Siarhiej Makarevich, 25.02.2025
Intangible Heritage: Between International Arenas and Local Interpretations
Lecturer: Siarhiej Makarevich (from Belarus), junior research fellow in ethnology, UNESCO Chair on Applied Studies of Intangible Cultural Heritage, University of Tartu
– Doing PhD on Heritage studies, focuses on heritage politics
– Relies on his research on Belarus
Lowenthal (historian and geographer) – “All at once heritage is everywhere – in the news, in the movies, in the marketplace – in everything..” – heritage is everywhere, advocated for heritage in its own rights
Heritage – modern idea, rooted in the ideas of enlightenment, modern historical concepts, during the rise of the nation-states → need to establish a common heritage, was nationalised
– western based idea, spread all over the world
– Cultural property – objects we inherit – need to preserve it for the future
– Who did it? – experts, academically trained professionals had the leading role
– After WWII – heritage concept started evolving, not only cultural property, moved to heritage subjects (people as carriers of heritage), also the idea of cultural landscape, today safe-guarding (understanding that heritage evolves over-time, includes studies, research and education – to ensure the continuity). Now we talk about the heritage communities, experts are now facilitators, without power
– Democratization of heritage – shifting towards people
– Implementation – often differ from expectations
– In the 1920s and 1930s – international preservation linked to the League of Nations
– After WWII – new international standards for preservation and establishment of organizations focused on the preservation (UNESCO most well-known)
– In addition to tangible materials – intangible cultural heritage – what is it?
– In the legal context – does not provide universal definition → practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills, cultural spaces, evolving, transmitted from generations to generations
– Where manifested – oral traditions, events, social practices, rituals, knowledge concerning nature and the universe, traditional craftsmanship
– New definition, since 2003, in order to give new approaches in dealing with heritage
– Heritage as a concept – all heritage is intangible according to Smith, a process of meaning making, a process of ascribing meaning, always a question of power (who defines? what we do?)
– Heritage-making – the object that heritage studies focuses on
– Past vs present – What is the role of heritage for today and for the future? Something in the present
– UNESCO 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage – adopted in 2003, entered into force in 2006, 184 state parties (how do they apply the rules of the convention on the national level?)
– Last year – 71% of the world lived in autocracies compared to 48% ten years ago (half of the countries in the world)
– Belarus – last dictatorship in Europe
– Last democratic elections – in 1994
– 1215 political prisoners, in the last 4 years more than 135 000 people politically repressed
– Difference between the government and the society (2020, society wants to be a subject in political processes)
How does it deal with heritage issues (joined the 2003 convention in 2005)
– Intangible heritage – many synonyms used, there is an inconsistency in the use of terms, demonstrates that there is a also a lack of policies adopted for safeguarding heritage
– Top-down management system
– The Ministry of Culture – sets a five-year plan for augmenting heritage → regional level → district level
– Double listing system
– State list
– Internal list – in accordance with the international convention
– What are in the lists? – ICH canon: traditional ethnic Belarusian rural cultural, cultural workers decide on heritage status, overcomplicated nomination process, no visible results of inscription (you have to report constantly how you are doing)
– Belarus and many other countries – still use listing that overshadows people, listing still in the convention (the heritage will become a deposit in the inventory, not something lively and dynamic → countries compete with heritage on the list)
– UNESCO ICH Lists
– Used classification into 1000 different concepts, shows connections between different types of intangible cultural heritage in the world
– More and more often – final decisions divert more from the expert recommendations → countries push their own heritage according to their interests on the international list
– Heritage diplomacy – how it influences decisions on domestic and international level
– Winter – states and other actors use language of heritage into broader political and economic relations
– Heritage as diplomacy – used as a tool in diplomacy, can be used to bring countries together, can also be a source of contestation, political, can be used to create hierarchical power relations
– Heritage in diplomacy
– Heritage as diplomacy
– Ukrainian art of decorating eggs – inscribed in 2024, jointly with Estonia and Ukraine
– Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine – Christmas Eve tradition, preparation of a joint nomination on the UNESCO ICH List → uses heritage as an instrument for strengthening ties
– Memorials to the Heroes of the Great Patriotic War: Brest Fortress and Mamayev Kurgan – Submitted in 2024 to the Tentative List (1972 Convention) – turn to heritage to promote their own interests and interpretations, a joint project by Belarus and Russia
– Bialowieza Forest – Poland has constructed a wall through the forest – Belarus has called upon the heritage status of the forest to force Poland to stop constructing the wall → failed attempt to push the country’s agenda
– How heritage is used to foster cooperation
– Also heritage used to promote the country’s own agenda – Borscht on the UNESCO ICH list after the start of the war
– inscribed in 2023 on the list of World Heritage in Danger – Odessa old town
– LIVIND – a Finnish project, financed by the ministry of foreign affairs, the goal was to bring together cooperation between different partners (Nordic and Baltic countries and Poland), also to integrate Russia more
– After Russia’s invasion – Russian partners were expelled from the projects
– Actions: webinars and online workshops, on-site project meetings, pilot projects
– How the project talks about itself – no hints on wanting to work with Russia → has boiled down to the ICH of Baltic sea region
– Conclusion – heritage is political – how it is seen and interpreted and used, not only objects
Q&A
– How are projects evaluated, where is the line between propaganda and natural ICH?
– It depends, China however has many listings, it depends from case to case
– More stake-holders – more apolitical is the heritage making actually
