Advanced

What does not move any hearts – why should it be saved? The Denkmalpflegediskussion in Germany.

Holtorf, Cornelius LU (2007) In International Journal of Cultural Property 14(1). p.33-55
Abstract
This paper is about the recent discussions (known as Denkmalpflegediskussion) on the principles and practices of state heritage management in Germany. In an expert report commissioned by the prominent German politician Antje Vollmer from Dieter Hoffmann-Axthelm, a number of fundamental criticisms were made. They concern existing practices of state heritage management, some of which are said to alienate and patronize people. One of the main issues discussed is therefore whether the management of the cultural heritage should be further decentralized (’entstaatlicht’) and made the responsibility of individual citizens and other stake-holders. The overriding criterion for scheduling should be a site’s ability to move people aesthetically and... (More)
This paper is about the recent discussions (known as Denkmalpflegediskussion) on the principles and practices of state heritage management in Germany. In an expert report commissioned by the prominent German politician Antje Vollmer from Dieter Hoffmann-Axthelm, a number of fundamental criticisms were made. They concern existing practices of state heritage management, some of which are said to alienate and patronize people. One of the main issues discussed is therefore whether the management of the cultural heritage should be further decentralized (’entstaatlicht’) and made the responsibility of individual citizens and other stake-holders. The overriding criterion for scheduling should be a site’s ability to move people aesthetically and emotionally, rather than some complex academic reasoning about historical significance. The significance of beauty and feelings to heritage is illustrated by discussing a citizens’ initiative promoting comprehensive reconstructions in the Dresden Neumarkt area, around the recently restored Frauenkirche. This paper seeks to review some of the key issues of the German debate and begin a discussion of how it might relate to states heritage management in other countries for which Sweden serves as an example. The question asked is to what extent heritage management elsewhere too can, and should, be further democratized. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Conservation, Democracy, Heritage management, Germany
in
International Journal of Cultural Property
volume
14
issue
1
pages
33 - 55
publisher
Cambridge University Press
external identifiers
  • scopus:85010090350
ISSN
0940-7391
DOI
10.1017/S0940739107070038
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
1a38213b-a261-4c5a-bb3c-2042e79ebe1d (old id 539050)
date added to LUP
2007-09-06 10:28:00
date last changed
2017-10-01 03:54:36
@article{1a38213b-a261-4c5a-bb3c-2042e79ebe1d,
  abstract     = {This paper is about the recent discussions (known as Denkmalpflegediskussion) on the principles and practices of state heritage management in Germany. In an expert report commissioned by the prominent German politician Antje Vollmer from Dieter Hoffmann-Axthelm, a number of fundamental criticisms were made. They concern existing practices of state heritage management, some of which are said to alienate and patronize people. One of the main issues discussed is therefore whether the management of the cultural heritage should be further decentralized (’entstaatlicht’) and made the responsibility of individual citizens and other stake-holders. The overriding criterion for scheduling should be a site’s ability to move people aesthetically and emotionally, rather than some complex academic reasoning about historical significance. The significance of beauty and feelings to heritage is illustrated by discussing a citizens’ initiative promoting comprehensive reconstructions in the Dresden Neumarkt area, around the recently restored Frauenkirche. This paper seeks to review some of the key issues of the German debate and begin a discussion of how it might relate to states heritage management in other countries for which Sweden serves as an example. The question asked is to what extent heritage management elsewhere too can, and should, be further democratized.},
  author       = {Holtorf, Cornelius},
  issn         = {0940-7391},
  keyword      = {Conservation,Democracy,Heritage management,Germany},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {33--55},
  publisher    = {Cambridge University Press},
  series       = {International Journal of Cultural Property},
  title        = {What does not move any hearts – why should it be saved? The Denkmalpflegediskussion in Germany.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0940739107070038},
  volume       = {14},
  year         = {2007},
}