural y contaminación ambiental. Lu-Kang, es, pues, un espacio para la difusión de los símbolos existentes de una identidad nacional; con símbolos que acentúan la historia de Taiwan de la colonización y la diversidad étnica, y que sitúan el origen de la nación con la llegada de migrantes pro- cedentes del continente. Palabras clave: Nacionalismo; Patrimonio; Taiwanización. Introduction riences are typically co-constructed by fac- tions with potentially conflicting interests The growing efforts devoted to the study (Bandyopadhyay and Morais 2005; Ban- of heritage tourism support the idea that dyopadhyay, Morais and Chick 2008; Chro- heritage tourism is more than just the nis 2005; Davis and Morais 2004; Nuryanti commercial provision of services to fulfill 1996). Therefore, it is not surprising that society’s nostalgic search for authenticity tourism researchers have challenged the (Bandyopadhyay, Morais and Chick 2008; idea that heritage tourism experiences re- MacCannell 1976; McCain and Ray 2003; flect the ideology of one single homogene- Urry 2002). Rather, heritage tourism is ous group. Instead, several authors have now widely regarded as a biased selection commented that heritage tourism expe- and interpretation of history in ways that riences are negotiated cultural productions, further the ideology of those with the co-constructed by the tourism industry, the means of cultural production (Johnson media, the government, non-governmental 1999). For example, Light (2001) reported organizations, local residents, and by the that the heritage of the “House of the tourists themselves (Aas, Ladkin, and People” in Bucharest has been renegotiated Fletcher 2005; Chronis 2005). Accordingly, and is now narrated in a way consistent while some of the aforementioned sources with Romania’s emerging post-socialist make important contributions to under- identity. Pretes (2003) indicated that standing the ideological motivations in- Mount Rushmore National Monument, the fluencing the official framing of the past in Wall Drug Store and Rapid City Dinosaur heritage destinations, few authors have National Park in South Dakota, USA pro- examined how other groups involved in the vide symbols of independence, freedom, co-construction of heritage for tourism in- equality, free enterprise and natural gran- terpret, negotiate, translate and strengthen deur central to American nationalism. the destinations’ symbols of identity. Chronis (2005) claimed that social values of Another predominant focus of research patriotism and national unity permeate the has been the nature of the relationship stories conveyed to thousands of visitors to between heritage conservation and tourism the Gettysburg National Park (USA). Last- development. Some authors have noted ly, both Arranz (2006) and Pritchard and that tourism development tends to cause Morgan (2001) commented on how promo- heritage degradation (Jansen-Verbeke tions of Wales to the British were embed- 1998; Mitchell 1998). Namely, some argue ded with hegemonic portrayals of Wales as that tourism leads to the standardization of the primitive other, while promotions for built and live heritage (Jansen-Verbeke foreign markets were embedded with na- 1998) as the industry responds to tourists’ tionalist discourses of resistance against demands with easily recognizable and in- British rule. terpretable cultural products (Johnson One of the frequent preoccupations of 1999; Light 2001; Lowenthal 1996). Con- tourism scholars is that the tourism system versely, some authors support the belief is complex and, as a result, tourist expe- that the relationship between tourism de- PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 8(2). 2010 ISSN 1695-7121 Duarte Morais, Su-Hsin Lee, Jing-Shoung Hou, et ál. 279 velopment and heritage preservation may tended that this is the process through be synergistic (Aas, Ladkin, and Fletcher which nationalism turns otherwise dis- 2005; McKercher, Ho, and du Cros 2005). persed and fragmented populations into a Those authors point out that heritage pre- national community united around an im- servation is costly and demands political agined common heritage. will, and that economic and political value In addition to concerns over the engi- can be obtained through the thoughtful use neering of a national identity, the study of of the heritage resources for tourism. nationalism requires thinking about how this imagined identity is disseminated and Nationalism assimilated by the populace (Coakley 2004). Despite the contemporary prevalence of This process is critical because without widespread labor mobility, cultural hybridi- widespread socialization of the population ty, and global division of production and into the identity imagined by the intelli- trade, nations seem to remain at the center gentsia, nationalism movements would be of today’s “world order, the main object of perceived as internal colonialism or as a individual loyalties, the chief definer of [an new form of autocratic government. Some individual’s] identity” (Smith 1971, p. 2). of the tools used by nations to “communi- Nationalism, or individuals’ collective alle- cate” with their populations include closely giance to a nation (Hutchinson & Smith managed institutions such as public educa- 1994) is foremost centered in the principle tion, and the mass media (Coakley 2004). of self-determination: the populace must In addition, nations also nurture desirable govern their own future free from outside national identities through the sanctioning control or the control of domestic elites of important symbols of nationalism such (Hutchinson & Smith 1994). Furthermore, as language, maps, currency, and holidays nationalism requires a sense of commonali- (Anderson 1991; Smith 1991). While these ty among members of the nation and of tools of political socialization have been difference in contrast to outsiders; a com- widely debated and studied by nationalism monality based on a collective conscious- scholars (Anderson 1991; Lowenthal 1996; ness of a shared past and vision for the Wang 2005), less attention has been given future (Weber 1948). to the contemporary phenomenon of herit- Much of the contemporary debate over age tourism. Heritage tourism has become nationalism centers precisely in the inter- increasingly associated with nationalism section of these two principles: self- because this form of tourism