Masterarbeit / Master Thesis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MASTERARBEIT / MASTER THESIS Titel der Masterarbeit / Title of the master thesis Memory, Ethics and Dark Tourism - The contested historical heritage of Anlong Veng District, Cambodia Verfasser / Author Gisela Wohlfahrt angestrebter akademischer Grad / acadamic degree aspired Master (MA) Wien, den 31.08.2010 Studienkennzahl : A 067 805 Studienrichtung: Individuelles Masterstudium: Global Studies – A European Perspective Betreuer/Supervisor: Ao.Univ.-Prof. Dr. Sigfried Mattl Abstract The purpose of the present thesis, “Memory, Ethics and Dark Tourism”, was to investigate to what extent a contested heritage site like Anlong Veng, the last stronghold of the genocidal Pol Pot regime in Cambodia, can be experienced as a dark tourist destination worth visiting. It was attempted to show, that a proper assessment of morally questionable sites such as Anlong Veng can only be reached if the meaning of such sites for the affected themselves is taken into consideration. Finally, it was intended to examine how far the site is able to reach its overall objective to foster the reconciliation process in Cambodia in the meantime. The research was conducted by means of interdisciplinary and qualitative methods. With the aid of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) five internet travel weblogs have been analyzed regarding the experiences of international visitors on site. The qualitative research data consisted of five in-depth interviews with experts in the field of reconciliation and remembrance, conducted in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. The results revealed that moral concerns are justified and also that the site is experienced as not worth visiting by international tourists. However, it was also discovered that Western perceptions of morality and proper heritage management are not applicable to the Cambodian context, as well as that the contested site can be in a metaphorical sense very valuable for Cambodians themselves. The principal conclusion was that the significance and value of visiting such a site depends on the consciousness of the visitor and how he interacts during the cultural encounter. Kurze Darstellung Das Ziel dieser Arbeit, “Memory, Ethics and Dark Tourism”, war es zu untersuchen inwiefern ein umstrittenes historisches Erbe wie Anlong Veng, die letzte Hochburg des völkermoerderischen Pol Pot Regimes in Kambodscha, als sehenswerte Dark Tourism Destination verstanden werden kann. Unter anderem war es beabsichtigt zu zeigen, dass nur unter Berücksichtigung der Bedeutung der Stätte für Kambodschaner selbst eine angemessene Einschätzung der touristischen Erfahrung dort erreicht werden kann. Letztlich wurde untersucht inwiefern das Denkmal gleichzeitig auch seine eigentliche Hauptintention, die Förderung des Wiederversöhnungsprozesses in Kambodscha, vorantreibt. Für die Untersuchung wurden interdisziplinäre als auch qualitative Methoden verwendet. Mit Hilfe der Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) wurden fünf Reiseblogeinträge aus dem Internet auf Erfahrungen der internationalen Touristen untersucht. Die qualitativen Forschungsdaten resultieteren aus fünf qualitativen Leitfadeninterviews mit Experten in den Bereichen Wiederversöhnung und Erinnerung, aufgenommen in Phnom Penh, Kambodscha. Die Erebnisse zeigten, dass moralische Bedenken durchaus gerechtfertigt sind und der Besuch der Stätte von internationalen Touristen als nicht lohnenswert empfunden wird. Unter anderem wurde jedoch herausgefunden, dass das westliche Verständnis von Moral, sowie die Erwartungen bezüglich des Managements solcher Stätten, nicht auf den kambodschanischen Kontext übertragen werden können, sowie dass das historische Erbe Anlong Vengs durchaus einen positiven Einfluss auf den nationalen Wiederversöhnungsprozess haben kann. Die Schlussfolgerung besteht daraus, dass die Bedeutung des Besuchs vom Bewustsein und Interagieren mit der Stätte, während der kulturellen Begegnung, abhängt. 2 Foreword No-one but the tourist is so blatantly, Conspicuously dissolved in numbers, interchangeable, depersonalised. Moral proximity, responsibility and the uniqueness irreplaceability – of the moral subject are triune; they won’t survive (or, rather, they shouldn’t have been born) without each other. Moral responsibility vanishes when ‘everybody does it’ . The tourist is bad news for morality. (Bauman 1996, p. 54) The impetus to write about this topic arose from my first trip to Cambodia in 2007. As much as I was aware of the humanitarian circumstances of the country, I was not prepared for what I wanted to encounter. However, it was a single and actually very random experience that caused more and more questions in my mind about peoples’ presence at places where they are maybe not supposed to be. I was wondering if the sole possibility to reach every corner of the world may have made us inconsiderate. The random experience I just mentioned was the unwarranted visit of a shooting range nearby Phnom Penh, just after visiting Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum and before heading towards the Choeung Ek Memorial site - the killing fields. Experiencing the two memorials as an already haunting tourist destinations, the not more than five minutes I spent at the shooting range have been a much more disturbing experience for me. While getting presented a menu printed on a cardboard, which offered me the choice from hand spray weapons to a Kalashnikov, I heard permanent gunfire just behind a free standing wall a few metres from our Tuk Tuk. Watching the depressive faces of the Cambodians around us, obviously living in poverty and misery, made me feel very uncomfortable. Leaving the site as quickly as possible, I was wondering who is able to enjoy shooting weapons in hearing distance from war experience coined people. Obviously, others have no problem to do so, which is why the shooting range is promoted as a destination like the Royal Palace itself. My subsequent wandering through the killing fields was grotesque and I felt like an intruder. Since then, I have been bothered by the question if simply the possibility to do so, justifies our touring of places like the killing fields of Cambodia, and what the nationals may think about the international visitors’ interest in the sites actually dedicated to the victims of genocide. 3 Table of content 1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 6 1.1. Statement of the problem ...................................................................................... 6 1.2. Purpose and Need of the study – the research question ...................................... 8 1.3. Research methodology and outline .................................................................... 10 1.4. Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... 13 2. Theoretical Framework .......................................................................... 14 2.1. Dark Tourism – A matter of debate .................................................................... 14 2.2. The politics of Memory and Dark Tourism ....................................................... 16 2.3. Selection, representation and interpretation of Dark Tourism sites .................. 17 2.4. Ethical considerations - Living memories and the tourist gaze......................... 19 3. Background ............................................................................................ 21 3.1. Characteristics of Cambodia as a tourist destination ......................................... 21 3.1.1. Decisive stages in Cambodian history ....................................................................... 21 3.1.2. Political, social and economical situation – Impunity in Cambodia ...................... 24 3.1.3. Tourism development in Cambodia .......................................................................... 26 3.1.4. Images of Cambodia..................................................................................................... 29 3.2. Memory in Cambodian Society........................................................................... 32 3.2.1. The culture of remembrance in Cambodia ............................................................... 32 3.2.2. Memories about Democratic Kampuchea (DK) ..................................................... 35 3.2.3. Impact of the Extraordinary Chambers of the Courts in Cambodia .................... 38 3.3. Experiencing dark tourism in Cambodia ........................................................... 39 3.3.1. Promotion and representation .................................................................................... 39 3.3.2. Experiences of international tourists and meaning of the site for nationals ........ 45 3.3.3. Conclusions and contemporary debates .................................................................... 49 4. Empirical Studies – The historical heritage of Anlong Veng .................. 51 4.1. Anlong Veng district – A dark tourist destination .............................................. 51 4.2. Experiences of the researcher ............................................................................. 53 4.3. Discourse Analysis of web travel logs about Anlong Veng ................................ 59 4.4. Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 62 4 5. Empirical Studies – the meaning of Anlong Veng for Cambodians ....... 64 5.1. Among victims and perpetrators........................................................................