Should heritage management be democratized? The Denkmalpflegediskussion in Germany.
(2006) p.103-115- Abstract
- This paper is about the recent discussions (known as Denkmalpflegediskussion) on the general organization of heritage management in Germany. The main issue discussed was whether heritage management should be further denationalized (’entstaatlicht’) and made the responsibility of individual citizens in order to serve better both the monuments and the people. A number of fundamental criticisms were made concerning existing practices of heritage management, some of which were said to alienate and patronize people despite opposite intentions. In the course of the public exchange of views various alternatives were suggested and discussed. In particular, more influence should be given to the owners. The overriding criterion for scheduling should... (More)
- This paper is about the recent discussions (known as Denkmalpflegediskussion) on the general organization of heritage management in Germany. The main issue discussed was whether heritage management should be further denationalized (’entstaatlicht’) and made the responsibility of individual citizens in order to serve better both the monuments and the people. A number of fundamental criticisms were made concerning existing practices of heritage management, some of which were said to alienate and patronize people despite opposite intentions. In the course of the public exchange of views various alternatives were suggested and discussed. In particular, more influence should be given to the owners. The overriding criterion for scheduling should be a site’s ability to move people, in other words its ’beauty’ rather than some complex academic reasoning about historical significance. This paper will review the polarized debate that ensued, summarize the main arguments that were made, and discuss emerging key issues in the light of the existing discussion in Sweden, for example in the context of the Agenda Kulturarv project. Should heritage management in a democratic society be liberalized to the extent that it becomes a matter for local communities and individual citizens rather than for the state? (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/607311
- author
- Holtorf, Cornelius LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2006
- type
- Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- democracy, conservation, Cultural heritage, listed buildings
- host publication
- Demokratiskt kulturarv? Nationella institutioner, universella värden, lokala praktiker.
- editor
- Alzén, Annika and Aronsson, Peter
- pages
- 103 - 115
- publisher
- Linköping University
- ISSN
- 1653-0373
- ISBN
- 91-975663-2-2, 1653-0373
- 91-975663-2-2
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 829754e9-4976-480c-acd8-ba1b951a7553 (old id 607311)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 16:00:08
- date last changed
- 2019-12-09 15:05:39
@inbook{829754e9-4976-480c-acd8-ba1b951a7553,
abstract = {{This paper is about the recent discussions (known as Denkmalpflegediskussion) on the general organization of heritage management in Germany. The main issue discussed was whether heritage management should be further denationalized (’entstaatlicht’) and made the responsibility of individual citizens in order to serve better both the monuments and the people. A number of fundamental criticisms were made concerning existing practices of heritage management, some of which were said to alienate and patronize people despite opposite intentions. In the course of the public exchange of views various alternatives were suggested and discussed. In particular, more influence should be given to the owners. The overriding criterion for scheduling should be a site’s ability to move people, in other words its ’beauty’ rather than some complex academic reasoning about historical significance. This paper will review the polarized debate that ensued, summarize the main arguments that were made, and discuss emerging key issues in the light of the existing discussion in Sweden, for example in the context of the Agenda Kulturarv project. Should heritage management in a democratic society be liberalized to the extent that it becomes a matter for local communities and individual citizens rather than for the state?}},
author = {{Holtorf, Cornelius}},
booktitle = {{Demokratiskt kulturarv? Nationella institutioner, universella värden, lokala praktiker.}},
editor = {{Alzén, Annika and Aronsson, Peter}},
isbn = {{91-975663-2-2, 1653-0373}},
issn = {{1653-0373}},
keywords = {{democracy; conservation; Cultural heritage; listed buildings}},
language = {{eng}},
pages = {{103--115}},
publisher = {{Linköping University}},
title = {{Should heritage management be democratized? The Denkmalpflegediskussion in Germany.}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/4539853/626116.pdf}},
year = {{2006}},
}