Oh, welcome back. I’m glad you could join me again. I’m professor John Blakeman from the UW- Stevens Point Political Science Department and this is my ongoing lecture series on the U.S. Constitution sponsored by the UWSP Alumni Association and their Alumni College Experience
And so this is lecture number three, what I call Constitutional Politics and Constitutional Interpretation and this should give you hopefully a broad overview on some of the classic ways we argue about the meaning of the Constitution, that’s something that we will cover in
In lecture four as well, and it’s also an introduction to what I call Constitutional Politics, which is our ongoing give and take about what the Constitution means and how it applies. Now the book I’m reading, you know sort of a shameless plug,
But if you’re interested in reading a lot more about the founding era of the constitution and reading the writings of federalists like Alexander Hamilton and James Madison or even anti-federalists. About 25 years ago the Library of America released a two-volume set called “The Debate on the Constitution”
And I would highly recommend it. Okay let’s get underway. Institutional Politics. Understand I’m trained as a social scientist and so I tend to approach Constitutional law not only from a legal standpoint but also from a political standpoint simply because the the Constitution guides our public policy
And as we will see, our basic political institutions often have differing interpretations of the Constitution and so when I talk about Constitutional Politics, what I mean is in part the Constitution is a political document. It creates our national political system and it emerged from a very political meeting, the Constitutional Convention, which as
Scholars have noted the Constitutional Convention was a bundle of compromises. It was a series of compromises between delegates from the 13 original states, well actually 12 original states because one state did not bother to send a delegation, but they didn’t always agree on what the Constitution
Outcome should be and so they had to compromise on many different things. Now the Constitution itself is silent about who should interpret it and how it should be interpreted. Now later on we will come across a very famous case: Marbury VS. Madison,
1803, which I bet you’ve heard of Marbury. That’s where the Supreme Court declares that it has the power of Judicial Review, it has the power to interpret the Constitution and tell us what it means and it’s been that way for over 200 years but the document itself is silent about who should interpret
The Constitution and how the method of interpretation and so that leads to a lot of political debate. It leads to ongoing political, legal and constitutional debates over what the Constitution means and that’s just a fact of American political life. Some people like that; other people hate it. But the fact is
As we’ll see, any political era, there’s going to be sometimes very profound disagreement over what the Constitution means. Now who interprets the constitution? Well Marbury VS. Madison tells us that it’s federal judges and the U.S. Supreme Court, especially since the Constitution is a fundamental law
And the role of judges in our constitutional system is to interpret the law. There are two concepts here worth mentioning. One is Judicial Review and Judicial Review is simply the power of a court to review a law as to whether it’s constitutional or not. Now at the federal level, federal courts
Exercise Judicial Review frequently, they frequently review federal laws for their constitutionality, they can also review state laws for their constitutionality. Judicial Review exists at the state level as well, every state has a Supreme Court and every state Supreme Court will exercise some type of Judicial Review
Over state law, sometimes even federal law. Judicial Supremacy is a different concept, this is the argument that when it comes to interpret the Constitution, judges are supreme and especially the U.S. Supreme Court and Judicial Supremacy means that the U.S. Supreme Court has the final say on what the
Constitution means. Now that’s controversial, you make up your own minds to be sure, but over 200 years of political experience we’ve pretty much accommodated ourselves to the idea of Judicial Supremacy, that the Supreme Court has the final say. There are a couple of exceptions where
We have amended the Constitution to overturn a Supreme Court decision on the Constitution but that’s very very rare. There’s another concept to think about here too, what we call Coordinate Construction and we have to remember that the Judiciary, Congress and the Executive branch are co-equal, in our constitutional system they are
Meant to be equal to each other. Now you know one branch may have a check or balance over the power of another branch of government, absolutely, that’s what the separation of powers is. That’s what checks and balances means, but the separation of powers also means that each of the three branches
Is equal to the other two and of course that means when it comes time to interpret the Constitution, judges interpret the Constitution, members of Congress do as well, Congress as an institution interprets the Constitution, the Executive branch always has to interpret the Constitution and we are often caught up in conflicts
Over whose interpretation matters the most and sometimes that’s a really hard question to figure out. Now other things to think about: who interprets the constitution? Well judges do, Congress does, the Presidency does, Executive Agencies do, so not only the President, the White House or the
Executive Office but the IRS which is an agency has to interpret the Constitution from time to time, Health and Human Services has to interpret the Constitution, the Agriculture Department has to interpret the Constitution. It’s not so noticeable in the public’s eye, generally speaking, but Executive
Agencies have to have to figure out what the document means, what constitutional principles are important and guiding when they implement public policy. Interest groups interpret the Constitution. The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU, very focused on the free speech clause, freedom of expression, the NAACP, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People,
Has litigated a lot of 14th amendment discrimination equal protection cases, the National Rifle Association has litigated a lot of second amendment cases. Interest groups really matter and our constitutional politics are sometimes driven by how interest groups view constitutional interpretation as well. Don’t forget the states, we’ve got 50 states,
Several territories states litigate, states interpret the federal Constitution as it applies to them. Then there’s us, We the People, we have to interpret the Constitution as well. We have to figure out on our own what we think the document means, now of course
We should rely on judges, we should rely on Congress, we should rely on Presidents, interest groups, state governments, but at the end of the day we also have to engage in this process and that’s fine. We should argue with each other about what the Constitution means, we should do so peacefully, absolutely,
Respectfully, but yeah we should focus on how we interpret the document as well. Then others? I don’t know, foreign governments who diplomatically engage with the United States, they have to think about what our Constitution means from time to time especially when they are interacting with the U.S. State Department on a Treaty issue
For example. So there are others I’ve left out to be sure, but yeah this might give you a different perspective. So when it comes time to interpret the U.S. Constitution, it’s not just the Supreme Court and judges. We do rely on them mostly and that’s fine but all of these other institutions and
Agencies and actors have something to say as well.
Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, everyone. Welcome to WHIPIC Roundtable 2022. We are delighted to meet you all today. I’m your host, Sujin Heo, from International Centre for the Interpretation and Presentation of World Heritage Sites, in short, WHIPIC. Since we are officially established earlier this year, we have hosted diverse online meetings,
And events associated with Heritage Interpretation and Presentation. As one of them, we are happy to host this Roundtable event and invite you all today. Throughout the past project that WHIPIC has conducted during the last two years, we realized the inevitability of dissonance in heritage originating from different understanding and interpretation of heritage.
So in this roundtable, we will be trying to step forward to how we should deal with dissonance in heritage sites, including World Heritage. WHIPIC Roundtable 2022 comprises three presentations, and open discussion session, where we look into different heritage sites with diverse voices and narratives. Celebrating the 50th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention,
We expect this roundtable to provide good discussions for a better present and future for heritage and the people who appreciate heritage. Before beginning the roundtable, I would like to introduce two very special remarks. First, I would like to present the opening remarks from Mr. Jaesoon Lee, Deputy Director General of WHIPIC.
He has sent us the video of his opening remarks. Shall we? Thank you very much for your kind words, Mr. Lee. Now I would like to invite Dr. Sujeong Lee, Head of Research and Development Office at WHIPIC for welcoming remarks. Good morning and good afternoon all. I’m Sujeong Lee,
The Head of Research and Development Office of WHIPIC. I would like to thank you all to participate and contribute to this very important topic of our roundtable. Solidarity is a key factor in sharing heritage values and expanding the benefits of heritage by leading us to the inclusive interpretation.
I would like to thank all of you to participate in this meeting and we expect today’s valuable presentation and extensive discussions would enlighten our centre in setting out our future research topics as well. Thank you again for all presenters, discussants, and moderator, and all participants. Thank you, Dr. Lee, for your warm welcome.
Before we move on, I would like to announce that WHIPIC Roundtable 2022 is now being recorded and will be uploaded to our YouTube channel with English and Korean subtitles later. So please keep your eyes on our social media to check the update. Now I’m honored to introduce our moderator, Dr. Hyunkyung Lee.
Dr. Lee is an Assistant Professor at Critical Global Studies Institute at Sogang University in South Korea. Her research interests includes difficult heritage in East Asia, transnational heritage networking, heritage interpretation, and peace-building at UNESCO. Also, as a heritage professional, she’s an Expert Member of the Cultural Heritage Committee in Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea,
And a Member of the Korean Committee for UNESCO Memory of the World. Dr. Lee, I would like to invite you here. I’m so honored to participate in this meaningful, significant roundtable event as a moderator in order to discuss the solidarity in Heritage Interpretation and Presentation.
The WHIPIC Roundtable invites three presenters, and three discussants. Let me briefly introduce them to you. The first presenter is Dr. Višnja Kisić. She is the Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Sport and Tourism, and at UNESCO Chair Master Program in Cultural Policy and Management Belgrade.
As a researcher, educator, and practitioner in heritage and museum field, her work focuses on relations between heritage and politics, in particular, heritage dissonance, memory conflicts, and reconciliation. Next, our second presenter is Mrs. Gegê Leme Joseph. She is an architect and urbanist, set and production designer, and museologist. As a Senior Program Manager,
She oversees the Coalition’s activities in Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean. Gegê also leads much of the Coalition’s global thematic work including the Migration Museums Network. Next, our third presenter is Dr. Ali Moussa Iye. He is a writer, researcher, and world-renowned heritage professional. Since he joined the UNESCO in 1996,
He has contributed to building up diverse African heritage programmes. He was the coordinator of the UNESCO Culture of Peace Programme in the Horn of Africa. And he also was the Head of the History and Memory for Dialogue Department, and directed two meaningful UNESCO programs, the Routes of Dialogue,
And the General and Regional Histories Project. Next, our first discussant is Mr. Jakub Nowakowski. He is the Director of the Galicia Jewish Museum in Kraków, Poland from 2010. From early years, he was compelled to research the history of his neighbourhood. And he graduated from the Department of Jewish Studies at the Jagiellonian University,
Where he wrote a thesis on Jewish resistance in Kraków during the Second World War. As a museum director, he endeavours to not only diversify the narratives of the Holocaust and the Jewish local history, but also foster intercultural dialogue and cultural education. Next, our second discussant is Dr. Shu-mei Huang.
She is the Associate Professor at the Graduate Institute of Building and Planning, National Taiwan University. Her research area intersects Recovery Planning, Indigenous Studies, and Heritage Studies in East Asia. She published several books related to difficult heritage in East Asia. For example, “Heritage, Memory, and Punishment” in 2019, and “Frontiers of Memory” in 2022.
Next, the last but not least, our third presenter is Dr. Stefanie Lotter. She is a social anthropologist and museum professional working at SOAS, University of London. She is a co-investigator in the project titled, “Heritage as Placemaking: The Politics of Solidarity and Erasure.” Dr. Lotter, whose research focus is on Nepal,
Is at the moment, co-organising a Summer School on “Urban Heritage Mining” in Kathmandu. Now, I’d like to invite Dr. Visnja Kisić as our first presenter. Dr. Kisić, it’s your floor. Thank you, Dr. Lee. Good day and good morning, and good evening, everyone, depending on where from you’re listening to us.
It is a great pleasure to be part of this panel and to actually be able to reflect on some of the experiences and projects that have been going on in the former and the post-Yugoslav context and in the Balkans, where I’m based
And where I’m doing most of my research and activist work as well. For this particular occasion, I’ve chosen to actually focus on very particular project, because in the context of former Yugoslavia, there’s actually numerous initiatives and kind of heritage dissonances and peace-building projects that could be a really good topic for today’s meeting.
But most of them have been led by civil society actors and non-state actors. So I wanted to focus on the one that succeeded in bringing official administrations, ministries of culture and cultural heritage, as well as institutes for heritage protection in the whole region
To do a common transnational nomination for UNESCO World Heritage Sites. And the object of this was the Medieval Monolithic Tombstones called Stećaks, which covered the span from 15th century, from 12th century to the 16th century. They are bound in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
But could also be found on the bordering territories, Serbia, Croatia, and Montenegro. There’s around 70,000 of them spread across more than 3,000 sites. Carved from limestone, featuring a very wide range of decorative motifs and inscriptions, interesting epitaphs, and featured in quite impressive natural surroundings. So not in the urban centres,
But actually very much outside of the urban centres. Offer us very interesting glimpses into medieval understanding of life and death in the region. So these monuments have been preserved both due to their monumentality, but also due to the fact that there’s a lot of folk superstition that surrounds them,
Folk stories and traditions that are connected to them. And they have also been continually an inspiration for artists and poets, especially from the 19th century onwards. But at the same time, despite being dispersed across four of the Balkan countries, they have been an object of dissonant discourses. And actually, discourses with ethnic prefixes.
And that is due mainly to the birth of 19th century idea of nation-states, different national historiographies that have produced different interpretation of Stećaks. Also in relation to the specific religions, specific ethnicities, namely, Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian. And all those kind of confronting interpretations have been again reignited during the wars in the 1990s,
And following the breakup of Yugoslavia. We can move to the next slide. So the breakup of Yugoslavia is actually the context in which this whole transnational nomination takes place, because it is in this moment, that the dissonance of Stećaks and the contestations around it became, again, renewed
In the search for new, very clean ethnonational identities and new memory wars. So basically, Stećaks have, again, become quite dissonant and quite contested at that moment. And the very kind of process of the very idea of transnational nomination process that took place from 2012 to 2016,
Was to actually bridge again these four countries, previous warring states of Bosnia, Croatia, Montenegro, and Serbia, in a cooperation that took more than five years, and that took quite a strong engagement from the UNESCO Antenna Office in Sarajevo, leading to successful inscription in 2016. We can move to the next slide.
So the nomination process itself had quite a heavy political support. It has been the first official state-run of cooperation since the wars, including both the ministry of each of the four states, as well as numerous heritage professionals. So the prospects of having a heritage inscribed
To the World Heritage List with all the recognition and prestige and tourism attracting powers had acted as quite a good incentive for all four states to cooperate and to somehow find a common ground on Stećaks. And for UNESCO, this transnational nomination has been really an exercise in sort of proving
That World Heritage List, and especially transnational nomination, can be a tool for heritage-led reconciliation, especially in moments where there have been wars or ongoing memory conflicts between different states and among different states. So instead of leaning to different contested national meanings of all four states,
The nomination process during these four years had succeeded in crafting this discourse of interrelations and hybridity. And we can move to the next slide. Yeah, sorry, to the previous one. Can we move back? Yeah, so as you see here, Stećaks are painted as being this monument that kind of transgresses
Both religious, class, and ethnic divisions, that are monuments of everyone and of all classes in the region. And somehow, these kind of dissonant and contested interpretations have been quite avoided and only mentioned in the nomination process. We can go to the next slide. In doing so, there’s been many achievements of this process
And we can discuss them later on. But the most important one was that Stećak’s really connected heritage professionals that were involved in the process itself, creating new trust, new links between them, new sort of solidarities. It also acted as a space for regional cooperation and really succeeded in kind of de-nationalizing
Or de-ethnicizing the contested discourses in the region. It also secured the long-term public protection for Stećaks, and these are all achievements to be applauded. But we can move to the next slide, and see some of the limitations. In the research that I’ve been doing, kind of extensively of this case,
It was seen that World Heritage as a framework itself, tried to lock one discourse. So it tried to reach a consensus that has been a false consensus and has silenced dissonances that still remain in the region, but are just not visible in the nomination itself. Therefore, it allowed for avoiding problematization
Of regional heritage conflicts and kind of trying to nudge them or hide them, at least, for the purposes of the nomination. It also focused a lot on materiality and objectivity and scientific issues related to heritage and downplayed the centrality of interpretations, and actually centrality of the meanings and values,
The different groups attached to these monuments. And in that manner, it also avoided the essence and the centrality of interpretation, and educational programmes further on in the management plan and in the ongoing cooperation between the states. So just to finally conclude with some of the lessons, we can go to the next slide.
So, on one hand, we can see that UNESCO World Heritage List can act as this kind of force to bring about the dialogue and cooperation and reconciliation, if it’s used in a good manner. And if there is time for the cooperation and negotiations to happen.
It also acted as a place in which recognizes, and working with dissonance would be much better than avoiding it, as was here in the case. So more entering into conversation, more dealing with de-naturalizing the basis of this cultural violence and contested interpretations and working towards new ways of understanding and plurality of understanding.
It also shows us that managing heritage sites and memory conflicts has to be done through much more focus on in heritage interpretation and much more focus on its presentation and education in the periods to come, in order to actually bring different actors together and build bridges and solidarity among the plurality of actors
And historic narratives, instead of silencing them. Thank you, that’s just a brief sketch of what was going on from my site. Thank you very much. It’s a very interesting case to show how the transnational nomination give us some ideas of a solidarity and also possibility and limitations, too. Thank you very much.
Our three discussants are also ready to give you some questions. So, Jakub? Thank you, Dr. Lee. Thank you, Dr. Kisić, it was very, very interesting. And then my question is actually something that all three of us discussants were interested in. I mean, what were the dissonances involved in that nomination?
In your opinion, the same process could be implemented in the context of, for example, Russian-Ukrainian conflict war or Palestinian-Israeli conflicts, or other situation, where, actually, national narratives do not agree on the meaning or managing of the site? Yeah, I would say it could actually have quite a big influence
On how we can deal with conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Palestine, at least, the much I know about the conflicts there. And as in many other cases, here, the issue was that medieval Balkans was territory of borders that have been shifting constantly and nation-states and ethnicities kind of living together,
Constantly rearranging their own practices, and rulers and so on. And suddenly, you get the 19th century in this idea of kind of clean ethnic state and ethnic nation-state, in which everyone wants to draw the borders and want to make their countries the biggest possible. So the disputes around heritage
And the meaning of heritage and who claims it to be theirs are actually connected to the fight for resources and more territories in the region, which is kind of very similar to what is going on between Russia and Ukraine at the moment, with loads and loads of different historical recollections
Being put in the dispute, and also what is going on with Israel and Palestine. So yeah, I could go into more details about what exactly were the dissonances, but the dissonances were not connected only to the historiographies of Serbian nation-state, Bosnian nation-state, and Croatian nation-state, in particular.
But actually, civil society actors, different interest groups, and so on, people in forums and medias were also having their own interpretations that kind of tweaked a little about Stećaks in this or that manner. And it’s interesting that Stećaks were actually promoted as this common South Slavic heritage during Yugoslav times,
And as soon as Yugoslavia dissolved the process of re-nationalizing and re-ethnicizing Stećaks was actually happening. Very interesting, thank you so much. Thank you so much. And Dr. Shu-mei Huang, are you ready? Thank you, Dr. Lee. And thank you, Dr. Kisić, for a great presentation. My question is about heritage interpretation.
What would be the reason to prevent the role of heritage interpretation to play out more in this particular case? And I’m curious, is there any ongoing effort to fill the gap? So I would say on one hand, discussing it openly has been seen as too risky, by all the member states.
There was one interpretation that was agreed upon in 2013. The nomination should have proceeded in 2014, and then one of the sides said, “No, it’s not Serbian enough.” Like, the Serbian side hasn’t been represented enough. And that was like, they were playing ping pongs, especially the national actors, and also the heritage professionals
That were put in the position of representing their own nation-state and their own national interests, even though that hasn’t been explicitly expected from them. But I think just the framework of UNESCO in which the public authorities and nation-states that are nominating the sites, and that should then negotiate their own dissonances,
Is the one that was kind of pushing both heritage professionals as well as UNESCO representatives to just avoid dealing with these dissonances. So dissonances are mentioned in one sentence, but then avoided altogether. And this kind of meaning of heritage being a bit of, Stećaks being a bit of heritage for everyone
Is actually serving the purpose of not bringing in the disputes and dissonance. What was interesting, I was getting these ideas from UNESCO representatives that actually, if they were to put heritage dissonance explicitly in the nomination, then this should have been seen as a risk that should be mitigated in the management plan
And also the risk to outstanding universal value, which expects you to valorize a kind of a single big narrative. So it is all a lot of things at the same time, but I would say, also the UNESCO discourse, which is still kind of this authorized heritage discourse, as we know it,
That wants to have these stable, fixed narratives that can be protected in the management plans. And I would say, this has to be changed and I hope this would be changed in the future as UNESCO’s kind of position on these issues is changing as well. But thank you for your inspiring question.
Thank you very much. Thank you so much, Dr. Višnja. I would like to listen to more about your responses, but shall we move to Stefanie’s question? Hello, yes, absolutely fascinating. And just following on what you’ve just started to explain, is peace a precondition for transnational identity-based heritage nomination? I would say, no.
And hopefully, no, because I think, in many cases, actually, heritage field and heritage professionals could be a head of the nation-state politics and conflicts, and actually trying to steer these common dialogues and mutual interpretations and work towards the heritage protection and mutual understanding.
But I think what is limiting in distance is that, actually, it is, again, nation-states, and ministries who should ratify the nomination process. And that, in many cases, impedes the proceeding of transnational nominations as such. So I think some other methods have been much quicker and much more agile to work with reconciliation,
Especially in the post-Yugoslavia context for example, and in the Balkan context. It had to do with civil society actors and many non-state initiatives or just single institution initiatives and networks. But hopefully, that can change. Thank you very much. Really important question. It’s very important question. And then, so there are lots of dimensions
And dynamics in the transnominations processes, but we can see how the UNESCO can work with the multiple, like agents and actors in the heritage interpretation. It’s a very significant matter. Thank you very much. Then shall we move to the second presentation now? So Mrs. Gegê Leme Joseph? So hello everyone, good morning.
My name is Gegê Leme Joseph, and I’m the Senior Program Manager for Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, with the International Coalition of Sites of Conscience. Thank you for having me here today to share our perspective about the important conversation. So for those of you who don’t know our work,
The International Coalition of Sites of Conscience is a global network of historic sites, museums, and memory initiatives connecting past struggles to today’s movements for human rights and social justice. We help sites around the world better engage their communities in building peaceful future by providing training, networking, and grants. Next slide, please.
And we are a global organization spread all around the world. So in order to best share Sites of Conscience’s lessons, challenges, and experiences of solidarity and participation in interpretation processes, I’d like to start with a reflection about the idea of solidarity in heritage interpretation
As a means to “overcome entailed dissonance of heritage sites.” So next slide, please. Overcoming dissonance can be seen as either the pursuit of a unison, or maybe alternatively, as the pursuit of a dynamic harmony of voices, experiences, and narratives. So Sites of Conscience strongly believes in building solidarity
Through multiplicity of perspectives and voices, cooperation, and power sharing. So I’m going to talk from this perspective today, which our expertise lies. So in a dynamic harmony of voices, dynamic, implies a non-static understanding of the past and how it impacts present and future. Harmony, implies equity and diversity within those narratives.
So this approach requires a fluid assessment of meaning-making, providing opportunities for this continued and constructive dialogue and negotiation between parties. So the goal from a Sites of Conscience’s perspective is not to meld all perspectives into one that can be seen as a singular,
But to lift the very diversity of these understandings and truths, in a way that reflects the complexity of these historical narratives and lived experiences. So this leaves room for them, the identification and amplification of shared understandings amongst the diversity of these perspectives and the process that then leads to bridging difference
And promoting solidarity and peace. But on the other hand, if the goal is to create a static unison, then we risk privileging one perspective over the other and endanger the sincere and sustainable engagement of community members and others. And it’s what Nigerian author, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie calls, “the single stories”
That we are talking about here as well. But they are simplistic, incomplete and often false narratives that exclude the experiences, needs, and voices of many groups, especially minority groups. And ultimately, contribute to divisive rhetoric, negative stereotype, discrimination, hatred, and violence. So that is something we need to start exploring more,
Maybe in interpretation in heritage and World Heritage Sites. So next slide, please. So we believe that this is a great moment to start evaluating or looking into how interpretation of World Heritage Sites has been done, if it’s been inclusive. We don’t think we can establish a true long-term relevance
And sustainability in a World Heritage Site without infusing this community ownership and meaning-making, decision-making, and the future plans of the site very early in the process of nomination. So by building this ground up process that is centered in cooperation and co-creation, then this can become early, a path that is a shared path,
And a blueprint for solidarity going forward. So on the other hand, our experience shows that when nomination processes are led from the top-down, disputes for narrative protagonism, quickly erode the ability to build harmony and to build solidarity. Moving from dissonance into a dynamic harmony is what we call, at Sites of Conscience,
It’s a path to becoming a Site of Conscience. This is not an easy or fast process, and we understand that our sites are at very different stages in this path. So a Site of Conscience doesn’t become a Site of Conscience because they are already, they have achieved this fully inclusive ground-up holistic approach,
But because they have a clear commitment to follow that path, hand in hand with their communities, as an ongoing process. And then they also want to develop these practices and it trickles down through organizational, technical practices for the benefit of everybody involved. So next slide, please.
So we have worked that over the last few years closely with some World Heritage Sites, which are Sites of Conscience. Maison des Esclaves in Senegal, is the first World Heritage Site in Africa as a founding member of the Coalition. And as a key site capturing the magnitude,
And the brutality of the Transatlantic Slave Trade, Maison des Esclaves was struggling to meet the needs of its growing visitors a few years ago. So in March 2015, the Coalition collaborated with Maison des Esclaves on a comprehensive needs assessment, resulting in this, kind of a multi-year plan
To support site’s development into a regional and global centre for excellence on visitor engagement on issues of freedom, migration, and slavery. So a multi-party team involving from government to academics and members of the community were working with Maison des Esclaves to support this process in this dynamic transformation.
And the project includes an update to the permanent exhibition that is based on recent research, reflects today’s understandings of the site, and of the Transatlantic Slave Trade. And at present, the exhibition of Maison des Esclaves do not incorporate the latest research on very nuanced understandings of the history
Of the house as it is understood today. So through this multi-perspective approach and Dialogue Methodology, we’re helping, We’re supporting Maison des Esclaves in interpreting the difficulty and emotionally charged nature of the exhibitions they have, and to also train the tour guides that work with them to connect scholarships,
Site content and the visitor personal experiences. Next slide, please. I also want to mention a project we launched in 2022 entitled “Correcting the Record.” And this project is aimed to document a one-of-a-kind methodology that will allow Sites of Conscience around the world to recalibrate their repositories, as we see, to amplify silenced voices
And promote more inclusive narratives, mitigating discrimination, and exclusion in the site. So this initiative will help address the issue of official historic narratives, the singular narratives, and foster new understandings in that place. So “Correcting the Record” invited six Sites of Conscience across the Global South to develop case studies
By revisiting their organizational practices and identifying gaps in their approaches to building these repositories in an inclusive manner. So after identifying underrepresented communities, and these sites are working with these communities to pilot Case Studies that they went through, which they will create blueprints on how to fill those gaps at the organization,
And how to work, learn to work, and cooperate with communities going forward. So this framework has been tested by these organizations and then we hope that it’ll bring important learnings on moving from dissonance to a dynamic harmony of voices, and then it can have important lessons also
In terms of solidarity for World Heritage Sites. Next slide, please. And one of these sites is the Intercontinental Slavery Museum, in Mauritius, which is developing a co-creation curatorial plan for an exhibition about marginalized Black Rastafari community in Mauritius. The museum is still in development implementation
And is premised on being fully inclusive of Mauritius’ histories and narratives of slavery and of the experience of the Afro-Malagasy community. But the museum team felt the need to open their practices while they’re still in development to transition from what they feel is a very academic-led moment of their development
To a community-focused organizational commitment. And that would start early in the process. So this project will help create a framework of co-creation, a co-creation for them for development of the museums, it could be exhibitions and programmes and management even, going forward. So in summary, Sites of Conscience believes that there is no fast,
No easy route for creating solidarity to move from dissonance towards a dynamic harmony of voices in heritage practices, nor in World Heritage nomination processes, or any other process. It requires flexibility while maintaining focus, it requires relinquishing power in favour of cooperation, negotiating perspectives towards a shared goal, moving away from Western-centric cultural perspectives,
Many times to embrace a diversity of perspectives, cultivating patience, endurance, and the willingness to live without definite answers to difficult questions without the single story in the long run. But we believe that the benefits of this process when it’s done collectively and in a sensitive manner, can yield unparalleled results.
That’s where we believe and how we work. So as the African Proverb says, “If you want to go fast, you go alone. And if you want to go far, you go together.” Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you very much.
Yes, your final remark is very encouraging and I firmly believe that the words, the solidarity and harmony is not static, but is a dynamic act and processes. Thank you very much. – Yes, thank you. – Shall we start our discussion with the three discussants?
Dr. Shu-mei Huang has the first, has a first question to Gegê. Thank you so much, that was really touching. So my question is about mechanism and founding. The kind of multi-year evaluation that the International Coalition of Sites of Conscience did for the Senegal case,
Indeed, is very important to the site as a site of dynamic interpretation. Nevertheless, many sites, as we know, may stop short advancing their practices after being listed as national nominants of World Heritage. And therefore, close the door for a more dynamic, diversified interpretation.
So how did that the kind of project come to being, and who should sponsor this kind of evaluation without too much intervention? It’s a very important question. In the specific case of Maison des Esclaves, there was a confluence of factors that led to the project.
So there were needs identified by Maison des Esclaves, we had discussed with them. Sites of Conscience, we have a very close relationship with them as a founding member. And then there was a visit by Mr. Darren Walker, the president of the Ford Foundation to Maison des Esclaves, and the Ford Foundation became interested
In supporting Maison des Esclaves in a process of upgrade and revitalization to attend these needs. So at that stage, the Maison des Esclaves and Site of Conscience collaborated in developing this needs assessment that could be quite broad and inclusive. It involves Sites of Conscience and Senegalese specialists, especially, and developed a comprehensive proposal,
And with the outcomes of these assessment for this project, this upgrade project. The project was jointly financed by the Ford Foundation and the Senegal government. And this was a very extremely important request by the Maison des Esclaves, and the Senegalese counterparts, to ensure the ownership and leadership of the revitalization project
To be with Senegal. In addition, most specialists involved were Senegalese, and we consider that the client is the Senegalese government. So that was a process that ended up bringing many of these parts together. But the leadership stayed very clearly with the Senegalese counterparts. And who should fund such projects?
I mean, ideally, those with a vested interest in the project should find, or involved in the management, should have the ability to fund them, especially local governments. But we know that governments do not always have those funds. So in that case, we need to make sure that whichever organization funds,
Or is interested in helping to fund, that they have to do it. They have to accept a mechanism of work within the project that doesn’t allow them to interfere with the views of the project, or we have to ensure that they don’t have any hidden agendas. So whoever the funder is,
Those involved in the manage interpretation of the site, as well as the relevant community, should be leading all decision-making in the process. In the case of Maison des Esclaves, they made very sure that their voice and the Senegalese government’s voice prevailed throughout all decisions in the project. Hmm. Thank you so much.
If you like the mechanics, and then funding is very important matter in heritage interpretation, too. Thank you very much to touch the practical matter. And shall we move to the second question by Dr. Stefanie Lotter? Yes, thank you very much for this wonderful presentation. I have a twofold question for you.
So, Mr. Nowakowski and I, we agree with the emphasis on the plurality of voices and the concept of dynamic harmony that the Coalition highlights. However, we would like to understand how the Coalition deals with A, narrations that are based on stereotypes and misconceptions, and B, with the co-curators, who co-oped and coerced.
So, in other words, how do you position the project in relation to the dangers of misrepresentation and censorship? Okay. Yes, it’s a very delicate work that needs to be done. In regards to that, we are fully cognizant of all those risks. So I think it’s important,
We need to highlight that the process of bringing a plurality of voices adopted by the Sites of Conscience framework is community-led. So this process, we’re working with them to build capacity and methodologies and frameworks, if they need to implement this ground-up participatory process and how to be truly inclusive and representative.
Also, this matters because they are, the stakeholders, local communities, are the ones who have the knowledge about this narrative. We try not, or we do not intervene or curate the process. We work and endeavor to give tools, every tool necessary for this to happen if they don’t have tools of their own.
So we work with them to sometimes develop new tools and from the tools they have, or they can learn from the tools that we can offer. So community members that are trained for this mediation or curatorial position, usually is also not one, it’s more than one person.
So you also have those many voices there, it’s a collective, that is looking into implementing this multi-perspective approach. So at the end of the day, it’s the plurality of voices themselves in this context that brings the necessary nuance of perspectives. And this, by having this nuance and this variety of perspectives and likes,
But per se, this sheds a light on the contrast between what is a legitimate and sincere account or lived experience that’s being narrated, and an incomplete or stereotypical narration. So from this multi-perspective approach, when it’s done also using dialogue, it accommodates the diversity and it singles out, and it’s easier to single out
The misconceived and stereotypical versions of this. So on the contrary, going back to Chimamanda’s response, is when you don’t have enough voices when you only have a singular voice, then any version is up for grabs. You don’t have the checks and balances.
And also lastly, I mean, any process of such type has to have checks and balances with the accuracy of historical events and facts and all the scientific processes that also go hand in hand with this. So there are checks and balances everywhere. It needs to be carefully done.
And in terms of the coercers, as supporters of the process, when we step, we do step in, in some points, when we see that it’s bluntly, there’s a blunt coercion out towards a certain point of view. But mostly, we try to keep a very keen eye and spot when that happens,
Discuss the behavior, talk to the group, ask them what they feel, how they feel about that, and try to help them redirect the process. So we don’t go and intervene either, it’s not our job to do that. We are there to support their process. So I think that’s basically my response.
Thank you very much for your details, like the answers responding to Dr. Stefanie Lotter’s question. And Jakub, if you don’t mind, could you please give a very quick question? And also, Gegê, could you please give a bit shorter answer to them, yeah? – Yeah. – Jakub? Yes, thank you.
I mean, again, your work is universal and relevant also in the context of where I’m coming from, with the Polish-Jewish relations and the post-Holocaust traumas. And I fully agree that communities participation is something that is extremely important. But sometimes, this community participation, inevitably risk reinforcing localism or tribalism.
And therefore, rejects, the voice of the different might challenge the boundary of the so-called Balkan community or pre-existing self ideas. And in other cases, the communities may not be at all interested in remembering or discussing the past either of their own or the others. So have you worked in such environments?
Yes, thank you for this question. I have worked in a project in Brazil before the Coalition, I was the coordinator of a collaboration between UNESCO and the city of Rio de Janeiro to develop a museum plan and interpretation plan for the Valongo Wharf with the surrounding neighborhood, Little Africa.
And in this project, we faced a series of situations. This project was built from the beginning, really community-driven. I was there as a facilitator, as a technician, similarly to how we operate the Sites of Conscience. And even with a fully representative staff, steering committee, scientific committee,
Entirely built around the Black Movement, around the local communities, and the communities of relevance for that project. There was intense competition for protagonism and whose story that was, who had the right to tell that story, who should be leading the entire project, even though the leaders
Up to the secretary of culture of Rio at the time, was a Black woman. So it was a fierce dispute that emerged, and it halted the project in many ways, and in many steps. But I saw this as a positive aspect. It was very difficult, but it was positive.
Because the conversations are reflective of the experiences they have, they live. There is no unified voice of the Black Movement or of Black people in Brazil and what they’ve been through. You can’t force that, but that was an opportunity to discuss this variety of experiences and where they wanted to come from,
In a project where these experiences could finally start breaking the denialism that Brazil has around the narratives stemming from enslavement of Africans. So this was like, it had disputes of who mattered, who didn’t matter, and also what needed to be said. A lot of them didn’t want to focus the project
On the aspect of what the Wharf symbolizes in terms of a disembarkment place of enslaved Africans. Actually, the part of the most disembarkments in the world, in the America, sorry. But they wanted to focus on the narratives of resistance, of the narratives of the achievements,
Of the contributions of Afro-Brazilians, to what Brazil is today. But this also was an interesting discussion that was a necessary one. So had we had more time, as the project got halted, in the current Brazilian political context, but had we had more time, I believe that time and patience would’ve created
An amazing result in this process. You have to navigate through it. We can meet corners and detours at every stop, at every point of the way, but you have to work around it, and find ways to carry on until you get the result that you’re supposed to try to achieve.
Thank you very much, Gegê. – Thank you. – Thank you. – Thank you, Jakub. – My pleasure, thank you. Yes, it’s like one more presentation is waiting for us. So Dr. Ali Moussa Iye, are you ready to give us your paper? Speaking about solidarity in relation to the heritage of slavery,
May be considered inappropriate and even a little bit provocative, given the fact that this history is precisely characterized by the most selfish, immoral and criminal pursuit of profit. Indeed, slavery was one of the greatest tragedy of humanity marked by barbaric mistreatment of human beings, including children, woman, elders.
And so the figure mentioned in the slide that I would like to show, give us an idea of the scope of this tragedy. Next slide, please. Yes, so as you can see, we have, I mean, in terms of numbers, 50 million Africans deported in different part of the world.
And we have 120 to 150 millions of what we can call a collateral death during the raid in the village, the serving during the long march, and the sea crossing, et cetera. So this crime against humanity was perpetuated generally with a general indifference. And I can even see the general support
Of the population in countries that benefited from it. So that’s why, to discourage any gesture and feeling of solidarity towards the enslaved people, the beneficiaries of these business have called upon religions, arts, sciences, law, to dehumanize the victim of their greed. And even especially vocabulary,
Has been invited to bestialize and to commodify them. For instance, in the Black Court developed by the Slave Nation, the enslaved people was called, “Moveable Property,” “Moveable Properties” or “ebony wood.” So, and many of the thinkers of the so-called Sanctuary of Enlightenment have not shown a particular solidarity with the victim of slavery.
Some of them even participated in the construction of this theory of the hierarchy of race and culture that served to justify this treatment. However, alongside the ethical and moral failure, there have been incredible expression of an act of solidarity towards the victim during the slavery time.
And could you please show the next slide? Yes. And here, I would like to mention the admirable work undertaken about the Abolitionist movement in the 18th and 19th century to denounce the barbarity of the slave system. I have to recall, I would like to recall the righteous activist
Who helped the enslaved African to escape the United States to Canada by inventing a very ingenious network of solidarity called, “The Underground Railroad.” But I especially would like to recall the exemplary action of the inhabitant of a small village in France called Champagney,
Who in 1789, decided to address a complaint to their king in which they respectfully asked him to abolish slavery. And the written plea that submit to the king is really very, very… I mean, moving and I just would like to mention they said, “The inhabitant and community of Champagney cannot think
Of the evils suffered by the Black in the colonies without being filled with the deepest sorrow when they imagine their fellow human beings, still united to them by the double bound of religious, being treated more harshly than the beast of Berlin.” So this is a very important quotation because mostly,
The common belief is that people are saying, “At that time, slavery was legally and morally accepted.” That was not true. And this is a concrete example that villages, there are people who really condemned that. So, but paradoxically, the expression of solidarity diminished and even disappeared after the abolition of slavery.
And that is the paradox of this history. The history of torture has been, I mean, has been disappeared. The site of memory has been devastated, violated and transformed. The archives have been hidden or destroyed to really organize the silence. Fortunately, the oral tradition, and the cultural expression of the enslaved people
Was the only that could survive this deliberate, I mean, organized strategy to destroy the memory and the history of the slavery. And the other paradox of this history is that it was this cultural expression that became now a marker of the post-slavery society, and even important feature of their soft power.
I mean, we all know how the United States has, was using jazz or blues or rock, to expand their influence across the world. And that was the production of the enslaved people who really helped them to do that. So, but since the 80s,
New waves of solidarity arose to come to term with this history. However, many of the concerned countries have chosen to promote only the achievement of the white abolitionist, ignoring the resistance and contribution of the enslaved people for their emancipation. For instance, the Haitian Revolution,
Which was the first and the only victory of enslaved people over their oppression, was completely silenced and concealed from history curriculum across the Western world. Therefore, one of the great obstacles for the consolidation of solidarity is the capacity and the willingness of the concerned country to change their national narratives,
To reconsider the historical figure and heroes and to revisit their museum and historical site. We have heard recently about the controversy around the removal of monument dedicated to historical figure, who advocated for slavery in the U.S., in the UK, in France, in Portugal, in Netherlands, and in different other countries.
So how do these countries prepare, How are these countries prepared to accommodate the rights to memory of a large portion of the citizens who are claiming to exercise in conformity of the principle of their democratic institution? How are they prepared to accommodate that claim?
How serious can policy for recognition of the concealment be taken, if public spaces continue to be overcrowded with monument and memorials dedicated to people who advocated and who promoted slavery? How museums, history curricula, site of memories can continue to display colonial mystification and representation, which constitute a denial of the past suffering
Of large part of the citizens? Those were the questions that UNESCO’s Slavery Route Project was confronted with from its inception. The project is now called, “Route of Enslaved People,” It was created and it was based of the fact that ignoring or obscuring major historical event constitute, in itself,
An obstacle to peace, reconciliation and cooperation. So I would like to conclude my intervention by calling how this project, which I had the honor to direct during 15 years, addressed the challenges of reconciliation and solidarity. Please, can you show the last slide? So from the beginning, the project has clearly posed the ethical
And moral stakes of the slavery to help the different stakeholders to understand that the remembrance of the slave trade is not intended to steer up a painful and traumatic past with the aim of producing guilt. It is a necessary move to recognize a common heritage that has determined us
And can allow us to better understand certain evils of today’s world such as discrimination and racism. So I think the project has succeeded to open up a project like that, the issue. The project also have, from the beginning, have put the issue of slave trade and slavery at the global level
And succeeded to impose it as an international issue. And this orientation has helped to de-racialize the slave trade and slavery and present it as a tragedy for the whole humanity, which has shaped our modern world. The “Enslaved Route” project also has always began. It is activity with the scientific approach
Because that is the approach that really helped us to distance from the emotion and perhaps to, and to recover and to transcend all the polemics about this history. The project also has developed a holistic perspective of this issue by also tackling the, I mean, the preservation of memory, the educational aspect,
The contribution of the enslaved people to the progress, et cetera. So it was really a holistic dimension that has been privileged. The project also contributed to the awareness about the necessity to engage dialogue, healing and reparation processes, that would facilitate recognition, reconciliation, social coalition, and living together in post-slavery society.
So I think, we can say that today there is more and more countries that are ready to open these tragic pages of their history and to try to consider this memory into their commemorative agenda. And I think that now, new pages are open.
And I think, and then we hope that these countries will really begin to write new books about this history, this particular history. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your very insightful presentation. And then that gives us some lesson to rethink how our attitude should be
To treat the difficult heritage and complex history. So we are going to have a very short discussion. So Dr. Stefanie Lotter, are you ready to give him the first question? Yes, thank you very much. That was a fantastic presentation and I wish we would have much more time to discuss this thoroughly.
The first question that I would ask you is, you’ve spoken to an add-on approach in interpretation and also, perhaps as a revolution. So taking the second approach in, I would like to ask you, as underrepresentation in material culture related to slavery is a problem in national collections,
Which goes hand in hand with the active concealment of dark history in national collections and archives, I would like to ask, how can we use national collections and colonial archives today to display the techniques of concealment and hiding historical truths? I think it’s very interesting to use the same colonial archives
And the same material that has been used to silence this history to be used to reveal this history. It’s very interesting. And I think, yes, there are many ways to do that. The first, one of the first would be, for instance, when there are permanent or even temporary exhibition
In museums inside of memory, the interpretation of the enslaved people or the descendant of the enslaved people be critically showcased next to the interpretation and the narratives of the dominant narratives. That is a way of showing an archive, saying what these archives… How these archives have been used to tell what the society,
The dominant society wants to tell, and then give the interpretation of the marginalized population, which have suffered from this history just next to that, so that the visitors can really compare. They have the middle of the archives, and then they have the different voices of the interpretation.
That is one way of doing any exhibition about slavery, because so far, when we have exhibition of slavery, it was the experts who do it. And sometimes, have this presentation of interpreting on behalf of the marginalized community, what should be there. And I think it’ll be good to go to the communities
To say what they want to see in this exhibition and what will be their feelings and interpretation of that particular archive. That’s one way to do it. Another way to do, is to have a kind of three dimension. You have the dominant interpretation. Of course, you have the archives and the material,
You have the dominant interpretation. You may have also an associate historian from the marginalized community and from the dominant group, to also, with the same historical fact, to show how they interpret. And I think that’s a way of creating what we are talking all this day. It’s the plural and pluralistic interpretation
And perspective of one clear particular historical fact, but giving the possibility to visitors, to make their own opinion about by having the different version. I think that’s a way of using the same colonial archives that have been used to conceal this truth, to reveal it in different manners. Thank you so much.
So we can see the, the power relations between the presentation and interpretation too, and the exhibition. And it’s very difficult to reach the good balance of the pluralistic voices in the exhibition. But we should make an effort. So, Jakub? Could you please unmute? Yeah, sorry.
Well, thank you for this excellent, and again, very relevant presentation. And those tensions that you’ve described are something that we’ve witnessed over the last few years across the world. And I was wondering, how does your project relate to those movements like Black Lives Matter or other social movements
That are bringing into light and challenge the systematic racism, discrimination, or inequality experience in the past, but also today, by the Black people. I mean, this is not only something that we witness in the U.S., but also in South Africa or across the Europe, the toppling of the statues across the cities. Yes.
Yes, I think from… Thank you for your question. From the beginning, I mean, the “Enslaved Route” project was linked to the movement, which tried to fault the social injustice inherited from the slavery, and then from the colonization, from the beginning. In fact, the project was created
Especially to study and to understand the root cause of racism and discrimination today. So from the beginning, the project has undertaken research. We produce a series of publication. We produce themes to really show that link between the racial prejudices, discrimination and racism, and the history of slavery, and of the slave trade.
More profoundly, the project tried to reflect on what we call the racial order that came out from this history. You know, this racial order was established in the 18th century, at the same moment of the capitalism system. So the project studied that, and I think it really give a lot of inspiration
To a lot of movements against racism and discrimination. In different countries, for instance, in the Latin America, and Gegê, she knows very well. In the Latin America, they call that the “pigmentocracy” The hierarchy that is built on the color of your skin. The lighter you are, the above you are.
So it is the whole pigmentocracy in these countries that the project has tried to fault. In South Africa, of course, we call it apartheid. In the French colony, they call it the “Code of the Indigénat.” In the U.S., it is segregation. So the project was really, from the beginning, created to get
A theoretical and scientific basis to understand all that kind of opinion. So it is very linked. And of course, even the fact that, to question the historical figure that are in the public space was one of the claim of the project
That the country is really serious with, this history should reconsider the statues, the name of roads, the street, that they are giving to enslavers. Because it is against their own constitution. They can’t valorize that kind of personality while those who fought for the freedom,
Who fought for the abolition, are not very sufficiently known, especially coming from the enslaved people. So there is a big debate now going on in the UK, in France, in Netherland, to really question what those modern society, what they want to showcase as a national narratives.
So this is a big issue, I think that is. And we hope that we can have other result, not only the crisis in the street, the protestation, but a real change in the policy-making and a real change in the national narratives. Thank you, thank you so much.
So because of the time limit, and then we’re going to, We are going to move to the next question. And Dr. Shu-mei Huang? Thank you, Dr. Lee. Thank you Dr. Ali, for the really interesting, important case sharing. My question is about remembering and living culture expressions among the descendants of the victims.
Assuming that there are partially those who may voluntarily remain silent due to long-existing trauma and fear. So I wonder: what would be the keys to facilitate their remembering? Yes, I don’t know if I really understood your question, but what I can say, in the case of the slavery,
Is that the victims have not only used their cultural expression to resist this de-humanization process, to which they were subjected, or even to survive spiritually, and physically in the very hardship of the slavery. But they used also this cultural expression as a mean to fight the slavery itself.
Because as you may know, through their cultural expression, they passed coded message for the Maroons about how to fight against slavery. For instance, the drums were forbidden by the enslavers. Do you know why? Because the enslaved people used the drums to pass message and to communicate about the position of the military,
To give information to the Maroons to attack. So it was forbidden by the enslavers. The gospels, you know, songs were also another way of really passing a coded message from plantation to plantation, from hill to hills to inform. So the cultural expression were not only cultural,
It has also this political and social aspect of it. And it happened that all these cultural heritage have become today a gift of the enslaved people to the slave societies. That is the paradox that I just mentioned. So it became now the common heritage of those societies.
And so it has, exactly, if the question was to the social aspect, definitely, this expression has that social and political dimension during the slavery time, and even now. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Yeah, thank you very much. It’s like, if only we had more time
And we should expand our roundtable to the next workshop. I should ask the WHIPIC to organize one more roundtable for the further discussion. We have only 10 minutes for the open discussion sessions, but we’ll just try to wrap up what we have learned, and also what we have discussed together.
And I’d like to give you one question. So I hope that all of you can share the very quick insights on the question. Our question is: not only inside the memory associated with a traumatic or a dark past, but also in every heritage site,
Diverse narratives and voices can emerge, which then produces dissonance in heritage. Could you share your opinion on how we should understand the relationship between dissonance and solidarity in heritage? Do diverse narratives and voices interrupt or contribute to solidarity in heritage? So we have already discussed some parts of this question,
But just like, that is a wrapping-up last question for our open discussion. So, Dr. Višnja Kisić, could you please respond to this wrapping-up last question? Yes, I would say that throughout my research and work, I’ve been advocating for this idea that we shouldn’t be dealing
With kind of dissonance heritage only as heritage of kind of war and trauma and heritage that is openly contested at the particular moment. But it actually, heritage in itself, as an act of remembering, and taking positions according to the past and building kind of future visions is this very dissonant endeavor.
And if we recognize it, there’s a diversity of voices, perspectives, and living experiences, in every kind of heritage. Even more so in the ones that sits very comfortably in heritage sites and museums being not disputed, because there is where we see a very kind of silenced marginalizations, oppressions and one-sided narratives.
So I would say, when working with heritage dissonance and bringing solidarity, what we have to be doing is seeing dissonance as a way to understand each other and each other’s perspectives that sometimes are not reconcilable in a particular moment, sometimes are not harmonious.
So it’s more the question of how we live with disagreements, how we can negotiate and share the same space and build relations even if we don’t agree on the historic perspectives, nor on the current, present interest and future visions. And I think this is probably the most difficult endeavor
That we have to be doing. It’s easy to be in solidarity with those that you agree with, and it’s easy to be in solidarity if you can find a common ground or harmonious way forward. But living in solidarity when you don’t agree,
I think this is the virtue that we should all build up. Oh, it’s very, I’m very touched. Yes, I totally agree that dissonance is a kind of a way to understand each other, so we shouldn’t avoid the dissonance. But sometimes, we need to welcome dissonance
And also disagreement, in between different stakeholders for the solidarity. Thank you. So, Gegê, could you please share your opinions with us? Please unmute your mic. Apologies. My opinion is very similar to Višnja’s and to what you were commenting. Dissonance is a reflection of, the collective is a reflection of society.
There is no homogeneity of feelings and perceptions and experiences in society. And the exercise to move from dissonance to harmony to build this path is the opportunity to build understanding, to agree to disagree, and to live, to learn to co-exist and build peace. So this should be the transformative role of heritage
Just provide exactly, along time, that opportunity for those dialogues that are constantly making people live in peace, agreeing to disagree, take place. And it’s not necessarily the same throughout time. So that’s why we can’t expect a monolithic version of history to prevail forever
Because also, the significance of sites, and of heritage, changes with time. or has nuances of the time So I am also supportive of the fact that dissonance is an opportunity, and we must be patient and work through it. And that’s the work that needs to be done. Thank you. Dr. Ali Moussa Iye?
Yes. Yes, thank you. Indeed, I agree with what Gegê has said. Dissonance is, I mean, dealing with the memory, history and heritage is always a challenging process. And because, why? Because it concerns the most intimate feelings and thinking of the people. I mean, it is the national identity, the personal identification.
So there is a kind of psychological, and even I can say, psychiatric dimension of this issue. So we need to learn how to address them with caution, with tact, and with a lot of listening. I think what is important here to manage the dissonance is to avoid,
To learn how to avoid the blame, what I call the “blame game.” That is the first, always. Because each communities want to express their complaint against the other. Because unfortunately, so far, national narratives are built against other narratives, not for, or infusing our narrative.
So this is the normal way of how narratives are built. So it’s always against something. So I think by bringing together in the discussion, scholars who can really help people acquire the capacity to dialogue and to discuss, I think it is a way to rediscover the common heritage.
From my experience of the Slave Route Project, what I learned is that any meeting became, turned out to become a therapy group. It began by anger, by shouts, and then people calmed down, and then they tried to understand each other.
And at the end, everybody agreed that we have to build our common future. We have to build a new way of living because, by the way, we could not separate our, we live in the same space. So what to do? To be fighting all the time, or to just try to live together?
I think people understand that kind of argument when you say, “Okay, the past is the past, we have to understand it, but we have to build a common future.” Then people say, “Yes,” and then they are ready to compromise and to discuss. And this is part also of the process of healing.
People need to be healed from the past, not only the people who suffered, but the people who are descendants of those who also, I mean, perpetuated suffering. It’s important. So that’s my response to this question. Yes, it’s just, Ali’s comment, this reminds me of the building.
We need to build up the ethics of heritage, and particular difficult process. We should approach dissonance with the very ethical manner. – Yes, it is. – And Jakub? Well, thank you. I mean, yes, I agree with everything that was already said. And the polyphony of voices,
Of experiences, is just something that we need to be. That is important, and we need to be aware of, and it’s possible to build a coherent narration that includes this polyphony. And I think, European Union as an entity, could be a good example of such a, a major process.
And again, we need to acknowledge the dissonance and always try to explain, where does it come from? I mean, how the same story is being told in different ways by different groups, to explain that is extremely important. But I think we shouldn’t be complied to accept those narration.
I mean, sometimes in those narrations, those opposing narrations are fueled by stereotypes, by misconceptions. And I think the next step for educators, for historians, for musicians, is to be challenging those narrations, which are hurting other, which are based on false, and false and wrong ideas. And that’s certainly the next step.
Yes, thank you very much. Education is also a very important matter to deal with the dissonance towards the solidarity. Dr. Shu-mei Huang? Thank you, I truly agree with previous comments about how dissonance should be seen as an opportunity. And particularly for me, it can be an opportunity for remaking identity,
Not necessarily giving up our own identity, but to embrace more fluid, diversified identity. Because a lot of dissonance that we can see from cases, actually have to do with our limit, our being limited by identities or associations themselves that might be products of historical violences and operation.
So dissonance, I think, offers ways for us to rework these identity and open up for new chances. Thank you very much. Wow, it’s like the dissonance also gives us some other opportunity to remake identity. It’s very beautiful, like the comments. Last but not least, Dr. Stefanie Lotter.
I was absolutely fascinated by the presentations. And I must say, those projects you’ve been working on were eye-opening. What remains for me a very big question, and I wish we could have had time to address this further, is basically, how do we coax out those silent voices, those who don’t speak up
And aren’t openly included in inclusivity projects that we are hosting? But I think that would be one for the next discussion. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, that is very important. We shouldn’t neglect the silenced voices, and also, we should think about how we can encourage them to speak out
As the member of community. Thank you very much for your insightful presentations, questions and discussions. We should organize another roundtable. On the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, this WHIPIC Roundtable reminds us of the value of UNESCO World Heritage as a shared heritage.
The UNESCO World Heritage programme helps us understand how heritage can be our heritage, and how we can protect and love them with our shared responsibility and accountability. For the last 50 years, while celebrating together the outstanding and magnificent and excellent beauty of the majority
Of the World Heritage Sites, we felt connected as a global community. Now, UNESCO World Heritage gives us full opportunities to share others’ pains, traumas, and difficulties with mutual understanding and empathy. To prepare for the next 50 years of the UNESCO World Heritage, we look forward to building up our new solidarity,
And we firmly believe that the WHIPIC will greatly contribute to it. Thanks for all your participations. Sujin? Thank you very much, Dr. Lee, for your full moderating and facilitating of the roundtable today. Of course, for our panels, Dr. Višnja, Ms. Gegê, Dr. Ali, Mr. Jakub, Dr. Shu-mei, and Dr. Stefanie.
I greatly appreciate your brilliant and considerate contribution to WHIPIC Roundtable 2022. And above all, I would like to thank all the audience who paid attention and listened to the whole session. I hope you all enjoyed it and got inspired by it. This is the end of WHIPIC Roundtable 2022,
But WHIPIC is now hosting online lecture and webinar series about the World Heritage Interpretation and Presentation. You may have missed the first one held last Thursday, but you can still join the second lecture in September. And also, I would like to apologize for a low resolution streaming via Zoom,
But as I announced earlier, this roundtable has been recorded and will be uploaded to WHIPIC’s YouTube channel, with Korean and English subtitles. It will be a clearer version with better resolution. Finally, I would like to hear your opinion on today’s sessions. So please send us your feedback via our social media or email.
Thank you again for joining us today, and we hope to see you at WHIPIC’s upcoming events. Thank you. Bye, everyone.
This video is sponsored by Blinkist Until about 1900, all we had was classical mechanics. This is the mechanics of Isaac Newton and James Clerk Maxwell. But after 1900, Max Planck ushered in an era of quantum mechanics. And it explained the various anomalies in classical mechanics, such as why electrons
Do not radiate energy and fall into the nucleus, as they should according to Maxwell’s equations. Since that time, Quantum mechanics has become one the most proven and successful theories in all of science. But, while equations such as the Schrodinger equation are
Superb at making predictions and explaining behavior at quantum scales, when you start asking the question. “what is actually going on,” this is where the controversy starts. Caltech physicist Sean Carroll says quantum physicists are like people with iPhones.
They know how to use it, and can do some great things with it, but if you ask them what goes on inside their iPhones, they have no idea. Similarly, he says, physicists know how to use the equations of quantum mechanics to predict all kinds of things, but ask them
How quantum mechanics actually works, and if they are honest, they will say they really don’t know. But this hasn’t stopped physicists from speculating what the mechanism is. These various speculations are known as interpretations of quantum mechanics. The standard interpretation is called the Copenhagen interpretation because
If was devised in Copenhagen, Denmark by mainly Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg in the 1920s. This is the interpretation taught to most students in college. But even a majority of physicists do not agree that this is the correct interpretation. In fact, there is no single interpretation that has a consensus agreement.
So what is the Copenhagen interpretation? What are the best alternatives interpretations? Why do we even need an interpretation to begin with? Those are some great questions, which I will attempt to answer…coming up right now. The primary challenge of understanding quantum mechanics is that according to the equations,
All particles exist in a state of superposition. That is to say, that the properties of any quantum particle such as its position, momentum, spin etc. is not only unknown, but is unknowable until it is measured. In fact, before it is measured, the particle is said to be
In many states at once. It is not here OR there, it is here AND there at the same time. It is not spin up OR spin down, it is spin up AND spin down at the same time. This sounds crazy from our classical mechanics perspective
Because we never experience large objects being in super position. When you hold a tennis ball, you know exactly where it is and how fast it’s moving. So, the quantum mechanical behavior predicted by quantum mechanics does not seem to fit with our world view.
One of the biggest challenges of quantum mechanics is trying to explain this transition from what is thought to be the behavior of objects at quantum scales – superposition of multiple states vs. their classical behavior upon measurement. The various interpretations of quantum mechanics can be thought of as attempts to explain this transition.
Most interpretations of quantum mechanics focus on the Schrodinger equation and the wavefunction to explain quantum behavior. This equation was developed by Irish-Austrian physicist Erwin Schrodinger in 1926. It contains a wave function, represented by the Greek letter psi. German physicist Max Born formulated the interpretation of psi,
Which is that the square of the absolute value of psi represents the probability of finding a particle in any one particular state if we were to measure it. The concept of measurement was introduced to explain what we actually see when we make an observation.
The fact is that even if it were possible for us to directly observe quantum particles, we would never see them being in superposition, we would only observe them being in one state or another. We would only see the spin as up or down, not up and down.
Presumably, our observation acts like a measurement that destroys the super position. To give you an intuitive feel, let’s look at some of the interpretations in terms of the famous Schrodinger’s cat experiment. This is a thought experiment proposed by Erwin Schrodinger to illustrate,
Ironically, what he felt was the absurdity of assigning probabilities using his own equation. In this thought experiment, we have a box. There are 4 things in the box. There is a cat, a radioactive source – the emission of radiation is completely random according
To most theories of quantum mechanics, so this is the source of quantum mechanical randomness. There is a radiation detector attached to a hammer, and a vial of poison gas like cyanide. If the detector detects radiation, the hammer comes down and will smash the vial of gas and
The cat will die. If it doesn’t detect radiation, no gas is released and the cat will stay alive. If we look at this from the quantum mechanical point of view, there are two possibilities for the wave function of this system. If we presume that the quantum system consists of the just the cat,
Prior to measurement, the wavefunction of the cat will look something like this: Where the wave function describes the superposition of the cat being alive and dead. We have one over the square root of two because there are two probabilities and the square of each
Probability will be one half, and thus added together the total probabilities will be one. The wave function always shows that the sum of all probabilities will equal one. In the standard, or Copenhagen interpretation, as soon as you open the box and make an observation,
One of the probabilities comes true, and the other probability disappears. So let’s say you observe the cat being alive, that probability is now 100%. And the other probability of the cat being dead becomes zero, so that probability goes away. This is called wave function collapse,
Meaning the wave function has collapsed to one state – based on the 50/50 probability. The wave function collapses as the result of a measurement by an observer or apparatus external to the quantum system. A measurement is simply an interaction of the quantum system with a classical system. In this case
It is you the observer opening the box and measuring whether the cat is alive or dead. The problem with this interpretation is that it sets two set of rules for how particles behave – one for before measurement, and one after measurement. But it doesn’t explain
How this transition happens. This is often characterized as the measurement problem. Why did the other probability go away. What is the mechanism that collapsed the wave function? Bohr might have said, well, it just fits the data. The data is that we observe only one event,
So all the other events that we could have observed no longer exist. We are just interpreting quantum mechanics based on the data that we can plainly see. Don’t ask me how or why this happens. Or you can say what Richard Feynman said when asked the question, “Just shut up and calculate.”
This is just not very satisfying because we, and, I won’t speak for you, but at least I, need to know what’s really going on. A popular alternative, the many worlds interpretation of the same event would be
That no collapse occurs. The wave function is the only true nature of reality. It never goes away. This interpretation was formulated by Hugh Everett in 1957 as a graduate student at Princeton University. And the followers of this interpretation, sometimes referred to as
Everettians, say that this is the simplest and most basic interpretation of quantum mechanics because it introduces no other assumptions or equations, other than the Schrodinger equation. In our cat analogy, the distinction that the many worlds interpretation makes vs. the
Copenhagen interpretation is that it says, hey, you as the observer are also a quantum system, and you are entangled with the cat. So the wave function includes more than the cat. It also includes you, the observer. It would look more like this,
Where one part of the wave function is that the cat is alive, and you observe it as such, and the other part where the cat is dead and you observe it dead: That is one wave function. When you opened the box, the reality that you observed,
Where the cat is alive, is but one world. However, there is another world in which you would have found the cat to be dead. Both worlds where you found the cat alive and where you found the cat dead exist.
You just happen to find yourself in one of them. So the question is why do we find ourselves in the one branch where the cat is alive, and not the other one? Everettians argue that other versions of ourselves in the other worlds are asking the same question.
You just happen to be asking it in the world you find yourself in. Every universe is equally ‘real’ to those living in it. To embrace this interpretation, you have to accept that many, perhaps infinite, worlds exist, all with different quantum outcomes. The problem is that
This does not seem to fit with our experience, because we have no inkling of the other versions of ourselves. Where are the other ones? If we really are entangled with the cat, then shouldn’t some part of me feel like I saw the cat alive as well as dead?
But this never happens. There is never a world where I see the cat both dead and alive, where half of me saw the cat alive, and the other half saw the cat dead. So how does the split of the worlds occur? Everettians say it is due to decoherence.
So what the heck is decoherence? Quantum decoherence is the physical process that is used to describe how quantum states transition to the one state that we experience. The Copenhagen interpretation treats wave function collapse as a fundamental process without explaining the details of how it happens. Decoherence attempts to explain what appears to be
Like wave function collapse, but in MWI-speak, it is a splitting of worlds. No wave collapse actually occurs. If the universe was composed of only you and the cat and nothing else, then you and the cat would be in a coherent superposition. This would be represented by our original equation here:
The key realization is that in reality, you have more than just you and the cat entangled. Both you and the cat will also be entangled with your environment because THAT is also a quantum system. So, for example, the cat will be entangled with what’s inside the box,
Atoms of air, photons from black body radiation, etc. All these objects will be entangled with the cat. And you will also be entangled with your environment. The environment inside the box for a cat that is alive will be different than the environment for a cat that is dead.
Why? Because a dead cat’s interaction with the air molecules and photons will be different, not only because it’s position will likely be different, but also other factors such as heat produced etc. So Psi now looks like this, where there is an added component of the cat
And you being entangled with environment 1 in one case, and environment 2 in the other case: These two environments are completely different. Because the entanglement with the environment now enters the picture, the coherent superpositon between you and the cat is broken.
The Schrodinger equation says that the two parts of the wave function above are perpendicular to each other, that have no connection to each other. This can be interpreted as two separate worlds. It is as if the universe splits into two separate realities. This is decoherence.
Decoherence is another way of explaining how quantum superposition gets lost, by interaction with the environment. You can also think of this as the quantum nature of the original 2 component system leaking information into the environment due to it entanglement with the environment. I
Made a video about information leak using tennis balls, if you want to check it out here. The problem is that since there is no overlap between the branching wave functions, no communication or connection between the worlds exists. So it is unclear whether we
Could ever verify whether the other worlds exist. The only evidence is the mathematics of the Schrodinger equation. An experimental verification may not be possible. Now if the idea of quantum superposition and randomness makes you uncomfortable, I want you to relax because there are completely deterministic interpretations as well.
One is the de Broglie-Bohm, or pilot wave theory, also known as Bohmian mechanics. Another fascinating theory I like is an Objective collapse theory by Roger Penrose, who combines principles from general relativity with quantum mechanics. And these two, along with some other crazy interpretation will be the subject of my next
Video. So stay tuned. You won’t want to miss it. In the meantime, check out this great app. I tend to read a lot, but always wish that I could read more. If you are like me, you’re going to love Blinkist, today’s sponsor, because what they do is condense the best
Non-fiction books into 15 minute summaries that you can either read or listen to podcast style. It’s an app that you can download on your phone or other devices. Blinkist allows you to save time, money and learn new things that the world’s best
Non-fiction books have to offer, faster than just about any other way. Think about this, by spending just 15 minutes a day, you can read 30 new books per month. If I finish 2 books in a month currently, I consider than an accomplishment.
One of my favorite books summarized on Blinkist is: Tribe of mentors by Tim Ferris, who is one of my favorite authors. He interviews some of world’s most successful professional leaders, and collects their down to earth success advice for the rest of us mortals to hear
Blinkist has a great offer for Arvin Ash viewers. You can try Blinkist right now and get unlimited access for one week. In addition, the first 100 people that click the link in the description will get 25% off of the full membership. You can cancel at anytime during the free trial period,
So it’s totally risk free. I highly recommend Blinkist. Check it out. And if you have a question, post it in the comments below because I try to answer all of them. I will see you in the next video my friend!
These educational videos take a lot of time and effort to make, and are offered here for free. One little thing you can do to fully call it even is to just like, subscribe, and comment. That would really help me in terms of the algorithm. So thanks in advance.
We’re continuing from a previous video, “Yarrow Stalk Divination,” in which we walked through a step by step guided divination ritual. The first part of this video is lecture, for a high-level overview of I Ching scholarship and schools of thought on hexagram interpretation. Then we’ll get into
The practicum component to workshop your yarrow stalk reading result. Study of the I Ching has its own name: Yì Xué, meaning I Ching scholarship. And with almost 3,000 years of I Ching scholarship, influenced by contributions from scholars of so many different ethnic, national, and philosophical backgrounds, it’s very diverse in terms of opinions.
I would say the biggest misconception about the I Ching is that there is only one authoritative method to casting and interpreting, and historically, that’s just not true. One way scholars organize different interpretative approaches is the Image and Number Tradition, xiàng shù pài, and the Meaning and Principle Tradition, yì lǐ pài.
The Image and Number Tradition focuses heavily on metaphysical correspondences. Here’s where you integrate numerology, astrology, and also, imagery—the imagery the hexagram itself evokes, as a diagram. The image of the diagram is your foundation for interpreting the meaning. The other side of the coin is its number,
And numbers in general. Mathematics. Calculations. Heavy integration of the Lo Shu magic square. If you have a really specific question, and you want to divine on dates and times, locations, personalities, characters, then you would interpret your reading through an Image and Number lens. Intuitive scrying, channeling,
Vision work is also generally covered under the Image and Number Tradition. Another approach to interpretation is the Meaning and Principle Tradition, which tends to be more philosophy-based, where cultural context matters, or where authoritative scholarship from trusted perspectives will help shape your interpretation. The Meaning and Principle Tradition is like engaging
In the Socratic Method with the Book of Changes. If and when you want to experience knowledge and conversation with higher powers, especially from a Taoist perspective, then you’ll adopt a Meaning and Principle approach. Yili tends to be a rationalist and humanist approach, a philosophical
Interrogation to get at the nature of reality, truths, and ethics. We attribute the Meaning and Principle Tradition to Wang Bi, during the Three Kingdoms era, and which was later inherited by philosophers such as Cheng Yi. In terms of the esoteric or mystery traditions of the Yi,
There are six schools, or Six Temples, six zōng. The divination method is being able to foretell what is to come, whereas the invocation method has more of an operation of prayer and petitioning for answers. Spell-crafting with the I Ching is to take a very proactive role in transmuting qi energy
In the universe. It implies alchemy. The Ancient Ways is, to put it crudely, efforts at reconstructionism. Whereas the Humanist-Rationalist Approach, Ru, is Confucian. This is academic inquiry with the Book of Changes. This is integrating the Socratic Method. And finally, the Historical Method
Is like The Ancient Ways perhaps, but less mystical, more fact-based, research-oriented, archaeological even, and seeks to base its interpretive methods on material evidence. The philosophical and cosmological premise of the I Ching is really important to understand, because it’s what informs how you approach an I Ching reading.
The Book of Changes is premised on the theory that there is an order to the natural chaos of this universe, and it goes round and round in cycles. It’s a series of syllogisms, immutable rules of logical flow, tautologies. If A,
Then absolutely B will follow. If no A, then C, D, or E are the possible outcomes. You then need to input more data to determine whether it’ll be the path of C, D, or E. There’s also this quantum aspect of your situation and personal events
Existing on a multidimensional state, meaning quite simply and intuitively, that something you think is related to, say, love and relationships, is actually related to finances, or something related to career is actually related to geopolitics, and so on. And, also, something happening in your mind, among your thoughts, even though
No action is taken, is influencing events in your orbit that you might not be aware of. Physical actions you’re taking today are paving the consequences for spiritual implications that will come up far, far down the line. Extenuating circumstances happening to you right now might be the butterfly effect,
Where the causal connection is from, who knows, lifetimes ago. So when you approach the Book of Changes for divination, asking to pinpoint a specific location on the space-time continuum, as it were, what you’re actually getting in response from the
Divination process is a circle drawn around that center point you want to know more about. The reading yields a 360-degree view of the situation. The divination ritual itself establishes the given radius of the circle for the Oracle to draw. Once you get that triangulated view of your situation,
The Book doesn’t tell you an answer, it doesn’t tell you what to do. It won’t feel like a direct answer to your specific question, even though it is. You’re getting that triangulated panoramic view, and then you need to take the initiative to decide,
Which pinpoints within this circle the divinatory result has drawn you that you want to focus on. So over the centuries of I Ching practitioners, certain agreed upon principles arise. Like if you really want to pinpoint, then the lines of text associated with your changing lines is a good place to start.
The oracle message or key themes of the hexagrams give you the thesis. And maybe all you really want is the short answer thesis. Maybe you don’t want to read the entire dissertation. With the yarrow stalk divination method, your result is either something like this,
Which you see on screen, with two hexagrams because you got changing lines. Or it’s going to look something like this, a single hexagram, due to no changing lines, which we’ll call a locked hexagram. That’s your triangulated view of your situation.
So that’s the extent of my lecture today, because I do want you to read my book. And now we get into the workshop portion. Go get your I Ching reading result from the yarrow stalk divination you did, per the previous video. But first, a quick relevant review of Taoist cosmology.
The Taiji numinous void gives rise to the binary yin and yang. There are four permutations of this binary yin and yang, which we call, left to right, Elder Yin, Younger Yang, Younger Yin, and Elder Yang. These are the four affinities, the Four Faces of the Tao. They combine in trinities to
Produce Eight Trigrams, the Ba Gua. The four affinities, Four Faces, denote how the primary hexagram of your I Ching reading result changes into the transformed or secondary hexagram you’ll be casting. To demonstrate, I’ll review my own I Ching reading result carried over from the Yarrow
Stalk Divination video. My result yielded only two changing lines, marked by the red Xs on screen at the Line 4 and Line 6 positions. That means the unchanging or immutable lines, Lines 1, 2, 3, and 5, are Elder Yang where you see the yang line, and
Elder Yin where you see the yin line. From the Four Faces, the four affinities of yin and yang. The bottom line of the affinities (the Four Faces) correspond with the yin or yang line cast in the first hexagram. The upper line of the Four Faces will correspond with the yin or yang
Line you cast for the secondary hexagram. And so you essentially carry over or draw the same yin or yang line as the primary. Lines 4 and 6, marked by the Xs, are the changing lines, Younger Yang and Younger Yin respectively. The bottom line of the affinities corresponds with
Your primary hexagram lines to the left. The top line of the affinities, these Mutable, changing faces of yin and yang, correspond with what you’ll cast for your secondary hexagram on the right. The top line of Younger Yang affinity in the Line 4 position is yang, so the line you
Draw for the secondary hexagram is yang. The top line of Younger Yin affinity in the Line 6 position is yin, so the line you draw on the right is yin. Identify the upper trigram result of your primary hexagram. As an example, mine is Wind. I also like
To note the driving force behind the trigram, which for Wind is the changing phase Wood. Do the same for the lower trigram of your primary hexagram result. In my example, the lower trigram remains the same, Thunder, which is driven by the changing phase of Wood, corresponding with Jupiter, the chrysalis stage of alchemy,
And the Language functions of the brain. My upper trigram transforms to Lake, driven by the changing phase Metal. Metal corresponds with the planet Venus, the division and dissolution stage of alchemy, and the Memory function of the brain. Here is where correspondence tables are useful. There are a bunch of
Correspondence tables for you to reference in I Ching, The Oracle, and you’re going to want to brainstorm correspondence notes for your trigrams and changing phase results. Wind over Thunder yields Hexagram 42, Burgeoning for my primary hexagram. Lake over Thunder, where the lower trigram doesn’t change,
Yields Hexagram 17, Inspiring Followers, for my transformed or secondary hexagram. Recall how my Lines 4 and 6 are changing lines. That means when I go to interpret Hexagram 42, I’m going to focus or place more emphasis on the text for Lines 4 and 6.
They forge direct causal links to Lines 4 and 6 of the second hexagram. The divinatory text corresponding with the Lines marked by the Xs on screen are the volatile, changing forces at play. Whereas the unchanging, immutable lines are what cannot be changed.
These are past forces long put into motion that has brought you to where you are now. At this time, pause the video and take a moment to take notes on your own I Ching reading result. Turn to the page entry in the book for your primary hexagram. Read The
Oracle section to help orient you on the key themes of counsel the Oracle is endeavoring to convey to you about your situation. Read the translations of the relevant Ten Wings passages and annotations for this hexagram. The text corresponding with the Fourth Line of my first hexagram is going to give me important
Information I need to change my situation in ways that will be most advantageous for me, in terms of the outcome I’m seeking. The fourth line position itself, in any and every hexagram, has certain correspondences that will also help guide your interpretation of the hexagram text message. Each of the six lines exhibit
Innate qi qualities that then interact with the actual yin or yang line of your hexagram result, so these innate attributes are the lens you filter your reading through. Same goes for the Sixth Line of my primary hexagram. The Oracle is giving
Me important information I need to know so that I can create certain Change that is going to better align me with the outcome that I’m seeking to achieve. The Wu Xing are the five fundamental phases of change, or categories of phase changes.
A more literal direct translation of Wu Xing might be the “Five Movements.” Note the changing phase correspondence for the trigrams in your I Ching reading result. There’s a lot you’ll be able to discern about your situation, really specific details, based on this.
Pause the video here and consult the information on screen to determine the driving movements behind what’s going on in the subject matter you’ve inquired about. We look to the metaphysical correspondences for the underlying phase of change, the underlying movement of qi driving the trigrams.
Pause on any of the slides in this video for a closer look, or you can find these tables in my book, I Ching, The Oracle, Chapter 6. In theory, these correspondences will reveal very precise details in its assessment and predictions of your situation.
Cycle through this correspondence table once more, pausing on each slide and write down everything that makes an impression on you relating to your changing phase attributions. Create a mind map of the dominant changing phases driving the forces of Change for you. Conceptualize each one of these relevant keywords as another symbol,
Or omen, another image to ponder upon. These keywords are signaling a much bigger download, a packet of insights that are coming through by way of the keywords. Pause the video and free-write what’s coming to mind. Let’s return to that theoretical principle of each hexagram line containing innate qi,
An inherent essence or attributes. The odd ordinals, Lines 1, 3, and 5, are innately yang, assertive, light, creative, and express waxing qi, or life force. The even numbers, Lines 2, 4, and 6, are innately yin, recessive, dark, destructive, and express waning qi. You know how you have a certain nature, inherent attributes.
But then depending on the circumstances you’re put in, you might act in accordance with your innate character or you might act against it. Likewise, we say that each of the six line positions possess inherent attributes based on innate qi. But of course, when presented with certain conditions,
It may act in alignment with its inherent attributes or it might have a chemical reaction with the conditions in a way that goes against its inherent attributes. Let’s take a look at my primary hexagram result and compare the yin and yang outcomes with
Their innate qi. Just as a reminder, we’ll note that my Lines 4 and 6 were changing. Note how the lines marked with the blue circle and cross show alignment. My yin and yang outcome in Hexagram 42 align with the innate qi of the hexagram lines. This
Lines signal areas of harmony and balance. Note how Lines 3 and 6, marked with the brown circle and Xs, show that the yin and yang outcome in Hexagram 42 negate or are in opposition with the hexagram line’s innate qi. To use Western occult terminology,
These lines are ill-dignified, whereas the lines marked with the blue cross are dignified. Because Lines 4 and 6 are my changing lines, marked by the red X, those are the ones I want to pay closer attention to.
I see that my Line 4 is dignified, and so this is probably going to be good news. But my Line 6 is ill-dignified, so this is probably going to be a red flag. At the risk of totally confusing you, you really didn’t need to know any of
That. But I wanted to make sure you saw the rationale for where the divinatory text comes from. Reconciling the innate affinity of the hexagram line with its actual yin and yang affinity reveals dignified vs. ill-dignified qi. While I think it’s reductive to say that Confucianism is classist
And all about class rank and hierarchies, it also kind of is about rank and hierarchy, and you’re going to see that, historically, in how we approach I Ching interpretation. Chéng Yí, a 11th century Confucian scholar and philosopher, underscored the importance of understanding Lèi (類), translated as “kind,
Class, genus, category, or order,” which implies the meaning “to know.” Chéng Yí’s philosophy is premised on Taoist cosmology, though he’s considered a Confucian. In Taoist cosmology, there was this unit whole, the Tao, that had to keep subdividing itself and with each subdivision, created different classes, categories, and types of creations.
Likewise, one must divide, subdivide, and categorize to know the holistic meaning and principle at hand. So, to be a good I Ching reader, under the Chéng Yi school of philosophy, you have to divide, subdivide, and deconstruct the whole hexagram into its parts,
And study the parts before you put it back together again to try and understand the whole. And then in this process of subdividing and categorizing, Line 5 is considered the hexagram ruler. Above it, Line 6, is the spiritual influence, what rests in the hands of the gods.
So one approach is read the divinatory message for each line of a single hexagram from your reading result, and filter the line’s text message through its innate subject matter attributes. This is particularly fruitful in the instance of a locked hexagram or when reading the
Divinatory result of a single hexagram. For example, the innate attributes of Line 3, reconciled from various traditions, schools of thought, and authoritative I Ching scholars, will inform how you interpret the prophetic text you see on screen for the Third Line, as it applies to your question presented. The downloadable worksheet that goes along
With this video lecture will help you navigate interpretation of each line of your hexagram. As previously noted, Line 5 is every hexagram’s ruler. If Line 5 is one of your changing lines, this is a big deal. Pay attention. Big shifts happening to the matter at hand, and willpower
And decisions will make all the difference. Listen to the counsel of the ruling line. If your reading resulted in changing lines, then you can choose to read only the changing lines, through the subject matter attributes of those lines. The subject matter attributes of your changing lines denote what key areas to focus on,
And the divinatory message itself reveals who, where, when, why, and/or how. Pause the video here to complete the prompts of your worksheet. The next section will address locked hexagrams only. Recall the four yin and yang affinities, which we call the Four Faces.
A locked hexagram result from the yarrow stalk method means you yielded no changing lines, no Younger Yin or Younger Yang. The lower line of the Four Affinities corresponds with the (quote) primary hexagram (unquote) and the upper line corresponds with the (quote) secondary hexagram (unquote), which is the same as the first, right?
So that’s why you only read the single locked hexagram, and read the line text for each of the six lines of your locked hexagram for more detailed insight into specific sub-topics or sub-plots and themes within your inquiry, bearing in mind that Line 5 is your hexagram ruler,
And is thus tantamount to a changing line in terms of emphasis of importance to you. Now, if your yarrow stalk divination resulted in changing lines, then proceed. In my reading, my transformed hexagram was Hexagram 17. Sui. Inspiring Followers. I’ll start by reading the Oracle section to receive the general divinatory message
Expressed by this hexagram. You’ll do the same. The next step is to focus your attention on the changing lines. The changing lines in your second hexagram connect to the changing lines in your primary hexagram. So remember that these are the points of causal connection.
I’ll then look to the Fourth and Sixth Lines of Hexagram 17, which provide important information I need to know about what actions to take to ensure the success I seek. Likewise, take a look now at the corresponding changing lines from your second hexagram.
Compiling your I Ching reading result in a table will help you stay oriented. In one column, top row, note your primary hexagram, and some general sights about it. In the second column, note your transformed hexagram. Then create a row to compare,
Side by side, each Line of the two hexagrams. In my example, I’ve only got two changing lines, Lines 4 and 6. I also like to note the general indications for those lines. Then populate your table with notes on the corresponding line text. On screen you’re
Only seeing the translations from the Zhouyi, and not the annotations. It may help to look at the annotations, as they’ll explain what otherwise may feel too sparse in the direct translations. If you’re workshopping your I Ching reading result, and I hope you are, then pause the video here to generate your own table.
The primary hexagram of your I Ching reading signifies yang forces, the natural order, that which is supporting and continue to generate the momentum of your current Path. Whereas the secondary or transformed hexagram signifies yin forces, and is the force of ongoing
Change on its path toward its ending. This is how the Path is going to develop and mature. Are you reminded of the He Tu and Lo Shu Book of the River Maps diagrams? The two hexagram results, in essence, mark the beginning and the end,
Forces that supplement and how to defeat, subdue, or more to the point, change. So in my own I Ching reading result, Hexagram 42, my primary, shows what forces and factors are pushing me further along on the Path
While Hexagram 17 is giving me insight into how I can change the course of that Path, how I can cultivate its development and maturation to achieve the end result I seek. You can dive as deep into every nook and cranny of your I Ching reading as you’d like.
Generally, the focus remains on the changing lines of a reading because it’s theoretically “time sensitive” in terms of enacting change to shift the course of the Path and ensure success. Those with a locked hexagram or single hexagram reading, Line 5, the ruling line, is typically considered the key point.
Whereas insights that the other lines yield are just considered “good to know.” But let’s get into the “good to know” parts. Let’s take Line 1 of Hexagram 17 for example. The innate implications of Line 1 of every hexagram, if we’re following Zheng Yi’s school of thought, correspond with the interests of the commoner,
What it is the local barons want, and foundations. In a practical modern-day reading, I’m going to interpret Line 1 as insight for seeking a new direction in life. I’m moving through a lot of historical and academic content really fast,
And just skating across, basically, the table of contents of my I Ching book. So if you want to pause and go down a rabbit hole behind any point I’ve raised here, go check out the 800+ page book. One more example before we move along. Line 3, though it wasn’t a changing line,
You’ll recall was ill-dignified when alchemizing with its innate qi, which should be yang. But in Hexagram 17, Line 3 is yin. So we’re going to read Line 3 to see what’s up with this ill-dignified energy in our lives. Read
The Oracle entry for the Third Line through the filter of Line 3’s general implications. When you come across divinatory lines that reference husbands, wives, sons and daughters, concubines, kings, lords, and ladies, in the 21st century, we interpret them figuratively. They’re symbols of something. So a husband, for instance, might be symbolic of reciprocal
Benefits, a representative of the outer sanctum. Wives, then, are symbolic of the inner sanctum. Sons are symbolic of future potential, but also of one-way dependency. The son is dependent on the parent. Daughters might be symbolic of opportunities, diplomacy, alliances. With your secondary hexagram, the innate attributes and sub-topic or
Thematic correspondences for each line reveals forecasts, projections. These are possibilities, and glimpses into the “what if.” So yes, it’s totally valid to cherry-pick one of these lines, based on the general thematic correspondences of that line, for the Yi’s sound bite on that specific sub-topic.
To recap, your primary hexagram triangulates information and insight related to the Path of Nature. Destiny, you might call it. What is predestined, but really, is just the laws of cause and effect. Your transformed or secondary hexagram triangulates knowledge and calculated information and the myriad methods that
Destiny can be diverted, that Nature can be Nurtured into something else. This is the quantum state, a map of probability distributions for the outcomes of each measurement in the system that is your question presented. Since I’m better known as a tarot reader, a European divination tool,
And many of you watching are probably tarot reader as well, it’s worth the time to talk about how I compare the two, in terms of divination systems. Historically, in so far as we understand the systems today, tarot’s origins are as playing cards, games, that centuries after its popularity was
Repurposed by occultists for divination and to wax poetic on occult philosophy. In contrast, the I Ching was designed, at its inception, as a divination tool, one premised on a whole lot of math…mathematics that seems to add up. The perfection of the system appealed to scholars of many different schools of Eastern philosophy,
Be that Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, which yes, just to get through this surface-level conversation I’m going to call a philosophy, Legalism, and so on. And these scholars wrote tome after tome about how philosophically sound the I Ching is. So it became part of philosophy.
I’m releasing this video in advance of I Ching, The Oracle’s launch date, so I hope that once you do have the book in hand, with my translations and annotations, you’ll revisit the yarrow stalk divination video and this one. Until then, if you’re working through the two video workshops with a different translation,
Share in the comments section which translation you’re using.
Liver function tests, also referred to as a hepatic panel, are groups of blood tests that measures the levels of several substances (enzymes and proteins) excreted by your liver. Levels that are higher or lower than normal can indicate liver problems. Several biochemical parameters are assessed in LFT. These are: Bilirubin (Conjugated and Unconjugated)
Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), Gamma Glutamyl Transpeptidase (GGTP) Lets now see each of them, one by one: BILIRUBIN: Bilirubin is a breakdown product of hemoglobin. When RBC complete their life span, which is 120 days, they are destroyed in the body and hemoglobin is released.
This hemoglobin further breaks down into heme and globin component. The heme component is converted into biliverdin which further converts into Bilirubin. This bilirubin is in unconjugated (also called indirect) form which is insoluble in water. So, it binds with albumin and then transported to liver.
In the liver, bilirubin is converted in conjugated form which is water soluble and can be easily excreted through urine or faeces. So, if there is increase is increase in bilirubin level, it indicates that something is wrong in your body, particularly in liver. The main causes of increased bilirubin level in blood are:
Hemolysis i.e. breakdown of RBCs Failure of conjugating system in liver Obstruction in the biliary system Our next biochemical parameter or test is: ASPARTATE AMINOTRANSFERASE (AST) AST was previously called SGOT, serum Glutamate Oxaloacetate Transaminase. AST is high in Heart muscle, Liver and Skeletal muscle, but low in Kidneys, Pancreas, RBC.
Damaged tissues release AST in blood. Therefore, AST level in blood is directly related to extent of cellular damage or injury. AST level in plasma is elevated 8 hrs after cellular injury, peak at 24 to 36 hrs, and return to normal in 3 to 7 days.
AST level in blood is always high in patients with chronic Hepatocellular disease acute hepatitis Cirrhosis and acute extra-hepatic obstruction. Factors which interfere with serum AST levels include: Pregnancy, in which there is decrease in AST level. Exercise, which increases levels of AST Drugs, such as antihypertensives and oral contraceptives.
The third test we will talk about is ALANINE AMINOTRANSFERASE (ALT): ALT was previously called SGPT which stands for Serum Glutamate Pyruvate Transaminase. ALT is found mainly in Liver, lesser quantities are in Kidneys, Heart and Skeletal muscle; Liver injury causes elevation of ALT level in blood;
ALT is more liver-sensitive or specific indicator of liver disease, as compared to AST. Its level is directly related to extent of liver injury, and raised level of ALT can be seen in chronic alcoholism, hepatic cancer and chronic cirrhosis. ALANINE PHOSPHATASE (ALP): ALP is primarily found in liver, bones and placenta.
This test has low specificity for liver disorder because there are other conditions that can also increase ALP levels. These are: Cholestasis, in which there is obstruction of intra or extra-hepatic bile ducts. Pregnancy. bone diseases specifically osteoblastic cancers and Paget’s disease. New bone growth can also cause elevation in ALP levels.
So, because of these uncertainties another test is performed called GGT. GAMMA GLUTAMYL TRANSPEPTIDASE (GGTP): This test is highly accurate in indicting Cholestasis. It is the most sensitive Liver enzyme for detecting Biliary Obstruction, Cholangitis, or Cholecystitis. GGTP level is very high in Liver, but low in Kidney, Heart, Intestine, Brain and Prostate gland.
Elevation of GGTP parallels that of ALP in Liver disease, but GGTP is not increased in Bone disease. So, if ALP is increased but GGTP levels are normal that indicates bone disease. We hope you have found this video helpful. If you liked the video, hit like and subscribe button.
Follow us on our social site to get notified about latest videos.
Welcome back to the NOC course on qualitative research methods my name is Aradhna Malik and Im helping you with this course and we discussed lot of things about qualitative research we talked what it is we have talked about philosophical background the Paradigms
The strategies of inquiry methods of data collection and analysis Now we are going to move towards closure of this course these are the last few sessions So we will start closing up the course you know through these lectures today we will
Talk about interpretation we will talk about what interpretation is How it can be performed or how it can be presented And will also talk about a few new strategies of interpretation so lets see what we have today Interpretation what is interpretation Interpretation is a clarification explication or explanation
Of the meaning of some phenomenon And this is again from this book by Schwandt and from the same book the same dictionary of qualitative research terms we have the reference is the same for both Judgment is a considered deliberate opinion based on good reasons
So these two terms are many times used interchangeably cannot interchangeable but interpretation does lead to judgment so when we interpret something be clarified it in our minds we explain it we describe it in our minds and then we form excuse me a and opinion about
It based on our interpretation of the phenomenon or series of events So these two terms are linked and used very very frequently in both qualitative and quantitative research Characteristics of interpretation: Interpretation is subjective interpretation in qualitative research is subjective it is contextual it is it varies from how the researcher has situated
The phenomenon within a particular context it includes the contextual situatedness of the researcher and the research It includes the biases and the prejudices of the researcher we gone through this many times I am not going to go into detail about it
It also includes the training and wordview of the researcher We have also discuss this point in a previous class so we know how one is trained to carry out the research affects how one interprets what one has the data one has collected and analyzed how has one been
Trained to look at this data how has one been trained to filter out the sense making data from the data that does not make sense at that point in time with reference to that particular context but may be used later on to add to the knowledge that is created
So how does one divide of the data into meaningful data today and data that could be meaningful as a result of this interpretation tomorrow so that all that depends on what one has been trained to look at what one is really looking at in terms of publications you see ultimately
We are all researchers and very finite tangible output of research is Publication It gives us numbers it gives us something that we can hold and touch and measure and see how many people cited it in terms of finding it useful so that is one tangible output
So what how one interprets data could also be influenced by where one intends to publish or how publishable the material the interpretation could be and all of these things we need to be honest about these things all of these things matter to a researcher now we cannot
Be totally removed from what we are studying we cannot be totally disconnected from what we are studying Qualitative research says yes the researched and researched have a relationship and despite this relationship or as a result of this relationship something new something unique emerges or
As result of this relationship the analyses is richer so that is where qualitative research focus this Okay Interpretation in terms of critical ethnography is likely to produce narratives about people in everyday and ordinary situations and in doing so politicize the everyday world illuminating
The structures and processes that shaped individuals lives and their relations with others which is likely to nurture civic transformation So we are you know when we talk about interpretation in terms of critical ethnography ethnography carried out with a purpose to highlight the problems
The sources of oppression the sources of the disconnect between the sources of hierarchy in social situations the sources of one community of people feeling uncomfortable and disadvantage than the other been perceived as privileged or more Elite or advantage class so we know
The significant events the significant phenomena normal life nobody wants to study normal life very few you have questions and nobody very few people want to study normalcy because it doesnt yield anything But we see the significant events significant phenomenal that really attract our attention
And what critical ethnography does is critical ethnography studies why this difference exist we are attracted to it because there is a difference and as researchers we also want to know why we are attracted to it in addition to why does this why does this difference even exist
And why is this difference leading to one group of people feeling disadvantage and one group of people feeling or be perceived as privileged One group of people feeling oppressed and the other be perceived as the oppressors Little bit of revision we had talked about the art of interpretation when we just started
Talking about what qualitative research was and we talked about interpretation being the last Phase or the fifth phase in the process of qualitative research We had talked about how interpretation takes place So lets go through the steps the researcher first creates
A field text consisting of field notes and documents from the field that is indexing and file work Then the writerasinterpreter move from this text to a research text which is notes and interpretation based on the fields text This text is then recreated as a working interpretive
Document that contains the writers initial attempts to make sensor out of what he or she has learned And finally the writer produces the public text that comes to the reader The Reader could be the peers reader could be the general public will talk about how
Policy how social policy is connected to qualitative research in the upcoming lectures will see how qualitative research can help social policy So you know we produce research documents we produce papers we produce monographs we also as qualitative researchers produce documents that can stimulate public action
So we talked about public action research participate sorry we talked about participatory action research so it can also qualitative research can also stimulate it can also provide an impetus to research that is going on or it can provide an impetus to research that
Should be carried out to help solve problems of day to day life by really going into specific situation then seeing what the specific situation are and helping the people there so that is what the ultimate output is So we produce documents that can help the or stimulate these discussions and actions okay
Impact of critical ethnography what does critical ethnography do We talked about Civic transformations: Critical ethnography presents the status of day today life with the stimulus for moral compassion and ground for sound decision making followed by a call to action So when we talk
About ethnography we discussed what ethnography is we describe what is there then we write it up in such a way that it stimulates sound decisions making and also brings to the fore I wont say highlight but brings to the fore the decisions that can be made to help the
Situation and this then followed by call to action so we say okay this is what it is this is what can be and this is how we can do it so that what it is so that the current situation can be improved okay
Critical ethnography also promotes interpretive works that raise public and private consciousness These work help persons collectively work through decision making process They help isolate choices core values utilize expert in local system of knowledge and facilitate deliberative civic discourse and so we reproduce works that can stimulate these decisions for social benefit
Critical ethnography also gives a chance to convey research findings to stakeholders through appropriate narratives It encourages participative discourse among stakeholders and researchers They talk to each other they see whats going on there life is described it its taken back
To them our understanding is defined in light of the stakeholders feel and it promotes the form of textuality that turns citizens into readers and readers into persons who can take democratic action in the world So its on the one hand it provides an analysis of the current day today situation with the
Feelings associated with that situation situated with the observations situated within that context so that the stakeholders can also relate to it they can realize that the researcher is really keen on doing something to help the situation and then it stimulates them
It motivates them to become people can actually do something for their own situation so that is the real goal of critical ethnography okay Writing norms for an ethnographic writing project accuracy is one we need to be absolutely accurate correct Interpretive sufficiency written accounts should possess depth detail
Emotionality nuance and coherence Nonmaleficence we should dont have the intention to hurt anyone right to know making ones moral position public I am on this side because I support your cause because I am I do not support this because Honesty the text must be realistic concrete as to character setting atmosphere and dialogues
It must be clear crisp accurate honest not written with the intention of hurting anyone but written with the intention of just highlighting bringing to the fore situations that can be resolved bringing to the fore problems that can be solved to make everybody is life better
How do you perform ethnography challenges in performance ethnography is how to construct perform and critically analyze performance texts We had talked a little bit about performance text in the past performance text or texts that a written about the performances who performed texts have narrators drama action shifting points of view and make experience
Concrete anchoring it in the here and now It is understood that experience exist only in its representation it does not stand outside the memory of perception So the meanings of facts are always reconstituted in the telling as they are remember that connected to the other events We are talking about remembering
Something we are talking about representing something as it is retained in our memory as we have connected it to our drawing parallels between a computer folder and our memory traces We store whatever we see and hear in our memory with tag into something we already know we
Store it in this folder that we have created in our memory so it is understood that experience exist only in its representation when we talk about experience yes we have a feeling it but then storing the experiences in terms of representing it in terms of you know our
Ability to retrieve it from our memory and replay it for want of a better word So it is stored in our memory and therefore it is influenced by the capacity and the categories the capacity of our memory the categories we have in our brain to hold this information
Etc The meanings of facts are always reconstituted in the telling I see it I hear it I experienced something but when I am telling it it is laden with the emotions are experienced when experiencing it it is laden with what I felt after the experience was over that helped me redefine
What I experienced okay So the meaning of facts are always reconstituted in the telling as they are remembered and connected to other events why would we remember an event only when it would have some significant value for us how many was remember the people we saw while travelling from our place of
State or place of work Many times people just passed by how many time to be remember how many stray dogs crossed our path unless a stray dog comes in front of your car and you have to accidentally break
The car and the dog just smiles at you and walks away wagging its tail probably expressing is gratitude to you for not running over it that would stick out in our memory But stray dogs walk on the roads all the time how many us would remember what breed of dog
Or what kind of stray dog crossed our path when we were going from my home to the office in the morning so all of these things are stored in our memories for a particular reason then and the motion experience you maybe a dog lover but only when you see a stray dog
About to come under your car and you have the opportunity to stop the car bring your car to a screeching halt And then you will see gratitude in the dogs eyes and the dog tail wagging that the emotions and multiplied you experience the different set of emotions at that point of time you
Dont see that you dont feel the same emotions when different types of stray dogs pass by those emotions are then reflected in how you convey that experience The writer narrating the ethnographic account recreates in the minds eye a series of emotional
Moments Life is when retraced through that moment interpreting the passed from the point of view of the present We have discussed this ad nauseam in the context of reflexivity so not going to go into the details go back and forth back and forth back and forth between what we see now what we
Experience in the past with distance ourselves we see things from the perspective of a researcher go back into the situation experience it understand it experience it understand it An aesthetic of color and critical race theory: A feminist or a member of a specific community
Or raised or ethnic group now they be the article by Denzin mentioned a lot of things but I am not going to go into the specific details just trying to be at neutral as possible a member of a specific community race or ethnic group uses art photography music dance poetry
Painting theatre cinema performance texts autobiography narrative storytelling and poetic dramatic language to create critical race consciousness thereby tending the significant events in the history of the specific community or race or ethnic or cultural group into the future So these practices serve to implement critical race theory
We take whatever has been experienced by a specific cultural group and ethnic group racial groups and we replay we use various forms of expression to capture what is being experienced and to capture the significant events that highlight the uniqueness of these experiences
They are not day today experiences they highlight and these experiences then you know sometimes they highlight the significant events in the history or these forms of expression highlight the significant events in the history of the race culture ethnic group etcetera And then we use those experiments captured through the expression of historical events
And we use them as basis for communicating what the specific culture or community or racial group would like things to be like in the future So we say this is what happened this is how we have expressed what happened and this is how we can change it and this
Is how we express it would be would like it to be and we use these different art forms to project these things okay So that is another form of critical ethnography okay Understandings that help create this critical race consciousness and again all of this relates
To interpretation we interpret the past events experienced by a specific community group racial ethnic group through art forms we experience we understand what is going on by a closed observation of the art forms also we also the art forms also tells us what can be done
To change that experience into more pleasant one okay or how would this let community like its these events or its perceptions about itself to be seen in the future okay Now ethics aesthetics political praxis and epistemology are joined every act of representation
Artistic or research is a political and ethical statement this is what it is this is what you would like it to be and here is why Claims to truth and knowledge are assessed in terms of multiple criteria including asking if a text: Interrogates existing cultural sexist
And racist stereotypes especially those connected to family femininity masculinity marriage and intimacy We want to know what is going on different texts are interrogated and this relates to day to day life significant events in day today life It gives primacy to concrete lived
Experience It uses dialogue and ethics of personal responsibility values beauty spirituality and love of others It implements an emancipatory agenda committed to equality freedom social justice and participatory democratic practices And it emphasizes community collective action solidarity and group empowerment Now claims to truth and knowledge are assessed
In terms of whether that text A: captures what is going on B: describes what is going on in terms of why it is wrong or explain what is going on in terms of why it is wrong Why it should be captured by the significant And C: It provides directions for how the
Situation can be changed to enhance to make the lives of those involved better that is a simple oversimplified explanation of what we just read through okay The Other understandings are No topic is Taboo every topic every topic is discussed in detail
It presumes an artist and social researcher is a part of and a spokesperson for a local moral community a community with its own symbolism method mythology and heroic figures It asks that the writerartist draw upon the vernacular folk and popular culture forms of representation including proverbs work songs etcetera
It includes a search for texts speak to disadvantaged and vulnerable or oppresses groups it seeks artists and researchers writers who produce works that speak to and represent the needs of the community It is understood that no single representation or work can speak to
The collective needs of the community Rather local communities are often divided along racial ethnic gender residential age and class lines So we use all of these forms of expression One: no topic is Taboo Two: the social researcher
Is a part of that local community is rooted in the local community is situated there feels the things that the local community is feeling and then understand that the researchers can drop on the various forms of expression that the community is engaging in It includes a
Search for text that that talk about disadvantaged groups it also try to find out the representation of these disadvantages and representations of the needs of the community And it also realizes that no single representation captures the entire gamut of experiences entire
Gamut of the needs of the community but still each text is representation is unique and valuable in itself What do these texts do These texts are expected to be grounded in the distinctive styles rhythms idioms and personal identities of local folk and vernacular culture These as historical
Documents these texts record the histories of injustices experienced by the members of oppressed group They show how members of local group have struggled to find places of dignity and respect in a violent racist sexist civil society These texts are sites of resistance this texts tell you what life is like they capture these
Moments they make them revisitable they are sites of resistance the places where meanings politics and identities a negotiated So the texts the way these texts are written provides an interpretation or they are representations of how these meanings were created and how
These created shared meanings can be used to change the things in the future okay So aesthetics and cinematic practices that inform and shape the narrative of texts documenting these practices So how do the cinematic practices these dramatic performing sorry this performing arts these expressions shape the narrative of texts documenting these practices these
Interpretations The experiments with narrative forms folk ballads etcetera are some of the ways in which the narrative of texts is shaped The use of improvisation miseenscene and montage fill the screen with multiracial images and to manipulate bicultural visual and linguistic codes The use of personal testimonials life
Stories voiceovers and offscreen narration to provide overall narrative unity to texts Celebration of key elements in the culture under study especially the themes of resistance maintenance affirmation and neoindigenism for example finding new ways of respecting old traditions or maintaining old beliefs or mestizaje (Mexican word that means mixing
Ancestories) there by challenging assimilation and melting pot narratives So we celebrate how the culture is evolving so all of these things shape the narratives of texts documenting these practices Then rejection of essentializing approaches to identity and emphasis on a processual gendered
Performance view of self and the location of identity within not outside of systems of cultural and media representation So essentializing approaches to identity are rejected and theres an emphasis on the view self that is constantly evolving Refusal to accept official race relations narrative of the culture which privileges
The ideology of assimilation while contending that the oppressed cultures had the capacity to and tried to resist the oppression It is a given fact that oppressed cultures always have some elements that trying to resist the oppression and all that is reflected in and
Through these expressions and that in turn adds to the interpretation of the significant events That even though this was going on something else was happening and that too is captured so everything needs to be captured in its entirety and presented okay
So alright what purpose do these texts serve aesthetics art performance history culture and politics are thus intertwined for an artful interpretive production cultural heroes heroines mythic pasts and senses of moral community are created It remains to chart the future
To return to the beginning to reimagine the ways in which qualitative inquiry and interpretive ethnography can advance the agendas of radical democratic practice to ask where these practices will take us next So that is how these texts you know we take these and then I go back and then we try and
Imagine how qualitative inquiry and interpretive ethnography can take these experiences and take these agendas of radical democratic practice and ask what and how our interpretations as qualitative researchers will shape these experiences in the future Criteria critical ethnography must meet: it must have written summary of literary craftsmanship
The art of good writing It should present a wellplotted compelling but minimalist narrative This narrative should be based on realistic natural conversation with a focus on memorable recognizable characters which should be located in welldescribed unforgettable scenes So one has to have a good grasp over the writing
The work should present clearly identifiable cultural and political issues including injustice is based on the structures and meanings of race gender class etcetera The work should articulator politics of hope It should criticize how things are and imagine how they could
Be different It should do these things through direct and indirect symbolic rhetorical means and researchers who write the above are expected to be fully immersed in the operations and injustices of that time Researchers need to know whats going on they need to feel the same thing that the members
Of the community at that point in time are feeling they need to be able to understand things from the inside as insiders and from the outsiders researchers and they need to be able to master this dance of going back and forth between the researched and the researcher
And then present an overview of how things are and how they could be So that is what critical ethnographers must do And that is where we will stop today that is as I know I will probably left you with
Some ideas that you may need to explore later but I just wanted to take the discussion regarding interpretation little further and give you food for thought If you remember right in the beginning of the course I told you that I need to leave you my intention is to leave
You with many more questions that you than you came here with I need to leave you I am trying to leave you with a lot of questions lot of stimuli for further thought and genuine quest for knowledge in this area thank you very much for listening
Foreign foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you foreign For the past 50 years UNESCO has discovered and protected numerous World cultural and natural heritages thank you in 1972 UNESCO adopted the world heritage convention the 1980s saw an increasing the inscription into the world heritage list as well as a rise in the number of visitors to museums and
National parks the fall of the Berlin Wall acted as the collapse of the walls between politics societies and cultures however the world heritage sites have been jeopardized Again by War terrorism and new conflicts through the establishment of a global strategy UNESCO broadened the standards and took the first steps towards
Achieving a more balanced world heritage list the international Society founded the e-commerce Charter for the interpretation and presentation of cultural heritage sites the interpretation of world heritage Works to recognize how world heritage sites embody the spirit and memories of mankind rather than values based solely on tangible architectural Works in an
Effort to make progress towards this deepening of interpretation UNESCO approved the establishment of the international center for the interpretation and presentation of the world heritage sites or the whipping the whippic to be officially inaugurated in 2022 has engaged in activities to disseminate the interpretation and presentation of the world heritage by
Organizing online lecture series and webinars 2022 marks the 50th anniversary of the world heritage convention thank you foreign Foreign foreign Thank you Foreign Ladies and gentlemen distinguished guests and colleagues welcome to the 2022 World Heritage interpretation and presentation Forum I’m Harry shim the head of the education and networking office for we pick very pleased to host this forum today this forum is organized by the international center for the interpretation and presentation of the
World heritage sites under the auspices of UNESCO that’s we pick we pick is a UNESCO Category 2 Center and financially supported by the cultural heritage administration of the Republic of Korea as the very first academic event of our Center and celebrating the 50th anniversary of the world heritage
Convention this forum aims to discuss the roles of Heritage interpretation and the we pick to contribute to the sustainable development goal uh this form is a two-day event on the first day we have eight presentations to discuss the challenges and efforts of Heritage interpretation and how we contribute to our future with world
Heritage focusing on capacity building and resilience based on these presentations panelists will talk about the future directions and role of wipik in the last session before we open the Forum we received a short video message of a welcoming remarks from Dr un chonche the director general of a cultural heritage
Administration of the Republic of Korea shall we please foreign Foreign foreign okay thank you so much for your encouragement Dr uh Trey now please welcome suhita the director general of UNESCO wipik who is going to announce the opening of this forum Mr please yes good morning the International Center for interpretation and presentation of world heritage sites under the auspicious of UNESCO
First of all I would like to extend my sincere grade 2 to the speakers and guess this for the 20 2022 World Heritage interpretation and presentation forum and I would like to welcome Dr hunger Korean national commission for UNESCO and professional Professor Han pilwon vice president of e-commerce Courier
Professor Kim jong-hee chair of overseas Korean culture Heritage Foundation I also extend my warm welcome to the professor Silverman Professor Mario’s antenna Secretary General of e-commerce and Dr baleni magar a manager of ecrom and all well known expert here and online our Center was officially established
This year our mission is to do research And archiving to strength capacity building and to encourage the understanding of diverse variable the heritage in 2005 United Nations had adopted sustainable development goals as core agenda to LGBT School unesco’s world heritage committee are taking Heritage interpretation and presentation as an important topic
Celebrating the fifth anniversary of world heritage convention we have prepared this forum to discuss how Heritage interpretation can contribute to the sustainable development to discuss in depth of the CV issue this forum will be held for two days the first day of this forum will address important issues of sustainable
Development including climate change conflict and community participations the second day we will share the outcomes of our research on the definition and concepts of Heritage interpretation community participations and the integration of human nature and culture is becoming more important in world heritage nomination and sustainable management
And this forum will Enlighten us to find solutions to these issues once again I would like to thanks all of the distinguished speakers panelists and guests joining this forum thank you foreign [Applause] for your detailed introduction and kind words now we have our congratulatory remarks from Dr kyung guhan the
Secretary General of Korean national Commission of UNESCO please welcome Dr Han [Applause] Ika um foreign it has also built a severe blow to the Heritage management not only world heritage sites but the experiences wonderful experiences enjoyed at the museums were deprived for many of the visitors because the museums had to shut down
UNESCO has sent out a commission a statement on how the museums play a significant role in the lives of individuals also promoting diversity in our daily lives the conservation and management and protection of the world heritage goes further Beyond Simple protection we now we are now thinking about how we can
Interpret the narratives the stories that lie behind the world heritage Heritage is indeed a significant aspect asset and to determine or interpret the significance of the heritage is very professional but also very subjective there are people who have built their identities and livelihoods on the narratives told through the Heritage and
Every individual has their own story to tell in connection to the Heritage so in this context we need to look into what heritage interpretation is the e-commerce Charter 2008 states that the interpretation is an over encompassing activity a very broad activity related to the enhancing of the experiences enjoyed by the individuals
Through Heritage and we at UNESCO the Korean national commission along with we pick have been working to promote and look into further into this this topic heritage has been built over a long period of time by many people in the process of connect making individual links to their individual
Lives so it is only natural that the Heritage sites have beared the voices of the individuals who have formed a community around the heritage we have also concluded that we have we would also like to emphasize that Heritage conservation promotes a sustainable development goals raising the public awareness of Heritage
Interpretation and to promote local participation is very important as we move forward the link between Heritage interpretation and the sustainable development is going to be viewed once again through this forum and I would like to thank the UNESCO will pick four once again putting together this wonderful forum
And also to the cultural heritage Administration for supporting all of these activities [Applause] thank you Dr Han for sharing your anthropological interpretation of a Heritage contributing to our lives and let me introduce the speakers who have contributed to this forum we have a professor Neil Silverman Massachusetts University of emergency in USA Professor
Mario Santana Quintero from carton University Canada and also as Secretary General of icomas we have a professor Peter Stone from Newcastle University and UNESCO chair in cultural property of protection and peace uh Professor Eileen obashley from Oxford Brooks University UK and Dr Ang Ming Chi general manager of Georgetown world
Heritage Incorporated Dr Valerie magari yes unit manager of a conservation program at ecrom Professor Tony dad Rico director of Heritage conservation at the University of Southern California and Professor young de Kim at Korea National University of cultural heritage and Dr kamini with asuria a senior advisor of ekram Professor Anna Lucia
Anarujo at Howard University USA Dr Emmanuel Gandara professor at National School of conservation and Restoration in Mexico Dr rohichigasu project manager of a climate change disaster risk management at Chrome and finally Dr Leticia letau independent Heritage consultant and lastly I would also like to address our invited guests as well except for those
Who have already given us the message so we have a professor Han pilwon the vice president of icomas Korea we have Professor Kim jong-hee chair of overseas Korean cultural Heritage Foundation Mr Kim ji sung director general of hcap Dr Chu in Suk cultural sorry the National Committee of Korea for cultural heritage
Mr Kim jong-giu the chair of a Korean National Trust yes so um moving on I would like to have a brief time to introduce our Center UNESCO we pick yes for uh that uh for so for the next 10 to 15 minutes I would like to have a brief introduction about the
Establishment of we Peak and its activities because it this year marks the official launch of the center so these are the outlines of my presentation so we pick as I also uh said that it’s a UNESCO Category 2 Center based on Republic of Korea and UNESCO agreement for the establishment of we pick
And reason for the establishment is to contribute to sustainable development through research capacity building and information technology on more inclusive understanding of Heritage interpretation the structure is that we have a director General and deputy director General and four departments and we have around 20 staff and the center is currently located in
Sejong city in the Republic of Korea so as I told you we have four departments which is strategy and planning office research and development office education and cooperation office and information and management office so I’ll share a little background history of the center so in 2018 the Korean government
Submitted the proposal for the establishment of this Category 2 Center on Heritage interpretation and Fast Very fastly the very next year at the UNESCO General Assembly they approved for the establishment of the center and in 2020 the Preparatory office for wikip launched in Korea and last year we did a Administration
Works for the establishment and run some pilot project and finally this year the we officially established the center so I’ll uh go around about the outcome in of the center in the research area we published the world heritage interpretation a review and annotated bibliography we compiled the world heritage interpretation Publications
Around the world so we categorized and summarized 1400 book chapters and 160 papers by themes and released it to the public and it’s currently available online and in the awareness raising realm we also have run the world heritage interpretation webinar series uh world heritage multiple memories it was about
The dissonant Heritage so we formed the six Global seminars discussing the resolution of the emerging issue of a decision Heritage the final session was held as a side event of the 44th world heritage committee and 5 000 views garnered with the involvement of the 24 experts in the program
So we’ll watch the 50 seconds of the gist of the webinar Yes it is hard work telling to visit histories but it is essential we’re more aware that there are multiple memories associated with places but if a nation state has a has a monopoly conflict between any national interest and the well the Heritage the outstanding values
It is in a sense inevitably now we have there’s this contradiction in Heritage where you know when it’s singular when it has one narrative it feels very powerful and strong but actually it’s quite vulnerable because if that one narrative is in any way challenged then it all crumbles
Yes that was the sort of a quintessential parts of the webinar and in the capacity building area we have around the world heritage interpretation and presentation online lecture series from 2020 some of the guests here are already participated in this series as well we organized the program focused on
Heritage interpretation in 2020 and Heritage presentation in 2021 with the participation of the international experts we hosted lectures with various themes such as world heritage convention digital media and Heritage cultural reconciliation and Community involvement so we garnered over 20 000 views globally and recently uh some University
In India you used this material as a course of a cultural heritage program and we also did an international cooperation uh we did a collaboration work with the global initiative our world heritage we collected International case studies of a sites of memory and hosted seminars on the collected case studies followed by the
Published proceedings and we also have the cooperation with the African World The Heritage fund the organization recommended a specialist for our programs and we did a collaborative discussions for the diversity inclusion this course so uh moving on to this year’s activities in the research Department we
Have a global working group going on on Concepts and definitions of Heritage interpretation and presentation and we also have the Heritage interpretation policy reviews and suggesting future missions and of course this forum is done by also the research department and we also did a thematic research on sites of memory
And finally we have Regional research on ouv attributes and values of the Heritage sites and in capacity building area we have a study going on on capacity building for world heritage interpretation and presentation and we have also have the Heritage manager capacity building program right after this forum in puya
For two days for that’s a pilot project in Korea for the awareness raising we as I told you we have online lecture and webinar Series this year we just finished our series last week it was themed breaching the Gap 50 years of the world heritage convention and finally we have this
World heritage interpretation and presentation editorial book publication and finally we have information sharing a department so information strategy planning for world energy interpretation and presentation foundational research is going on and we also have another uh basic research on study on world heritage presentation and its long-term strategy
And for the awareness raising we pick will be publishing a magazine called interpreting world or interpreting world heritage and it has already launched a newsletter last month um finally uh we’ll talk about our future so in the next three years we will be extending our personnels probably even to the uh foreigners as
Well and we have um goals to the finalizing our Concepts and probably the principles as well and for the next three years we hope to establish a research institute about the Heritage interpretation and we want to extend our capacity building programs and for the last four years
We our goal is to also to have a regional capacity building centers in some uh priority areas and also want to have an informational platforms globally so that was the um a short introduction about our Center so before we start the session one may I kindly ask all of our guests and invited
Speakers for a photo shoot to the stage so while our guests are taking photos we’ll have a 10 minute break for coffee or tea so we’ll be back we’ll be back to you in 10 minutes that’s probably 10 a.m in Seoul time thank you foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Thank you Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Ladies and gentlemen we’re going to start the following session um in one minute I kindly ask for you to take your sis thank you okay um okay now we’re about to start our session one everyone visited thank you okay um I would like to introduce the moderator of the session one uh Dr
Sujang Li the head of the research office at we pick she had her PhD in conservation studies from the University of York and she worked for government more than 10 years and drafted Korea’s first conservation principle please welcome her on the floor thank you thank you very much
Thank you very much miss him uh good morning everyone the ladies and gentlemen uh good morning I’m as introduced I’m the head of research office of we pick I will be moderating the session one today and the first session will explore the efforts and challenges in sustainable development that we should
Consider for Heritage interpretation and interpretation we will begin with the presentation by miss Kung hyunji program Specialist of our Center she will be presenting about the role of Heritage interpretation in sustainable development scone flow is yours thank you good morning everyone I am hanji Kung a program specialist at
Research office of UNESCO we pick I would like to first of all say thank you to everyone for coming here today as one of the organizing members of this forum I hope my presentation will be on introductory presentation that you could get a glimpse of what the Forum will be
Talking about for the next two days foreign there are three main research areas that we are focusing on and there are theoretical research interpretation policy research and thematic research this presentation itself is about a research under interpretation policy research which this year has focused on the interpretation for sustainable
Development and how it works in the world heritage system okay okay um to begin with nowadays Heritage is managed in increasingly complex context and this requires the development of more suitable management approaches that need that meets the needs of both Heritage and society and there are also increasing numbers of Demands made that
Heritage should contribute to contemporary Society foreign how can Heritage take an active role in responding to the social issues and challenges that we have nowadays we assumed that this is possible this could be possible through Heritage interpretation mainstreaming the idea of sustainable development so we decided to look through the link between Heritage
Interpretation and sustainable development as well as how world heritage system can better support these two interpretation and sustainable development to make a better synergy foreign the interpretation policy research therefore aimed to find out how the interpretation is different in policy and practice how Heritage interpretation can contribute to sustainable
Development and how a world heritage can support the interpretation for sustainable development and finally we wanted to find out what we pick can do in that process For the research we did literature review on the linkages among Heritage interpretation and sustainable development in the world heritage system and how these affect each other then we had three times of Roundtable discussion to hear the opinions from the Heritage practitioners managers as well as policy experts foreign the relations between Heritage and
Sustainable development uh that we want to look first is understood in many different ways according to Logan and Larson first sustainable Heritage prioritize the protection of outstanding Universal value which therefore focuses on Heritage conservation but second Heritage versus sustainable development considers these two are threat to each other and sustainable development for Heritage
Refers to adopting development mental plans plans for the needs of Heritage conservation and lastly Heritage for sustainable development refers to the idea of protecting outstanding Universal value at the same time addressing the wider Social Challenges that we have the literature review took this idea of Heritage for sustainable development and
More as it is a more desired approach in the present Society because it responds to the demands of contemporary Society while the importance of the protecting the heritage is not compromised uh the idea of Heritage for sustainable development is very well addressed in the policy for the integration of a
Sustainable development perspective into the processes of the world heritage convention I’ll just call it 2015 policy from now on because it’s too long they they are the world heritage committee adopted this policy in 2015 to um to stay in line with the un’s adoption of the agenda 2030 which
Mainstreams the 17 goals of sustainable development and the policy recognizes the shift in society and Rising Global issues that the challenge the Heritage conservation objective should change to consider a broader range of economic social and environmental values so that the well-being of community can be protected while also protecting outstanding
Universal value of Heritage sites Now let’s have a look at the term Heritage interpretation this is very well-known definition of Heritage interpretation which is by Freeman Tilton he says that Heritage interpretation is an educational activity which aims to reveal meanings and relationships through the use of original objects by first-hand experience and by illustrative media
Rather than simply to communicate factual communication information and the ultimate goal of his idea of Heritage interpretation is to evoke the audiences to feel the necessity for preserving heritage another important and frequently referred definition of interpretation is the e-commerce Charter or nma Charter it says that interpretation refers to the
Full range of potential activities intended to heighten public awareness and enhance uh the understanding of cultural heritage sites and it adds on that it includes educational programs community activities and ongoing research training and evaluation of the interpretation process and most importantly Recent research of our Center we pick on the definition of
Heritage interpretation which will be the main topic for tomorrow’s session has defined the interpretation as a meaning making process through communication participation and experience it increases understanding and creates and encourages connections between people and Heritage places in the decision-making process of what is interpreted and how it promises Heritage
Interpretation based on an ethical approach and a consideration of the full range of Heritage values including outstanding Universal value as well as Community Health values and called considering all these definitions Heritage interpretation seems to involve broader and deeper range of activities including research education communication and meaning making rather than just delivering uh
The effects and I think it it is intended to give changes in people’s thoughts and Inspire them to support Heritage protection thank you yep and regarding the relationship between Heritage interpretation and sustainable development Heritage interpretation tends to follow the Paradigm shifts in Heritage management there has been a recent call to change
The role of interpreter from bed of the experts to one of facilitator just as expert-led identification and management of Heritage is being replaced by values-based and people-centered opportunities and this is this trend is in line with the sustainable development discourse though interpretation interpretation is often a common ingredient of many heritage-based
Sustainable development projects in reality but it is not expressly acknowledged sometimes interpretation the term interpretation and its activities are referred to with different names like Environmental Education conscious Consciousness raising public education public tour and so on so it is it could be a little bit difficult to come conceptualize and
Understand the term Heritage interpretation as a term that encompasses all these various activities and processes that are done for Heritage protection and this is even clear in the world heritage convention and the in the operational guidelines um in the operational guidelines the term interpretation is mentioned only
Six times throughout the whole text and mostly it was used in relation to building infrastructures for visitor centers in language interpreting only once it it was mentioned along with the education and awareness building so the conclusion of the literature review it can be said that even though interpretation can be a comprehensive
Activity of Heritage protection which could be also which could also contribute to sustainable development the world heritage system still needs more room for improvement to explicitly include and encourage such interpretation activities in practice and based on this literature review the uh there are three types of Roundtable sessions were arranged for the questions
Of how does Heritage interpretation contribute to sustainable development in practice and how can possibly world heritage system can support Heritage interpretation for sustainable development first uh so the first two sessions gathered Heritage experts with profound experiences in Heritage interpretation and engagement with the communities of the world heritage sites or uh to to
Share good practices of Heritage interpretation for sustainable development to examine its outcome in the last session invited Experts of Heritage policy to revisit the world heritage system from the sustainable development perspectives and the participants to the round tables uh presented their projects and shared how their interpretation in different
World heritage sites and Heritage places met the sustainable development goals in the dimensions described in the 2015 policy which are the inclusive Social Development inclusive Economic Development and environmental sustainability and thus fostering peace and security and here I would like to share one case of inclusive economic development that I
Think it’s quite uh impressive uh which is Jaipur city of India diaper City is the capital and it’s the largest city of the Indian state of largestan and the home to the Amer Fort and jontar mantar which were designated as World hertzside in 2019. it was uh I for me it was very
Impressive sorry impressive uh that the idea of inclusive Economic Development was very well considered from the early uh planning stage of the tourism development of the city uh the tourism SEC so there is a tourism sector plan which was initiated by the government of Rajasthan State and
It aims that it it is to create a future in which tourism promotes socio-economic development and conservation without sacrificing the historic and cultural fabric that makes Jaipur unique and they have also recently established the first handicraft policy this year and it emphasizes attracting investment for the promotion of cultural heritage and
Revival of traditional art and crafts so in that context the city has made a sector of a site as a craft walk craft walk where domestic International domestic and international visitors can walk along the city wall and communicate with The Artisans and buy their crafts
And I think this is a very good example of economic inclusive Economic Development because they are using both the living Heritage and Architectural tangible Heritage at the same time in integration and the benefit would go to the local community and would help the community to contribute to preserve heritage site in return
So um the panelists of the round tables moved on to an open discussion on the Heritage interpretation practices for sustainable development and how this can be supported in world heritage system they all agreed that the Heritage interpretation should be practiced in a way that steps out of inter institutional framework and that
Involves the community in the process as it can be inferred from the world at the bottom co-creation United in diversity and slow Heritage and slow Heritage at the LA at the last part for your information is it means making certain place or Heritage needs sufficient time because it takes inevitably long time to
Build trust between Heritage experts and communities and to make a collaboration a collaborative decision so we need to take enough time to make something work out of the Heritage interpretation yeah and the in conclusion um the word people multiple narratives trust long-term relationship or the idea that it is rather a lifelong practice
Not just one of uh practice seems to be the Gen uh the penetrating elements uh for Heritage interpretation with sustainable development approach in practice then um how can the world heritage system support the interpretation for sustainable development first is it is possible by providing a guidance to implement the 2015 policy
There are calls for specific guidance and strategy for Heritage practitioners raised during the Roundtable discussions for example um specifically how to involve the indigenous group or how to properly develop cultural heritage tourism to be in line with the 2015 policy uh but at the same time it was also
Considered necessary to have a guidance for the community that addresses their importance and roles in managing and interpreting Heritage sites because most of the policy guidelines at the UNESCO they are meant for the experts and Heritage professionals not the communities so it may be the time to explicitly involve the community as
One of the major bodies of Heritage interpretation within the Heritage world heritage system oh sorry and secondly it is possible by revising the operational guidelines to empower sustainable development there were multiple opinions that operate the operational guidelines need to be amended to reflect the sustainable development approach more firmly it may be
It could be amended to include a section in in the nomination dossier on how the interpretation can be practiced to contribute to sustainable development in addition All State Park it is the reality that now all the state parties are required to follow common set of criteria and principles in recognizing
The value of their Heritage while the ways all these different states parties recognize recognize the value of the Heritage sites and how they conserve and interpret the Heritage it’s all different therefore the operational guidelines need to acknowledge and integrate the regional Heritage values and conservation system as well as to
Acknowledge the use of traditional management system uh so um the operation guidelines need to I think they it need to use the stronger term uh rather such as requested or uh not like encourage or suggest um in that context it is the people who recognize the value and develop the ways
To best manage the heritage in their cultural and natural setting it is important to take a holistic approach and Inter integrate the interpretation of natural and cultural and tangible and intangible Heritage as all of these different forms of Heritage exist together so the operational guideline need to encourage
Integrating those divides in the future so this is this is going to be my last slide for the presentation um the interpretation policy research that we had uh we did last uh this year conducted um at the Wii Peak aimed to examine the reality of Heritage interpretation contributing to sustainable development
In practice and to find gaps with the policy and operational and the operational guidelines recognizing what are suggested to change in the world heritage convention in the 2015 policy though we pick will need to focus its research area to how Heritage interpretation and sustainable development is understood in different
Regions also the Weeping will need to focus on the capacity building for the community to voluntarily raise their voices in conserving and managing the Heritage sites and stay out of the institutional framework that does not fit their way of perceiving their Heritage value and furthermore to see measurable outcome of the implementation
Of the 2015 policy inherited interpretation considerable time is needed so therefore to continue such projects with sustainable development approaches there needs to be a periodic monitoring and evaluation system this will be another area where we pick can concentrate on to better achieve sustainable development in the uh in Heritage interpretation
So this is the end of my presentation thank you very much [Applause] thank you very much Miss Kong and um thank you very much for your a very insightful presentations she positioned interpretation and presentations in sustainable development based on the outcome of our this year project which is about the policy project okay
Before we invite our next guest I would like to um ask um the floor to share your ideas and your voices so that we probably can give the microphone to the floor at the discussion sessions after three more presentations so please be with us and Please be aware of that
We probably will start our discussion session after the three presentations to invite the floor to hear your voice and the questions first this is the two-way uh Forum that we intended so please uh join us to hear your voice okay our next speaker will be joining us online I’d like to invite Professor
Anna Lucia aurazo online she probably will talk us and share us about the slavery issues uh based on our experience and the expert knowledge please join us Dr araujo so you are online I can see you thank you thank you so much I will start sharing my screen and here we go
I assume that you can hear me all seems sign uh then this presentation shows how Collective and public memory of a slavery Atlantic slavery shape it how the history and Heritage of the slavery are interpreted in museum spaces and Heritage sites I argue that history and memory are two
Different modes of the scores that are manifested and towards and visual images that engage what happened in the past in different ways then in my recent book slavery in the age of memory I emphasize that history and memory are conceived as forms of discourse either oral or written about people
Things situations and events that actually occurred or allegedly or happen in the past in other words these two modalities then of this course that engage with the historical past have many elements in common and are shaped by those who produce them historical discourse is an imperfect account based on primary sources such as
A written document a visual image an object or an auto account produce it in a specific moment of what is conventionally defined as being the past historians they’re not only aim to establish facts they exam they select they classify the organize and interpret these facts in the light of existing
Evidence ultimately history produced by professional historians in thought in universities and colleagues is an organized account that attempts to explain the past now despite history’s aim of objectivity and historians attempts then to tell the truth history written by historians in the present is also biased it is also
Shaped by memory by the ways individuals and groups remember and reconstructed past in the present now after emancipation in the Americas the material traces of the slavery and the atletic slave trade have been gradually erased from the public space and also from the Heritage sites associated with these atrocities such as
Plantations wharfs markets and other Urban settings then until the end of the 20th century slavery has also been absent from the public space of Europe Africa and the Americas in most cases museums of all kinds have avoided telling the history of the slavery and when this story was presented these institutions they tended
To focus on white abolitionist figures instead of exploring the histories of the enslaved populations victimized by this human atrocities in the early 1990s with the end of the Cold War however historically excluded groups including then men and women who identify themselves as descendants of enslaved people in African colonized
Individuals these persons they started occupying the public sphere and also the public space and also intensify their International connections UNESCO through the launching then of the slave root project in Wida a republic of Benin in 1994 played a crucial role to change this landscape we that was the second
Busiest slave trading port in Africa just behind Luanda in West Central Africa indeed one year before the launch of the slave root project then the city of Wida also held the voodoo Festival that also led to the creation of a series of monuments commemorating the Atlantic slave trade then the monument
On the left it was created by Union School in 1994 the other on the right is part of this initiative of 1993. likewise the Republic of Benin also witnessed the creation of several small private museums in other monuments commemorating the heritage of the Atlantic slave trade this new interest was motivated by a
Variety of reasons some of them belonging to larger contexts such as the Persistence of racism and racial inequalities and others associated with national contexts including the commemoration of the abolition of the slavery and the abolition of the Atlantic slave trade then as marked out this contest this context
Friends for example passed the tobira law in 2001 Allah that recognized the slavery in the Atlantic the slave traded crimes against humanity now despite the tobira law either in Paris or in former slave ports such as nand and Bordeaux black groups also demanded the construction of tangible markers acknowledging the country’s history of
His slavery is slave trade and colonialism in response to these demands then on May 10 2007 that is the day that France national day that Francis commemorates then the uh in slavery the City of Paris unveiled uh at the shaft the monument the crime writing and this is a 12 feet
High bronze sculpture by friend artist fabaris Iber an artwork that represents a broken chain composed of broken brings one side of the uh is culture reveals a network of red and green lines painted on a background uh white background that evokes then three branches like the real ones right surrounding then the the
Artwork although this Monument does not include any names eBay Embraces the use of the written word in his work and the surface of the other unpainted side of the bronze’s culture as you can see uh on this slide reviews engraved words such as lib souvenir remembrance in my published works I address memory
Then as a mode of discourse that is racialized because social actors engaging in this work of bringing the past of Slavery to the present they identify themselves along racial lines usually black meaning descendant of enslaved people or white meaning the sentence of people who trade in the
Slaves or who own the slaves even if we know race is a construction and that these categories are not frozen we know that many people around the world are racialized as black and their ancestors were not Enslaved the ancestors of many individuals racialized as whites were not the slave owners or
Slave Traders as well now based on almost two decades of research about how the history of the and the heritage of the slavery and the Atlantic slave trade are interpreted in museums and Heritage sites I want to emphasize then uh 12 main points first of all as I already mentioned the
History of the slavery the Atlantic slave trade and enslaved peoples have been largely absent from museums and also from Heritage sites in Europe Africa and the Americas this slide shows Lisbon in Portugal a city that in the late 15th century had a black population estimated at 10 percent
But you see uh here is the shafaris Delhi the king’s Fountain as it is today in Lisbon in this same site is represented in an anonymous painting of late 16th century on the right then no black or sign indicates the long-standing history of the slavery in Lisbon across the city
Yet a few years ago the city voted to construct a memorial honoring the victims of the Atlantic slave trade and the plaza Jose saramago that is about 300 meters from the site that you see here on this picture although the memorial designed it by the Angola artist kilwanji Kia Handa was
Approved it was not yet constructed then this was the the approval was happened before the pandemic started yet basically one single Museum in Lisbon addresses then this history of Portugal’s involvement in the Atlantic slave trade then the Museum of Lisbon at pimenta Palace where among others one big model
Of the city allows the visitor then to choose one itinerary that is titled lugari’s Invisibles in English invisible sites of the slavery and if the visitor selects that trajectory in one specific television screen the projection then will happen in the big screen showing then the the the movement the the faucet transportation of
Millions of enslaved Africans to the Americas in the history of Lisbon involvement in this trade they said uh this video can pass and noticed if the visitor does not choose the correct screen to have the big projection Brazil also witnessed similar silences only in the 1990s Houston area started
To publicly address its past associated with slavery and the Atlantic slave trade when in 1996 a cemetery of newly arrived enslaved Africans wasn’t covered in later in 2010 as you can see on the right side when an excavation and covered the valongo warf uh Wharf where millions of Enslaved the Africans
Disembarked during the era of the Atlantic slave trade and that is today listed as world heritage list despite this absence I underscore that a community black museums usually local is small and underfunded have been addressing the history of the slavery and black populations in the Americas for decades
For example here you see Museo De negro black Museum in huge general which was created in 1938 and was associated with the church of Our Lady of rosary that hosted the black Brotherhood of Our Lady of rosary Associated and with the Catholic church yet representations of Africa in museum exhibitions around the world
Addressing slavery depicted the history of the African continent and as if it had started to exist only with the rise of the Atlantic slave trade by often ignoring its long history here for example we have the permanent exhibition the slavery and freedom in the newly created national museum of
African-American history and culture in Washington DC and the the history of Africa that is addressed it starts with the slavery now most exhibitions they also showcase white saviors in some case white uh slave owners such as the founding fathers of the United States are also presented as white saviors as well
For example again the permanent exhibition is slavery and freedom in the national museum of African-American history and culture in Washington DC features then Thomas Jefferson one of the founding fathers of the United States won hundreds of enslaved persons than any Heap occupies a central place in one of the main sections of the
Exhibition likewise a recent exhibition titled lives bond together slavery at George Washington’s Mount Vernon is uh I’m not is it uh it was this exhibition occurred in a museum that is inside a heritage site that is Mount Vernon the former Plantation of Founding Father then President George Washington and like
Jefferson Washington was a great slave owner now when slavery started then being interpreting museums and Heritage sites such as these former plantations there is often a lot of emphasis on the wealth of slave owners here is Mount Vernon the home of George Washington and here the exhibition that I just show
You lives bound together featuring then the wealth of George Washington Stylus is also around the slavery and emphasis on this luxurious lifestyles of the slave owners um are also visible in the Arlington House in Arlington Virginia where the confederate general Robert E Lee lived a similar emphasis is also visible at
The John Brown House the residents of the slave trader John Brown after who Brown University in what in the United States was named after then in all these cases silences regarding how this wealth was generated predominate likewise the exhibition of material culture insights in museums interpreting the slavery often reinforces this perspective through
Displays showing luxurious objects to illustrate the wealth of his life honors and Traders but failed to explain who fabricated and who manipulated these objects which in many cases were enslaved people also many exhibitions such as those some ill as we find in some of the displays of the international slavery
Museum in Liverpool in the United Kingdom tend to over emphasize physical punishment and displays uh and display also instruments of torture this kind of victimization approach may be necessary to show the violence of the slavery but at the same time it is a choice that real objectifies and recommodifies enslaved people and
Reenacts violence in some of these museums for example such as the Museum of Accutane in Bordeaux in France instruments of punishment are displayed with this lighting that showcase these artifacts as if they were artworks now over time museums started addressing some elements that have not been
Addressed in the past such as the slave resistance but even when they do that what is conceived as resistance is really rebellions in interactions whereas the daily forms of resistance are often absent here in the case of Mount Vernon in that exhibition lives bound together that is an exception but
In most cases resistance is rebellion now museums in museum exhibitions failed also to address the gender dimensions of the slavery and how is slavery and the Atlantic slave trade particularly affected women years here is the the museum then the Civil Rights Museum in um in in then in
In Tennessee one of the the few museums that addressed this uh this story uh then that brings gender to light now museums and Heritage sites also fail to address the achievements of formerly enslaved people and when they do there is also tendency to focus on well non-individuals especially men such as
Frederick Douglass Harriet Tubman and equiano two exhibitions addressed for example the problem of the legacies of the slavery and when they do some rather attempt to provide a narrative about the harmonious existence of various racial groups in former slave societies yet in some museums such as the Nanda
History Museum in in France uh we have this new use of contemporary artists uh contemporary artworks as a provocation to interrogate the history and the legacies of the slavery and the Atlantic slave trade then as a historian who studies memory of the slavery my presentation does not aim to offer
Specific solutions to these problems on the one hand my work rather points out when the slavery is not represented in these museums Heritage sites and the public spacing General on the other hand my work underscores the pitfalls of existing initiatives interpreting these Atlantic slave trade slavery and enslaved peoples in these
Spaces not only in the United States but also in several other countries in Europe Africa and the Americas ultimately I emphasize that these historical interpretations usually led by public historians are not immune to the work of memory and because Collective memory and public memory of slavery are racialized I emphasize the
Importance of that museums and Heritage sites interpreting in slavery must engage communities whose ancestors were the victims of this atrocities thank you thank you very much Professor raucho for taking us to the marginalize the history that we oftenly uh not come across with leaving behind those uh said history we
Would like to invite the regional perspective our next presenter will be joining us online as well please welcome Dr Manuel Gandara professor of national school for conservation and investigation in Mexico taking Latin America’s case his presentation will focus on the regional perspective on interpretations Professor manra flow is yours thank you
Let me start sharing my screen okay there we go it’s a big strange type we use checked it there okay I see myself twice now uh but I hope that you’re seeing the right screen now okay well uh first of all I would like to uh thank uh weepik and of course the
Organizing committee for this invitation especially to miss Kung she has been very patient patient with me and very helpful uh so I I really appreciate your invitation also before I start I would like to to make you aware that I may be looking like I’m reading because that’s
Exactly what I’m intending to do because with my broken English the translation would be difficult and also I would have a hard time trying to stay within the limits that were very generously giving me to intent of time so uh without further Ado I will start let me move just this miniature here
Because it instructs my my screen perfect well what’s in it for you in this presentation I think that you might find something useful because what I will be sharing if with you is something that uh despite the Mexican saying I think it may be bringing true the Mexican saying says or dictates that
No one learns from other people’s mistakes but I’m sure that you can benefit from what we have learned in Latin American especially my case study which is Mexico not only for what we have done right but also from what we are in the process of trying to correct does what Senate
What’s in it will the agenda First I will explore the relationship between interpretation and increased visitation and the effects that that increase had on Heritage sites I will focus on how strategic planning center on Heritage sustainability had unfortunately unintended adverse consequences then I will attempt to show how interpretation um can be can benefit from uh Heritage
Sustainability approach based on unesco’s 2015 policy that means really presented well a moment ago for uh sustainable development perspective then I will go and analyze uh one of the examples that I could find in Mexico of unfortunately not for a world heritage site but it’s a success story and it has
To do with the idea that the real problem is not what people can do for Heritage but what heritage can do for people and for the planet so present a success story after giving my bad news earlier uh and then I’ll talk about our work in progress we’re doing in Mexico
At the site of Chicago okay that is the First theme uh Latin America including the Caribbean is rich in world heritage sites both National cultural and I am sure that you’re familiar with places like for example Machu Picchu and Peru Tijuana in Bolivia beautiful Tikal in Guatemala kopan in Honduras a in Mexico
To do again and Monte Alban also in Mexico and I could talk also about other sites like my alolan sites where we have the the key to understanding how climate change adversely affected a civilization that once stood proud of its mathematical and astronomical achievements this world heritage properties range
From a City built with mud in the Chihuahuan Desert that you’re seeing now called pakime to the tropical forest of the keys in Costa Rica home to the Monumental and very enigmatical Stone spheres it goes from prehistoric caves like gilana gates in Mexico with some of the earliest evidence for mace agriculture
To magnificent towns like the colonial city of Cusco Peru some are still in use some of these places for example Lavana Cuba and some were long ago abandoned like the rock shelters in the Sierra de capibar in Brazil and they could go on like this because with nearly more than 150 sites
Listed I would show you you get the idea well that it is perhapsed because of the size and complexity of our heritage combined with a Perpetual lack of resources and a volatile political history that we share many problems in a region conserving and interpreting your sites this may be also why the Heritage
Interpretation in this part of the world started later that in the so-called developer world I had initially planned to include a summary of a history and a survey of recording situation of cultural heritage interpretation in a region but what I found during the research was that except for a couple of Articles which
Are really local reviews there is a paucity of available information that precludes any attempt of building a credible chronology even so what we’re doing is our recently created Mexican Association for Heritage interpretation is going to be launching next year an Initiative for a joint Latin American Latin American project to fill that void
What we need is not just to speculate about that history but we must build a reliable database for archival and bibliographical documentation which certainly exists but it’s only locally available mostly in animal analog media and to supplement it with oral histories and interviews with the founders and Pioneers of interpretation
In the region having said that let’s go on with our agenda cultural heritage interpretation gained importance with the increase in visitation major sites at the end of the century it started world heritage properties typically archaeological sites the first to be listed were already major tourist attractions by the
Time they were listed and I give you their matchup you just saw some of them had a small side Museum that did not necessarily have an interpretive approach it was basically chronological data with some Salient aspects of the culture the sheer size of this ancient cities combined with massive visitation determined the
Main way in which information was presented for example into diwakan and the highlands in Mexico with more than one million visitors already in the 90s the solution was to deploy science as we call them in Mexico but we were kind of the panels in chapter the planets of text labels
But some countries needed earlier uh Guatemala for example labels were in place at the end of the 80s and I’ll show you a couple of examples in Mexico what is called the signal signaling project began in 1996. and this were the kind of science that we put in the beginning they were not
Always interpretive signs well they were impeccable in academic terms really impeccable for the common visitor they were often too long and difficult to read and even irrelevant or boring however there were a huge huge Improvement especially at the smaller sites that had North Side museums where the only information provided were
Western admission fees visitation hours or restrictions as an example of that uh here’s this all signed place before designing project began probably done with the best of intentions I I believe that uh by the local state keepers at least all sorts of restrictions which is the last one deserves a
Translation it says literally it is forbidden to enter the site and to remain on it would be difficult to remain on it if you’re forbidden to enter it right but it was done locally by by manual workers because we had nothing really before the 90s and at least nothing systematically
To to help people understand what they were saying until of course we started design a project and put a new label program in place and or labels have gone to several iterations in Mexico and they are getting better and they are getting ever all the time
But for uh before I concentrate on my case study Mexico for comparison purposes I wanted to look at this other two labels that are from the site of uh tikala Tikal in Guatemala the simple three and that’s the the label you can see they have a more uh interpretive
Stance and that is not a coincidence uh what the malah had started a training program for interpreters and I think that that shows in here uh Tijuana and Machu Picchu for example they opted for having better better interpretation done by local guides they didn’t rely on on interpretive media like we did
It was until the 1990s that cultural heritage interpretation as practiced in other countries made a clear impact in Mexico the literature we read came from a tradition we started by Freeman Tilden at the National Park Service of the United States we especially follow Sam’s thematic interpretation we are using Sam Ham’s
Model by the mid 90s developing interactive multimedia chaos for several museums in Mexico by the late 90s we tried to adapt himatic interpretation to our local conditions and to cultural heritage because it was done only in natural reserves when we we even invent you to introduce what we call anthropological historical
Approach in year 2000 that was called later thematic interpretation I’m sorry automatic interpretation Mexican style I understand that Costa Rica Colombia and Argentina have carried out their own adaptations even with our adaptation in Mexico our colleagues deemed thematic interpretation was only applicable for cultural heritage it was only applicable
To natural reserves and not applicable to cultural heritage sites and museums this is changing fortunately but it was an uphill fight for for some times and the number of projects and Publications is growing fortunately on this field one of the effects of inscribing sites in unesco’s world heritage list was increased visitation
This was combined in many countries with a lack of expertise and cultural resource management among the absence of real strategic planning the overseers of the sites were mainly professional archaeologists with little experience on planning or visitor or resource management but the early 20 hundreds insights like Chichen Itza visitors were literally
Eroding the site as you can see in the pictures corrected measures were quickly put in place but by the late 2000s it was clear that Heritage sustainability was definitely an issue or archaeological sites in Mexico are owned by the nation and are operated by the National Institute of anthropology
And history in my own Institution but our mandate is limited to what is called the legal perimeter of the sites while in 1972 the Heritage law protects all archaeological remains we have no jurisdiction of what happens outside the legal perimeter in fact in larger sites like the tuacan
Which is what you’re seeing is it’s the map of the tuacan it was evident from the start the visitation to the site attracted all sorts of informal businesses around defense perimeter what you see in that little red rectangle is the first perimeter there are other two buffers zones but that is the first
Perimeter and around that uh you we see food stamps bars stall selling local crafts and even Chinese made trinkets that unfortunately visitors boy boy was Mexican souvenirs or memorabilia so we we were very clear early on that this was a problem but we practiced what I called archeology and side defense and
It has had its consequences this is a result of this way of looking at sites as archaeologists we are trained to do research and some of us or some of them I don’t uh know how even how to restore buildings activities which all happen to be inside the perimeter fence this perimeter that
Is protected by law but no one trades on how to deal with what with what happens outside the fence and things are interesting because in my country archeology is controlled by the state and on the premise that Heritage is a common National good for ample social benefit and those can be
Privatized so when contract archeology began in the states and some of its negative effects on Heritage were known there was a white widespread reaction in Mexico against it and against the recipient field of cultural research management that that was very sad because by implication uh it also meant a very very
Unfortunate rejection of all strategic planning in general it prevented us from having an integral long-term view of the sites and environments and this impacted in other ways for example uh in in the 2010s more or less unesco’s had a policy to to have site management plans for world heritage sites and uh
The people that were supposed to do them and then they were generalized to other sites resented them because again there was this uh animosity against against planning they thought they were just bureaucratic documents that was paper board that wouldn’t have any real effect and of course then many of these plans
Would have problems as we’ll point out the political context didn’t help as the offices in Mexico both of UNESCO and icomos or Commerce were criticized for not taking a stronger stand on iconic sites were adversely affected by transnational companies they didn’t make a clear pronouncement a small by influential group of anti-unesco
Academics made their opinions public and they had some weight with very few exceptions these plans were done without consulting the local populations these populations recently decides that they were supposed to benefit from but which we’re really being exploited by your by tour operators and international hotel chains in some cases the
Municipality claimed that the visitors use resources such as water or services like the sewage system with little gain from a tourist expenditures especially International visitors whose tour packages include meals and shopping only at business partners of those major tour operators in the most extreme cases the local Crafts People and sometimes memorabilia
Vendors that operate the national chain at archaeological size forcefully entered defense perimeter and sold their Wares inside the speed despite it being forbidden Unfortunately they can be very insistent even aggressive pushing their sales to the point of having visitors complain in a study we did we carry out in Chichen
Itza in 2009 they were the only clone the visitors had about the site and you can see them as a matter of fact this lady in in the bottom right side is running from this guy that also said horrible things to her in some site the vendors interferably
And flee when spotted by the side guards like the one on the left this is the tour come by the way in others most notably Chichen Itza they bring movable stalls which they take out when the site closes many memorabilia has done Elsewhere for example notice
This uh Maya predators that are sold as Mexican souvenirs Chichen Itza um I’m sorry a very few of those stalls are really used by local craft persons a key here you can see a Craftsman doing uh masks that is a person from a nearby Maya town
Of piste and he really is doing you know Maya things related to the site but that is not the case with most of the installs that you can see it there and uh it is sad to see the path leading to the most sacred Cenote or Open Water
Sinkhole that you’re seeing here Cenote one uh Senate one uh with um this path line on both sides by vendors of all kinds but this is a consequence of the authorities building years ago smoke cafeteria that you see in the right side of a picture almost on top of the rim of
The same sympathy and giving it giving it to a privately operated concession then local people question why is that allowed and they are not allowed to sell their things and they demand equal treatment and this is an unsolved problem several Solutions have been tried and known has become very efficient
Then what happened that by doing archeology within defense and focusing on efforts in the sustainability of Heritage at all costs a concern that I guess could be understood because it was done by your psychologists we got unintended consequences which takes me to the final part of this talk
Mexico’s cultural heritage is a huge it’s under so much pressure you wouldn’t believe it you know from building of the infrastructure for from tourist uh entrepreneurs from politicians that taking care of Heritage sustainability was a priority back then my own enthusiasm about thematic interpretation derived from a successful
Application that helps save parts of an archaeological side that I was committing in which the people helped to to save the site at least part of the site that experience showed me what people can do for Heritage a legitimate concern of course but with a limited Focus
The real issue is what cultural heritage can do for people as I learned from two colleagues of Oaxaca that I will be referring to in a moment but the fight for quick welcome which is the name of the site was very impressive you know groups of of several
Venues uh really got involved into into it and they prevented the site from being further destroyed but now we can see what went wrong you don’t need not fully considered the dimensions of inclusive social and economic development that we just saw presented which are now keystones of
Unesco’s 25 25 15 I’m sorry 2015 it’s a sustainability policy the benefits of Heritage were not reaching the local populations they were not consulted in the planning process and it is my impression that we didn’t do enough to First interpret the site for them so they would understand
Why we were so concerned that it would be damaged or anything no and even less we were concerned to ask them what they felt about it no serious mistakes that uh uh sustainable approach would take into account the second dimension of the 2015 policy environmental sustainability has not
Fared very well in Mexico either so Chicago a war Heritage Property I’m working on and I’m going to be talking about it later um it’s an example how how government levels echelons evolved my institution places higher in Government Can happily ignore the policy even when we’ve signed
It it clearly states the policy that non-major extractive projects should be carried out in the vicinity of world heritage properties however in 2016 the ministry of economy granted a Canadian main company a large plot of land including the whole legal parameter of a site what you see there in in Gray
Appointed with the green arrow is sochikalco that is the official perimeter of Social and it’s completely inside of this mining operation fortunately I don’t think it doesn’t we haven’t we don’t have an indication that Canadians want to mine the site but you will agree with me the concession should simply not exist
So I’ll reach the first conclusion if Heritage for sustainability is not considered during strategic planning not even the best Heritage interpretation is going to be able to fix that later the problem lies elsewhere we need to correct existing plans and create new ones with a Heritage for sustainability approach
Not just for Heritage sustainability but um before I mention my good case my positive case uh that I wanted just to say that that idea and this is what we get by working only inside defense the case I want to share with you and maybe you will find enlightening or at
Least inspiring is from the central valleys of Oaxaca it was started by Nelly Robles and was later led by other two Visionary colleagues do you have on the screen Teresa Morales they are the ones that made me see that the issue is not only what local populations can do to protect Heritage
But what heritage can do for local populations they supported the sapotec indigenous community that demanded that their ecological remains found in the village to stay there to that end the other person Robles convinced my institution that the way to do that was for the community to build an independent
Autonomous Museum to hold the Arctic artifacts in custody that was difficult back then the community working through its traditional assembly donated a communal house to hold the museum they also determined which topics would be shown and along the planning design and production stages to have the support of
Camarena and Morales of course but it was a community that had always the last word in what to show how to show it and what to say about it one of the topics they selected besides the theological one was the complex process of weaving textiles which many of them did for a living
And once they were there they also decided to open a store next to the museum so the visitors could buy the beautiful garments they make so make experts fear that the museum would be looted and the precious archaeological evidence will be lost but here we have people celebrating the
First 20 years of the museum in 2011. well uh in 30 years no one has dropped the museum instead it inspired other indigenous communities in that state to build their own Community museums and he here we see the party we had when it uh Tennessee would reached 25 they are
Dancing their traditional dances so instead of being looted what it happens that inspired many communities in 15 years as a matter of fact it created a network of more than 20 such museums in Oaxaca that was the union next because misuse started growing in other places in Mexico the the National
Association of communities Museum was founded that did you see here and today the banner we see in the bottom is of a network of community museums of the Americas with museums built by indigenous and local communities from the whole continent using the same methodology developing Oaxaca by Camarena and Morales
So I think that the hacken case is a good example of several of the how several goals of the 2015 policy regarding the dimension of inclusive Social Development and even working towards gender equality since women participated something that normally under those conditions those Traditions would be difficult but they did it for
The museum the dimension of inclusive Economic Development was also considered the craft shops and other services that these museums offer their visitors are an alternate source of income for the community and I know I know you may be thinking okay maybe you can do that with a small
Scale and a local indigenous Community but how can you implement that at a large World archaeological site and the answer is through and the answer is that I don’t have any answer but at least not an easy one no but I wish that I knew uh but of course
This is a challenge as I understand this is a challenge this timely conference is inviting us to accept is it not but I thought that showing you what this community museums did uh at least points in the right direction of inclusion of sustainability of many things that I
Think are the way we’re going to to go it’s giving us inspiration to follow okay I’ll go now with the dimension of sustainability of the environment with beginning to see it in mix Heritage sites like Oaxaca Mexico in which natural interpreters and cultural interpreters finally got
Together no but we would like also to see it and decide that I’m working in the site of social that you met earlier this is a site in a beautiful aerial view it’s placed uh on the state of Morelos my home state Portland race in Morelos in Mexico
The I want to get into uh its role in environmental sustainability because the Museum of socialco was the French a good friendly Museum built in Mexico it has uh depends totally in solar energy on water Recycling and other sustainable Technologies and I would like to extend that idea that from 1996
They had on environmental sustainability I want to take that incorporate that into the content of what we’re doing with a new panel program um and we also want to extend to another dimension of the 2015 guideline which is the dimension of fostering peace and security using our anthropological and historical approach
We have developed a new interpretive label program which has not been deployed in on accountable damages that the site suffered in the earthquake of 29 2017 and also for lack of funds my own project budget was called this year more than 50 percent on account of the
Pandemic but in the meantime we’re doing we’re developing a virtual tour based on a new label program the same content that specifically touches on three of the goals of the sustainability policy fostering peace and security environmental sustainability and contributing to inclusion and equality although on a very minor awake probably
Well peace in Mexico first I should uh clarify is not threatened by armed conflict with any other country specifically with your neighbors to the north but the Warriors against the worker Tales so we went to reach with our ritual tour especially young people to whom the cartels lure and finally recruit
We want to show young people that there are always options other than violence and the emblematic Temple of a feathered serpent which is the highlight of a site or one of the highlights of a site is a great testimony to that for its iconographic program has been interpreted as a celebration of a
Collective achievement with the participation of rival cities at a very tense political moment to reach those goals we went beyond the criteria used by UNESCO to include surgical on the list that you see in the screen the surgical is an exceptionally well preserved and complete example of fortified settlement of a classic period
And its architecture and art represent the fusion of cultural elements from different parts of Miss America for a period when the breakdown of very political structures result in intensive cultural grouping but if I present this to the general public they don’t know what the Epic classic is they maybe
Don’t know what Miss America is and they have no idea I’m sure what breakdown was there what was the Intensive cultural regrouping I think that’s the way um why because those are not interpretive statements at all so it would be unfair you know these are the assessment
Of value but this has to be interpreted they have to be interpreted in terms of cultural heritage interpretation we cannot just bring them to the audiences like that this is why interpretation is different from value assessment um well the central themes of a visit will Revolt around the importance of
Cooperation and peace rather than conflict and War Fierce because um sochikalco has evidence that they did something fantastic uh they called on people from rival cities to correct their calendar in an adjustment much like the Gregorian reform which took place six years later in Europe you know by uh the leap years
The calendar had moved and it was a total problem for everyone and do you see here a foreign character with Maya attire represented and also represented the representation of a predicted Eclipse that uh allowed people to determine what the correction would be and here we have the chronographic
Representation of how a hand pulls one icon with a date and substitutes it with another date and if you don’t see it because you’re an archaeologist here is simplified so our new label program which I will show you one uh tell here is talking about that the second theme that
Violence is not natural it can be explained and even perhaps prevented if we understand what causes it these two themes are a direct result of applying your approach we seeks to denaturalize social practices and to show that they all have a history they are a dynamic
And aiming for maybe all they are not necessarily right for that matter no and since they can change they can change also for the better a principle that I call a principle of Hope I’m gonna jump because I’m falling behind these are some of the components or
Approach pad I’d rather show you this other uh of the new labels that shows how how climate change has impacted human Humanity before and so tikalgo attest to that sustained Rod might have been an important factor in these collapse they reduce your info words and social conflicts it’s inhabitants
Finally sacked and burned the city to the ground after years of being abused and even repressed by local Elite like you see them here people were hacked in this reconstruction and the idea is that we ask uh the audience if violence could be avoided if we
Understand what causes it and we will be delighted if they leave the side pondering that question in terms of inclusion we aim to show the digital media can allow a large audience to visit the site which is impossible with a very severe topographic slopes that it has on Macy’s
Inaccessible for many people and at the same time we can include people with hearing disabilities by using now video labels with subtitles in Spanish and English and in the future sign language we had planned to do also an hour a bedroom of indigenous language that is
Still in use nearby but they cut our budget so in closing I am aware that fulfilling the policy in Latin America will possess a big challenge we have scanty budgets a small number of Specialists and insufficient install capacity and yet we still May must take care of a rich and
Diverse Heritage but cultural heritage everywhere is so has so much to offer that is imperative that its benefits serve all the people on our planet as well then adopting and embracing the goals of the sustainability policy is an important first step and by the way everybody is invited well thank you [Applause]
Thank you thank you very much uh probably uh two online presentations uh make us to be more connected throughout the world and finally we would like to invite Dr Valerie Marga here with us today uh for the presentation about the capacity building programs and the people nature and culture Integrations
She is the unit manager of conservation program at ecrom and she probably will join us and share the experience about her expertise Dr Valerie his flow is yours thank you thank you very much and thank you also to the previous presenters uh good morning everyone um and I would like to First
Congratulate week for the organization of this forum and thank them for the possibility of sharing with you some of vikram’s experience on the topic and ekram being one of the advisory bodies to the world heritage committee where we actually work mostly on capacity building so we are celebrating the 50th
Anniversary of the world heritage convention and in these five decades we have seen an expansion of what we consider as Heritage when we look at this event coming from Varanasi in India what is Heritage in this image is it the buildings is it the shrines is it the
Sacred Ganges River or is it the worshipers or probably a better question would be what is not Heritage in this image we have come to realize the importance of context when we Define heritage whose significance may be understood through a wide variety of values which will be important to different groups of people
Or actors within our system context here includes the wider setting of uh in which Heritage dislocated those beyond the boundaries that Manuel Kendra was referring to and this includes social economic political and environmental aspects if we want to fully apprehend Heritage including nature and culture we need to
Understand it through a much wider setting this includes the management environment the social environment the broader human and built environment and the natural environment as well and over time we have shifted from an expert-led approach to Heritage where it was mostly yet led by very few individuals sometimes referred to as
Experts to a values-based approach to Heritage which was more encompassing but it was still led by those experts let’s say and now we focus on people-centered approaches which includes the points of view of many individuals and I believe we no longer consider ourselves necessarily as experts
So this means that there has been a shift from focusing on monuments and sites with a strong focus on the material and tangible aspects of natural and cultural heritage highlighting usually the negative impacts on Heritage and ending in strategies that cared for the well-being of Heritage with little
Or no or no interest in interpretation to focus on people and Heritage where we care about the values for the people we focus on both positive and negative impacts on and for Heritage and the result should be the well-being both of society and Heritage so this shift in the Pro in the
Approaches led to the development of the world heritage leadership program coordinated by the Norwegian Ministry of environment iucn and ikrum and in collaboration with the world heritage center and the e-commerce and with the General’s support from other countries as well including Korea and this program is now proposing a focus on Heritage
Places which are understood not just as the properties that are inscribed within the world heritage list but also their broader setting so if we consider a hypothetical landscape any place in the world and where we zoom in we can see that there may be three three world heritage sites
In it one is a monastery with a sacred Mountain another one is a marine ecosystem and the third one is industrial heritage for each of these sites we will have a the inscribed property which is now here highlighted in red maybe a buffer zone which is highlighted in blue and maybe a
Wider setting or an area of influence which is highlighted in yellow and by analyzing these three sites we will always find that there are necessary interactions to understand them the industrial Heritage for example may have been made possible thanks to the existence of resources in the region
That led to the the their exploitation the city surrounding that industrial Heritage can now probably offer housing and lodging for pilgrims and visitors who go to the monastery or to the sacred mountain and the marinek system provides resources for the people living in both areas um the Marine ecosystem may also be
Negatively affected by the pollution from the city or from the surrounding agricultural practices but what we can see is that communities um living in each of these sites will actually have benefited or have influenced all of the other areas so in short world heritage sites do not
And cannot exist in a vacuum I mean we cannot keep them as just focusing on what’s inscribed and it’s very close perimeter and they cannot be understood in isolation as well so by integrating nature and culture into the wider setting we ensure that all the values are considered and we can
Hopefully also pull resources to ensure that our diversity is secured for the present and for the future so this is why we’re now trying to eliminate barriers between nature and culture and promote common approaches to Heritage places we are in the process of reviewing the well-known manuals that
Were published nearly a decade a bit over a decade ago and we are going to integrate them into a single management manual for world heritage which includes both nature and culture and where risk management is actually a part of the management system as well and we have already published or finished two other
Resources guidance and toolkit on for impact assessment which was published uh during the summer and coming soon we will have also another toolkit called enhancing Our Heritage which is focusing about the effectiveness of Management Systems so all of these toolkits are already trying to bring out these Heritage Place
Approach and understanding Heritage in a much broader way so the conservation and management of sites includes all aspects related to a site from understanding its nature values and significance to understanding all the factors that may be affecting it to proposing conservation actions and all the way to communication interpretation and presentation of a
Site and we have to bring out the fact that this is an iterative process where review and modifications can happen and are usually required based on changing conditions and the understanding of a Heritage Place will include considering all aspects as I mentioned social um cultural political economic and environmental social aspects will
Consider the inclusion also of indigenous and local communities which are extremely important and also seeking this Equity that both previous speakers were mentioning the environmental aspect will also take into account climate change and disasters which are increasingly affecting our heritage sites uh and the particular aspect will review issues of
Governance including indigenous rights and bringing a voice to communities that have long been forgotten and have not had a voice the economic will consider all resources available uh including financial and Staffing for taking care of our sites and hopefully ensuring that they are both continuing and in the longer term
And the cultural aspects we’ll consider the legal and customary management context as well as issues related with language and communication which are particularly relevant for interpretation so in order to integrate all these aspects okay question will be good communication and this requires respect and dialogue and as was mentioned this
Morning also time and the long term and this has to be a dialogue that flows in both directions not just from people who are considered professionals within the Heritage sector but also listening to the voices of other people around it and as was mentioned also this morning this
Will require time to establish Mutual trust to find also the correct terminology so that we are not speaking in a language that is not understandable to everyone so that we can achieve meaningful and accurate communication and therefore interpretation and when we are in front of a Heritage
Place we often do not see or speak about the same things some of you may see a dock in this image others will see a rabbit some will see both and communication is often about this we may be speaking about something that is very clear to us but another person is seeing
Or understanding something completely different so in order to reach good understanding we must make sure that we are clear about what is important why it is important and for whom before we start acting on how we’re going to do something about the site when we are
Going to do it and where we are going to do it um and this will be um both in terms of conservation of the site and its management but also in terms of its interpretation and presentation and we understand that Heritage has been created by people and it has been
Created for people as well whether it is natural or cultural these are all constructs that we Define in areas that we want to protect and we all agree that our world is also a better place for the richness that Heritage brings to our lives so the challenge is that in that
Diversity our approaches need to be context based to be meaningful there will not be a single recipe that will work for all Heritage places so really working at the local level is the most important and understanding the specific context in which we are operating and in order to have meaningful
Interpretations that work for different audiences through different media we need to also find the right stories that connect each one of us to that place respecting the rights and values understanding the emotions and the feelings that Heritage can create and promoting lifelong learning the generation of new knowledge and
Promoting respect and peaceful societies as well so this means that Heritage professionals need to gain new skills behavior and knowledge particularly those linked to communication which includes language and terminology as I already mentioned um skills and tools to be better at interpretation and presentation in a matter that is truthful and respectful
For the context and these as is always the case in Heritage requires cross-disciplinary work so relying also on Knowledge from other professions and making it work as a whole so Heritage professionals also need to understand and communicate that Heritage is an ecosystem it is not something that can be seen in isolation linking
Conservation management and interpretation which only together can promote sustainable practices for the future and with that I would finish thank you very much [Applause] thank you very much Dr Marga um we have all presentations together in the first session one we have dealt with the the role of Heritage interpretation
In sustainable development we also heard about the marginalized history aspects and also we invited the Reasoner context and lastly we have a kind of integration between people nature and culture all those four themes probably at the center of it there is Heritage interpretation and presentations please be back with us
In the discussion sessions by bearing this important issues on the Heritage interpretation and presentations before we start our discussions we will have a 10 minute break so that you can have a kind of uh you know sort of questions in your mind so that we can invite more voices from the floors and
Also the online speakers and the offline speakers we probably will come back by 10 to 12 for the discussions please enjoy your break time and use the beverage and some snacks foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Thank you very much for coming back this is the discussion session which is the last session before the lunch I know that you all are hungry but let’s take a moment to discuss and explore the further issues on the Heritage interpretation and presentations as I mentioned earlier
And announced you already I will take some opinions and also comment and some questions from the floor first because this is the two-way communication process Enlighten us and hearing your voice as well through this forum okay Dr Lee um we delivered the microphone okay do I have to take off my mask
Thank you very much for present for presenters and it’s all thought provoking and inspiring talk thank you very much as far as I understand you four of you dealt with the different topics regarding Heritage interpretation and presentation however the the communities time seems to be the penetrate for different presentations uh
We are aware of the importance of communities in the Heritage interpretation and presentation and I know all of you made an effort to how the community’s values can be integrated into Heritage interpretation and presentation but before going further we needed to critically thinking about what and who communities are how we Define
Them and how we can understand them scope them otherwise we can have some stereotypes of understanding communities that the professionals should educate so in order to change the paradigms of understanding communities then we need to discuss who they are for at first because nowadays UNESCO not only the world heritage but also intangible
Heritage sector and memory of the world the value of communities is it has become like a master key so we needed to think about it and secondly I’d like to ask the very important to include the marginalized voices in The Heritage interpretation and presentation however uh it is very important to ReDiscover
The their past that we have been long missing but at the moment we needed to think about how we can understand the presentness of the marginalized voice because they used to be the victims but they no longer victims now but we need to think how we can understand them in
The presence context so that is my two comments and questions thank you Valerie would you like to start about the communities yes thank you very much for the questions and and comments I I fully agree that communities are complex to work with because I mean it’s not a
Single Community ever there will always be many voices many multiple perspectives coming from those communities and the broader the site the most the more complex those communities will actually be but even in a small community I mean there will be many many voices and many perspectives so it is about taking
Enough time to really understand who those communities are what are the messages that they want to also transmit and how do they value Heritage as well and so it it is about taking the time and I think you’re mentioning this morning about the slow Heritage I mean
It’s it’s about building that trust so that they communicate what is important to them and we get to also understand and so it’s it’s a just two-way dialogue and the second part I mean the the how to work with communities is also mean about uh getting all these new skills and new
Tools that Heritage professionals do not necessarily have when they are trained we do not necessarily I mean we know about our topics whether it is archeology or architecture or Heritage conservation or or Heritage cultures but we do not necessarily know how to to communicate and how to to Really
Interact with these with these communities and particularly in in the cases of marginalized groups I mean it’s also about understanding those different layers as you mentioned I mean whether it is the past the distal pasta drug was a difficult um Heritage and or represents a difficult moment in history but it can
Also be marginalized groups today who are not necessarily included and who also can be given a voice and where Heritage can also become a bridge to put those communities in contact with the Heritage and with the conservation professionals understanding those needs and the possibility for those groups I mean Manuel was especially
Was mentioning this possibility of using Heritage and using the past also to involve these younger people the younger Generations so that they do not get caught up by the cartels and the violence that exists in within the community so it’s it’s about it can be both ways
So I mean it it is complicated but there are tools there are methodologies that we need to learn as conservation professionals and it’s mostly about communication and understanding how to listen respectfully but also to put out all the different voices in a dialogue and in a respectful way of
Finding channels to communicate what is the meaning of those places and what it’s the role it can play for society nowadays from sure maybe the other thank you very much very Professor kandara would you bear with us about your opinions from Regional context how can we approach the communities and also
The marginalized communities as well in these issues I think that uh one of the issues that we have pending is that many of these sites are in Far Away places they are marginalized already they were in the middle of a jungle or very far away and
In from Development Centers and all of a sudden they have a world heritage you know property near them and they get full of Hope of what that is going to do for them but nothing happens and then what happens is what we’re seeing in in
Mexico I was so sad uh some years ago when we did a visitor study uh in in lieu that in view the museum was going to be opened in in Merida the capital of capital capital of Yucatan and the Assam went from chichenisa an Indian person an indigenous person what he thought about
Uh the the ruins and what was the connection he had with the people that built the ruins and he answered oh those those those those were not lost uh that they that people don’t don’t have anything to do with us we’re we’re not indians we are mestizo and
Those pyramids were built by the Mayas of Ina Inez my Institution they are they put they’re posting Maya people that didn’t exist no that uh are created by our institution because they have no connection no link it has been broken and the the very sad thing is that even if there’s any place
In in the Maya World in which the connection is direct it’s precisely in the Yucatan Peninsula so you you can see that when you’re that marginalized to the extent of not recognizing who you are not wanting to recognize it then we have a lot to do in front of us and for
Me looking for um a way of develop the economy taking to into account their needs and their possibilities is crucial at least in Mexico that’s the the worst part I think that we have to to take into account but something like that happens in other places in in uh in Latin America uh
The one Echo for example this is a very small and poor community that had enormous expectations of what the world heritage would bring to them so we’d have to find a way to communicate to them and and to plan with them plan with them and it can be done
It can be done uh I’ve seen attempts in Mexico but for Unfortunately they haven’t you know relay fruit Professor Gandara Professor araujo would you like to give us some of your opinions about the marginalized communities the the way how we can deal with those kind of issues uh thank you
In in the case of slavery and the the Atlantic slave trade the Indians is the point uh about memory being racialized is that uh the descendants of these communities who were enslaved in the past especially then in the case of the Americas they remain marginalized in this different societies I take here the
Example of Brazil then as you are talking about world heritage the valongo kwarf that is one is in one of the the slides that I showed waloniru in Brazil that was one of the largest slave trading ports during the era of the Atlantic slave trade and the The Wharf is located in the
Area of the the city that wasn’t covered in 2010 because of the the Olympic Games and the World Cup but it’s a region that a part of the city that most that has been abandoned is part of the downtown of the the region that two years ago
Even tax drivers they didn’t want to go to that region to to visit that area and there was a lot of problems in that uh in that region at the moment of transforming that site in uh first in recognizing it of course as a world heritage site but also to decide of what
To do with the site because it’s a site Associated of course to the community that lives around the that area but is also a site that is of all black Brazilians whose ancestors were brought by force to Brazil and this is not a marginalized community in terms of a
Minority because more than 50 percent of Brazilian events are black or brown then are people of African descent then nobody’s doing any favor by highlighting that story it’s their story and Brazil would not exist without Africa then the only way to do that is of course to
Create foreigns to to discuss what to do with besides by knowing that it’s normal that there are then the different opinions and different positions regarding what to do with these places the problem is that in then in countries like Brazil and even in the United States if you are referring to
Um then the sites that are managed by the the then by private foundations and not by by the state very often it’s very difficult to to intervene and to to suggest what should be done and which practice should be led and this is really the communities that
Can put pressure to recognize that these sites are sites where atrocities were committed on the one hand and on the other hand that this atrocities must be recognized then uh for for everyone and in most cases those who are running the sites and and this includes private organizations in some cases in other
Cases it includes then the municipal government federal government the state government they do not want these stories to to be told exactly because they are part of the present because black people in countries like Brazil they are still marginalized and this is part of this long history that
That involves the slavery and the Atlantic slave trade then UNESCO can helps with that okay can help with uh with that and also can suggest what can be best practices but it’s really only the organized communities that can put real pressure to get things right thank you thank you very much Professor
Araujo uh Miss Kong uh probably you are the one who has to integrate all those kind of perspectives in terms of the communities in the policy research uh from now on uh what would you your plan would you share your plan about how you would like to start about the community
Issues in the policy aspect laughs um Community aspects it’s a it’s a really difficult question for me to answer um but as I’ve been doing the interpretation policy research I’ve been recognizing that the the community is really really important and it’s it’s much important than I have ever expected so I think um
The and I’ve also I’ve been recognizing that all these guidelines and policies are addressing the roles for the Heritage experts and professionals but I I think there should be more room for the communities to be involved in this world heritage policy world heritage system and um
In order to do that I think uh these uh guidelines or criteria or principles that are that the world heritage system is suggesting to the state’s parties should be should have more um inclusive um room yeah so that all the states parties can apply the way they perceive their own
Heritage values and conserve their heritages into the into the Heritage world heritage system so what we want to do what I want to do personally in the future and hopefully sujang will allow me to do that in in the next years to come is to um examine the how the idea of world
Heritage system or sustainable development or Heritage interpretation or presentation is understood in all different regions there may be different interpretation or understanding by all the all the different states parties that may not fit exactly with the world Hertz system so we want to go really from the fundamental ground so that we
Can find out in the future how we can think about how to involve the communities in the world heritage activities uh thank you very much it’s not my decision it’s our Center’s decision to decide the next topics that we explore in few years and I’m sure that the uh
The capacity building functions in our Center is very much concerned about the communities as well who Target for and what kind of content for the targeted communities can we do deliver the capacity building programs probably uh Miss shim the head of the capacity building office will tell us about what
Is her approach on the community issues and where the research office and other information office can support her programs in future please yes I’m sorry this is not the discussions for only on the platform but um it will be a kind of challenge for the audiences as well and this is your
Crime to be here uh with us sorry uh sorry again is this mic working yes yes from the capacity building office perspective how would you like to deal with the community issues as Dr hyung Yong Lee mentioned from her questions oh okay thank you um actually in the session two we were
Actually going to also discuss about the community but then uh to answer your question we try to think about Community as a very um diverse and multi-layered voices of people so we have a plan to Compass building to different layers and different part of the stakeholders not only the people related
To The Heritage but also who has a right to the Heritage and who has also a sort of a commercial related to the Heritage so even to the construction related people so we have a compass building programs to the diverse the stakeholders yes thank you
Thank you very much I hope uh Dr Lee that will probably answer to your questions yes we we have to start with the definitions of what is the community and what types of communities that we have to tackle in short and long term and please share us your ideas on the
Communities in the future projects of our Center okay is there more questions from the floor yes Dr Ong bear in mind you are the speaker I know yes in the afternoon thank you please come back after lunch all right I’m Ang minchi I’m the site manager from Georgetown been in Malaysia
Um I would like to follow up from that question to your question to her answer and I have a suggestions for we pick which later on I will be giving a presentation or interpretation by the local community and one of the biggest issue for us as a site manager for variety site is
The ouv and the attributes were not involved in now of proactive communication with the local people so I would highly recommend capacity building opportunities to be given by those who is going to submit the tentative lease I think it’s important to yes involve the local people involve us but
A lot of time we are not involved in the tentative list so please make it as a pre-criteria they need to understand words interpretation for the local people and then through that then you will give the local community and opportunities to tell our story to the Warhead discussions
And of course if you are very powerful also involved the youth because nowadays the Gap is you are not interested on the very boring Heritage so you know certain percentage of the yes the the local people the indigenous people the youth and in particular our beloved State
Parties who is going to submit the tentative list and the dose so I think you you can have a lot of things to do in that perspective thank you very much thank you very much Dr Wong uh we it will be really useful and valuable advice from you from the
Site manager’s perspective uh Is there further questions from the floor okay yes Mario Santana Quintero thank you thank you so much for putting together this um this session you know about sustainable development goals and the relationship with Heritage and we have been talking a lot about the communities but I always feel that
We There is a gap between the community the authorities and Industry you know because industry is probably the biggest polluter and they probably the area that we haven’t really have is it’s a gap we don’t see it in any of the Heritage meetings I hardly ever see anyone within
The development right and they’re actually and it comes from their sustainable development it comes from the people who are doing the developments and I know they are very conscious people about you know Heritage and climate change but I don’t see them here so I don’t know what what is your
Opinion in general to the panel how can we engage with people that actually do the developments okay I have to deliver my question I mean his questions to someone who can answer the best uh worry would you like to start thank you thank you for that tricky question Maria um the um
I would say there are two moments where where developers can be involved I mean one is when something is happening at a world heritage site I mean with through the Heritage impact assessments I mean that’s the moment if it is done early enough in advance where you can actually
Have a dialogue and understand what is the purpose of the development project that is going to take place around the site and hopefully that leads to finding Solutions I mean not just necessarily us as Heritage people saying well you cannot do this or you cannot do that
Because you’re going against the uh the values of the site but it’s about trying to find an alternative usually I mean hopefully so that would be one but the other one is definitely yes I mean we we have to be able to and I think interpretation is also about that I mean
It’s about finding the the multiple meanings that a heritage site has for many people I mean not just the very local communities but to the broader public as well and trying to communicate that and why those heritage which should be kept as they are and or what is the
The role they can play in the future of that community of that larger society uh in in general so it it is the let’s say The Wider spectrum of interpretation and presentation that should actually uh lead to a better awareness and just going back also to
Ang’s comment about the I mean how to to include the the values I mean the ouv oversight I think that’s also something of the approach that we’re trying to promote with the different advisory bodies uh of the Heritage Place it’s that yes Society is recognized and inscribed on the world heritage list
Because of the ouv that has been recognized by the committee but the meaning of the place is actually much bigger I mean and it has to be it has to consider that bigger setting uh where all those values for the local communities but also for different groups might actually be revealed and
Will actually give the full meaning of the place uh and we will and will allow to to protect all the aspects that need to be prepared and also involving different types of public and different age groups I would say not just the young I mean the young are extremely
Important they are our future but also I mean elderly people who may have also traditional knowledge very good information to provide to the younger generation and the young who can also bring their own enthusiasm and the new media and new techniques that also will be extremely valuable
Very much I will not just take around the same questions to all the speakers because we are running off time uh and also we can’t miss the prepared questions if we do probably we will regret and also the answers are awaiting as well uh probably the threading theme
Of this session would be the how what is the role of the interpretation and presentations in all those kind of issues in implementing the world heritage conventions as I mentioned earlier there there were a reasonable context issues and also marginalized history issues and also the capacity building issues and the people nature
Culture integration issues and at the end probably miss Kong will deliver all those kind of research themes in the policy research at the end shall we go one by one starting from a professor araujo about what and how they interpretation and presentation can help and what is the position in the
Marginalized history or selective history problems in this area thank you for your question in many ways I think that this question comes back to what we already I already answered when we had the the previous the previous question I I believe that this uh then this is where perhaps historians
Can can provide some help then the history of a site that is a heritage site that involves human atrocities then is the history of the the victims but also includes the the history of the the perpetrators and of course the historical narratives are always selective we are historians we are all
We also select what our sources we try to to to to be loyal to a certain level of Truth but we are also selective then this is uh I think that uh this is why the The Works of historians they they are important then to be able to to dig
Into the the work that we do in the archives we have a variety of sources archaeological sources uh then sources that are oral sources and put this together in order to give this multi-dimension multi-dimensional vision of what happened in the past and this of course includes uh different social actors in
The past than people who were those who perpetrated the atrocities and those who were victimized and then we needed to recognize those who are the perpetrators but we do not want to make the uh the presentation or uh even the the interpretation of the sites by focusing
On those uh who are the perfect perpetrators and this is when the the it is important to have this this various views uh the the history of those who are victimized and also to have several social actors who in the present uh are related to to the sites because this is
The way also to uh to convey the the several histories the the several uh narratives by at the same time recognizing that this atrocities were committed then I I believe that in deals the the the the role of historians is very important and I am not sure if all
The time historians they are really called to uh to to wait when we are even listing this uh sites in the the world heritage list but when you are trying to to maintain them in the list and continue then interpret and presenting them to to different audiences
Thank you thank you very much lastly I will ask Professor Gandara what would be the aspect from Regional context that miss Kung will probably will proceed her result in policy in next few years what would be the considerations originally perspectives that we have to consider in policy revisions I think inclusive Economic Development
Will be crucial would be crucial because all our efforts will fall flat if we cannot reach you know people and and meet their expected their expectations so I that would be my my suggestion and in terms of a broader problematic I think that we need to to maybe transcend
Oub and and find all the other things that a site provides because it uh normally or assessments are very technical and we’re missing things that would help us to do things that the approach I am suggesting emphasizes one of them is to denaturalize informational people for example to to feel to know
That there there is not natural for them to be naturalized that’s important message no and also too I don’t know if there’s a word in English like this to historize no that doesn’t doesn’t seem correct to put history on things like uh the the horrible stories okay that
That’s the horrible story in the past that the past can change and we can change it so this principle of hope that I was talking about I think is something that we should also try to put into what we do we’re not we’re not just being optimistic or idealistic this is true we
Have improved as as a humankind and we can continue to improve but if we concentrate on the Epic classic and on the role that the miss American communities exchanged blah blah blah blah we’re not going to be doing anything we have to go and look for deeper meaning
Deeper meaning in Heritage and meaning that we’ll be able to connect people with people people with the past people with other people I think that that would be the way to go Professor Gandara uh thank you very much for joining us for the session one this
Probably will be the uh the end of session one but please stay with us after the lunch break uh be back by 2 30. uh bear in mind that we will continue our discussions about the role of Heritage interpretations and also that will lead to the end of our today’s
Session uh for the role of our centers in future as well thank you very much for joining us and thank you very much Dr Maga and thank you very much professor manora and thank you very much for professor araujo and thank you for Miss kongji’s uh participations as well
Thank you very much we will be back by 2 30. thank you foreign foreign Foreign foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign foreign thank you foreign thank you foreign Foreign foreign foreign thank you Foreign foreign thank you foreign foreign foreign Thank you foreign foreign Thank you foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign foreign Foreign thank you foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign foreign thank you foreign thank you Foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign Foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign foreign Thank you foreign Foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign foreign Foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign Foreign foreign foreign foreign foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign foreign Foreign thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign foreign foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign We have dealt with this some of the challenges that we have and what we can do for the sustainable development goals and the topic for the session two is world heritage and our future capacity building and resilience I’ll be moderating this session as I’m the current head of the education and
Network working office I would like to introduce Dr Eileen orbashley the professor of Oxford Brooks University in the UK as our first presenter Dr obashli has specialized in conservation and management of historic buildings and places and her research focuses on the sustainable conservation regeneration and management of a historic environment
Please Eileen the floor is yours thank you very much um and it’s great pleasure to be here um and be with you and to be in a live conference too um but also to be joined by many people uh online as well so I think that’s a good way of of combining everything
Um I’m going to talk about Community inclusive approaches and I’m particularly going to focus on Urban Heritage interpretation because a lot of my research happens around historic urban areas and this morning we talk quite a lot about archeology so I hope this afternoon also gives us a bit of a
Balance looking at the different um type of Heritage and I know um and Wing Chi for example is going to follow up on Urban Heritage as well in this session so I thought maybe that folk sort of keeping that Focus um would be useful mindful of the
Speakers that are going to follow me and I will try not to repeat things that are going to come up later in in the session but I think you know what’s in urban Heritage when we look at sort of the Heritage that’s a collection of things rather than archaeological
Society a single sort of world heritage site Urban Heritage sites that are sort of world heritage sites are much more complex in their own way they might not have the sort of height of architectural or artistic um value and most of their Heritage value comes from a sort of collection of
Buildings the sort of each element is not that valuable but put together it gains value more importantly it has a lot of intangible values and it’s living Heritage its Heritage or places that people are still living in and occupying and have a relationship with and I think that’s really important and very
Important aspect of it is of course it’s social values that are embedded Within These communities of both having an attachment to a place this notion of place attachment you feel attached to a neighborhood or District because you’ve lived there you have family there you have familial ties there for example so
You create you you generate this attachment it might just be somewhere you come and do your shopping once a week but those places that have meaning are all part of what becomes the urban heritage so of course I don’t need to tell you that Urban Heritage is also a tourist attraction
That it we all like visiting it and I’m sure every one of us has visited numerous historic towns as a tourism experience the world over every continent there are historic towns and that become attractive to visitors for the sort of character of their architecture for their walkable scale
For the nice little shops that now now fill them and for that very reason they also become very popular Leisure destination So within a city itself historic districts can become areas where there are cafes or bars and little sort of souvenir shops and the like so
Even within a city they create a good background um for leisure activities they’re also used ly to promote identity for example and that historic architecture can be part of a sort of an identity that a state party a local Authority or political decision maker can decide promotes a certain it might
Be a certain ethnic group it might be a certain religious group it promotes a certain message so and also a sort of identity is then attached um to a place and to an architecture and that obviously is important when we start thinking about interpretation so how does Heritage interpretation
Occur and I’m not going to talk about the methods or the systems or what it might look like and how it can become creative because there are there are many people who are better equipped than me to talk about that but I think let’s look at who’s creating the narrative and
I think particularly from Community point of view that’s really important so there will be panels and signage or I don’t know local museums and all aspects of of interpretation within the city now that’s the official narrative that’s the one that the local Authority or tourism department or someone sat down and
Agreed that that is the narrative about a place now we also have this new layer of interpretation which is the one that’s shaped by the visitor so if you go on TripAdvisor you find out about a place from the people who visit it they score which are the top 10 attractions
Um to visit in a certain place what are the best museums to see what you think about them what your experience is going to be where you’re going to eat and all that and you pick that information up from other visitors these aren’t locals it’s not an official narrative but it’s
The visitors telling you and you only actually get to locals if you go out and seek them out and you know maybe attend participate in a guided walk by someone who’s part of the local community um who’s taking you and telling you about their life experiences so the
People who actually live in a place who make up this living Heritage that we’re so interested in in visiting they’re actually right at the bottom of of having a voice in The Interpreter nation of the place that they actually live in so visitors coming for two or three days
Can have more powerful input through writing two or three reviews um than someone who actually lives there and again I think this is worth um worth noting things and of course tourists have impacts on places and again we know this there’s a lot of literature written about the sort of
Commodification of cultural heritage um the ReUse of urban spaces so we see spaces that were Community spaces that were social spaces that gradually taken over by commercial uses that serve mainly the visitor or the Leisure markets like you know squares and streets taken up by restaurants and
Cafes we have gentrification in terms of sort of Tourism gentrification and prices go up prices of housing go up um you know we’ve got a big issue these days with Airbnb and and a lot of housing going over to um those types of you know the visitor
Market because they pay more money and of course we have predominance of Tourism uh based or tourism-centered functions in the shops sell souvenirs they don’t sell you milk or bread um they sell you um things that you know t-shirts um and the rest of it so communities of this
Place they’re both physically displaced in terms that they can no longer afford sometimes to live in the places um that they live in but they’re also displaced from the facilities they enjoyed in their own neighborhood the services and the social networks um with whom they were who they
Collaborated who was part of their sort of support network if you like so that bearing in mind also um these these impacts let’s go back to why place is so important um for communities and I’m I’m using the word Community very very Loosely here there is no one Community it’s actually very
Heterogeneous very things are also very fluid but a place and particularly Place attachment can bring a sense of identity you’re from that place you’ve lived in that place all your life or you’ve come to live in it you’ve come to select it you have an attachment to it your
Partner might be from that place you belong to it you have this feeling of belonging and that belonging is not just a physical belonging to an architecture but it’s also a very um it’s an emotional attachment a psychological attachment of feeling you’re welcome in that place people create social networks
Um and we know how important social networks are um in terms of resilience and resilience planning in in sustainability um and these are sort of informal and formal support system that are formal systems made up of various agencies that operate in a city um from Grassroots up to sort of more
Municipal Arrangements but also just informal neighborly attachments it might be extended family and and the ability to live in close proximity to your family that create strong social networks and also it’s it’s also also about cultural identity and somehow historic buildings cultural heritage creates a receptacle onto which our
Cultural identity is portrayed and here I think again it’s worth understanding that these are not necessarily communities that might live in a place anymore but still feel they have cultural identity and cultural links to a place that maybe their ancestors came from we’re talking about diaspora communities who still feel
Attached to the Homeland um in recent research we’ve seen three or four generations down still feel an attachment to towns historic towns that their grandparents and great-grandparents went came from and they felt a stronger affinity and identity to those towns than to actually where they were living today so I think
You’ve sort of really got to see this big picture of of how people can feel attached um to sort of the lived-in Heritage the the Urban Heritage almost of the everyday and less than immoral and I think you know theoretically in sort of just touching on the theory a bit we talk
About the right to the city um this was first introduced by Henry LeFevre in 1968 and it’s evolved I’m not not saying this is the theory that that’s uh that still holds and and he he evolved it himself as well but what does it mean to have a right to the city it’s
About having access to basic services that every citizen has access to basic services like water education um shelter and so on but they also have a and I think these are the two most important points of this that we’re seeing um particularly in the cultural heritage and in the interpretation
Framework is that having the right to the space in the city those social spaces the informal spaces those shared spaces that everyone has a right not only to physically access them but to feel socially welcome in them that they’re not marginalized um from them and the fact that they should have a
Right to have a voice in the city that their voice is heard and listened to and this isn’t just the Democratic voice it’s about a voice that helps shape the future of the place um and and this doesn’t need with City it doesn’t need to be the entire city
It’s probably looking at it again at that neighborhood level that District um level and and how that right might emerge um as a as a cultural expression having local businesses for example having a space um for local businesses um to food stalls other stores this is Brixton in London where
Um at one point before it all got gentrified local uh the big Caribbean Community immigrant community and and they had were given subsidized spaces in a derelict or uh shopping mall or that was sort of had seen better days and that really revived the place but it
Enabled them to have Caribbean foods and other goods and sort of created that cultural meaning and a sense of belonging to that neighborhood and again creative spaces I know we don’t always like graffiti but it can actually be a very creative activity or warm murals is an expression of some parts and groups
Of a community and I think you know things like these murals they can also be a form of interpretation and that not all the interpretation happens in in neat boards and managed narrative this is also an expression of how people engage with the city how they feel about
It and how they express themselves and how they have a voice in the place in which they live um so what can Heritage interpretation do how can it help you know how can we work with communities uh and enable them to have a voice um in Heritage interpretation
To start with i we have to accept that communities are multiple um that they are complex they might have different ethnic groups different religious groups different there’ll be economic divides there’ll be generational divides and also remember they will be fluid they will be dynamic they’re not static they’re constantly moving constantly changing
Um and so forth so we don’t have one single Community we never do people have multiple associations to the place it might be very present it might be about the past um it might be that they are diaspora communities so they’re not actually there but they still feel a strong attachment
Um to a place and as a result they will have multiple narratives they will have multiple stories and different multiple ways of expressing themselves how a young person expresses themselves how um an older person how different genders they will each Express themselves in very different ways and will want to be
Heard in very different ways there isn’t a one-size-fits-all um that we we reach out but what if we reach out if we engage if we bring people on board what do they get out of it it enhances their sense of belonging to the place it enhances their right to the
City that they feel part of this community um and it improves their understanding and appreciation of the Heritage but it also means that their voice they are represented in that Heritage and this is the notion of co-creation of knowledge co-creation isn’t just an act of you know let’s all work together and build
Some you know artwork or I’m expressing it is much deeper than that that the understanding of the place is developed collectively and of course through these activities through the sort of processes of Engagement um it can support social networking it can improve social networking I’ve seen this on projects where we bring together
People who we think should know each other who we think are associated with one another and yet they haven’t really had that chance um to work together and seeing them building stronger networks um is is all it’s all really um positive and then again I don’t want to go into
The sort of processes of how do you engage um and and engagement shouldn’t just be about we’re doing an interpretation plan we’re going to engage engagement needs to be something bigger that looks at all Urban issues or all issues of the neighborhood and Heritage interpretation might be one of those but it enables
It’s only by meeting people by engaging with people on a long-term basis do you create trust so if again in terms of Engagement when you look at your Gatekeepers when you look at the people you’re working with the p the groups or the ngos or the the local leaders that
People will turn to are ones they’ve already built trust with sometimes over 10 20 years so I think important it’s really important to recognize that engagement doesn’t happen overnight and it doesn’t deliver results overnight either it depends on long-built trust so why not use those trust networks either
Use existing networks and build on them or if there aren’t existing networks use this is your starting point but use it for something um larger and you know move away from sort of very classic ways of of Engagement and and workshops and looking more at principles of things like social
Learning and which are sort of the basis of co-creation uh more than sort of ones that are just informative and and sort of with a very strong end game um don’t look at the end product look at that sort of learning that will lead us somewhere but we don’t even know what
That is um but you know going back to sustainability going back to sdgs at the bottom of it all lies social Equity is one of those three pillars and for anything to happen to any form of Engagement if you want engagement I think this got mentioned in some of the
Morning sessions as well about Mexico you’ve got to deliver on social equity equality and give it um you know off and on projects when I’ve worked on management plans in various parts of the world you know the big issue for local communities is is some thing that’s not been delivered
They don’t have access to water or they feel there’s unequal division of benefits from tourism for example and that might be real it might be perceived most often it is real so you’ve got to deliver on social Equity so quite often we’ve we’ve tapped into the higher organizations say until we
Solve this this discrepancy we’re not going to get down to Heritage management because that will linger that will will stay on So You Know underpin it all with that there is there are systems and there are people who can make those changes they might not be the Heritage management teams but there are
People out there and recognize this is not an end product but actually a starting point um for things to happen and we talk about disruptors in tourism Airbnb Uber you know they come in they disrupt the market but for every International global um disrupt there are also local enablers
I call them people who make a difference locally who set up local businesses Enterprises um you know the guided tours with the tourists you know there are all these little actions that happen um the small enablers who only use local products or promote local Agriculture
And so on so support them and help them deliver rather than supporting some of the bigger players support the small enablers because they will open doors and they will lead to other people and other things that’s happening so if we look at resilience planning and I know Rohit will probably um
Talk a bit more about this um going forward but you know his neighborhood is the smallest level in resilience planning it’s it’s sort of stacked on the smallest level is the neighborhood and historic neighborhoods are sometimes at a disadvantage because they don’t have all of the infrastructure that the big
Modern city might have but on the other hand they have lots of advantages when it comes to resilience they have good adaptive capacity they’ve survived before they can probably survive again they’ve been through many cycles of disasters and various events so they have familiarized responses to it they offer different Dynamics
Um that that you know variety can be a good thing in in terms in times of a disaster or you know when you’re up against something to have diversity is often on your side if it’s often helpful because there’s an alternative and on offer they’re often established Community organizations that have
Built-in trust and they have strong social networks and again for in terms of disaster disaster management these are really important caveats these are the sort of benchmarks that are being sought so a lot of these places straight neighbors already have this so can we build on them um and and help with
With resilience planning too so it all it all links in it’s not separate things um and sustainability and and interpretation actually go hand in hand and are all part of it but what I want to turn you know turn on its head is that it shouldn’t be that we use
Heritage interpretation and engagement to improve sustainability um and that that informs them we help people understand and make them more resilient why don’t we use Heritage interpretation as that tool for engagement so start with it you know use the fact that you’re talking about the Heritage that you’re understanding the neighborhood
That you’re building trust so Heritage interpretation rather than a product actually becomes the start of a process that builds strength that brings local people on board so it becomes one and all um and you start from the local perspective and you build it up wherever it goes wherever it takes you
Um and that in turn will help improve resilience um support sustainability and all the rest of it will come and I think we talk about in tourism we always talk about if it works for the locals it will work for tourists rather than planning for tourism first you know like bus services
Make it work for the locals tourists can use it as well with an added layer you can make that work and I think you could say the same thing about interpretation if you get it right for the locals if you get that expression right from the local perspective the tourism one will
Follow and will probably be richer for it so that’s I’m going to leave you but thank you very much for your time [Applause] thank you Eileen you have beautifully explained about the Paradox uh that tourism sometimes forgets and overlooks the community around the Heritage and the importance of the Heritage
Interpretation for the social inclusion and equity and urban resilience our second presenter was a Rohit but I think he’s still preparing for the connection to the zoom so I would like to welcome Professor Peter Stone the professor of Newcastle University in unuke and the president of Blue Shield International
He’s also working at the chair of UNESCO cultural properties protection and peace committee Peter thank you thank you very much so um thank you for the invitation to come uh thank you also for letting me speaking English the only language I could actually present in so that’s lucky
Um I’m going to not really talk much about Heritage interpretation in armed conflict because it’s almost an impossible thing to achieve but I’ll talk a little bit about why I think about that and how we go to things um in the in the next few minutes what I do
Want to talk about though is two key messages firstly that Heritage interpretation and protection are heavily intertwined and really must be regarded as peacetime activities if you leave them until there’s a problem it’s almost too late but you have to prepare for the worst and that if implemented in peacetime Heritage interpretation and
Protection can help deliver the sdgs so those are the two key messages and you can all now go back to sleep after such a large lunch but how does it impact on Heritage on conflict that is and we all know and just three quick examples the BAM and Buddhas okay before and after
The Bridget mostar actually after in this scene um in this image um the bridge having been rebuilt and of course neither of these were identified by UNESCO as world heritage sites until they were destroyed and there’s a question mark in my mind and an implication around that that we need to
Think about a little bit more um and then of course the one that we don’t really know much is what is going to happen um Palmyra because it’s still in the middle of a conflict area and there are all sorts of attempts of reconstruction already about Palmyra but
What’s actually going to happen on site when and there will be a when um that conflict um finishes so all sorts of issues that we need to think about in terms of that damage to destruct of cultural heritage during conflict and how we interpret it
But what I’d like to do before I go into the present or the future is take us back in time a little bit to the period immediately following the second world war and um what you had at that point was um failure twice the royal families of Europe had failed
To stop the first world war and as a result as a price for that most of them were taken out of control of their countries okay so the first world war failed to be stopped by those in charge so the International Community got together and created something called
The League of Nations to replace those royal families very simplistically and equally simplistically the League of Nations was based on economics and politics and that was supposed to keep world peace to stop another conflict like the first world war well that didn’t do very well in uh in looking
Back in time because of course the second world war arrived pretty soon after the first and at the end of that the International Community got together again and said okay the League of Nations didn’t work so we’re going to create something bigger and better that will work this time but the thing that
We’re going to add to the United Nations is this concept of Humanity’s moral and intellectual solidarity and through the un’s cultural agency or educational scientific and cultural agency that was going to deliver through education science and culture together with politics and economics world peace that was the aspiration at the end of
The second World War and it was an aspiration caught up in all sorts of things that finished or that um happened at the end of that war so for the first time in the Nuremberg trials senior politicians and Military Officers who had been on the losing side were
Prosecuted for crimes and convicted for crimes against cultural property also for many much more heinous crimes but crimes for cultural property were there in 45 and 46 in the Nuremberg trials article 27 of the universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 emphasizes everybody’s right to accessing that culture and understanding
Of the pastor Eileen has just been talking about what’s the most interesting from this point of view is the 1948 genocide convention genocide was a word that didn’t exist in language until it was created in the 1930s by a polish jew called Raphael lemkin and lemkin’s whole interest in genocide came not from
The second world war but from the Armenian genocide in the first World War he managed to get out of Europe and out of Poland just in time before um the rest of his family were exterminated in the camps um and was in America when he drafted the genocide convention after making the
Word genocide up and in lemkin’s first draft and following drafts of the convention it had two forms of genocide barbarism and vandalism barbarism the genocide against people vandalism which frequently came before barbarism genocide against their cultural property in the language of the time it was only in the final conference
Before the final text of the um convention was agreed that that second chapter that second concept of vandalism was taken out of the convention by a vote of 25 to 16 with I think six abstentions um by the insistence of the so-called settler communities the U.S Canada Australia New Zealand supported by many
Of the ex-colonial powers because they thought that the genocide convention would and could be used against their treatment of indigenous communities at the time so that but that concept that lemkin was talking about permeates all of those things and it permeated the uh convention that I deal most with the
1954 hay convention on the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict and its two protocols but the interesting thing about um The Hague convention is that those who drafted it expected a and I quote Red Cross for cultural property to be created at the
Same time as the convention and they um expected that to be called something called the blue and white Shield as you can for reasons that are fairly obvious um down at the bottom right of the slide but that didn’t happen that organization wasn’t created in
1954 and I’ll come back to that in a moment but let’s just nip back to world heritage sites for a moment and think about the interpretation of them because the two things to me are very heavily interrelated and those two things just to make clear are the protection of
People and the protection of their Heritage and the protection of their Heritage and the interpretation of their Heritage okay so to a world heritage site that I know well because I live this bit of the wall is about three miles from my front door and
Um I also was the chairman of the walls managing plan committee for seven years um some years ago now but the interpretation of Hadrian’s Wall was entirely about the Roman army the Roman Frontier and the Roman Empire the only reason you knew you were at one particular site that interpreted the wall
Um was the balance of those they was more about the Army here and it was less about the Army there it was entirely interpretation about the past about history nothing about its contemporary or future relevance nothing or almost nothing if I’m being overly kind about UNESCO about unesco’s primary objective
The creation of World Peace about world heritage or about how you might be able to combine world heritage and unesco’s primary objective peace and world heritage sites nothing a point we’ll come back to but and I’m going to gallop through this because Eileen said it all why is
Cultural property important it gives us that sense of place identity belonging dignity well-being and it should therefore be moving over back to my um Blue Shield uh mentality a key part of the thinking of three different sectors the Heritage humanitarian and what we call the uniform sector so not
Just the Armed Forces but border control Customs police emergency services and if we do that if we have that package of ideas in one place we begin to enable the creation or the maintenance of healthy peaceful stable sustainable communities and that’s what we should be looking for
But in 2003 when I first got involved in this work neither the military or the uniformed or the humanitarian sector wanted anything to do with the protection of cultural heritage in Iraq that was nothing to do with them there was also limited but extremely hostile opposition for those Heritage
People who did try and do protection in terms of Iraq um because we were working with um the satanic uh forces of Western imperialism and the military so the Blue Shield arrived 42 years late when it was created in 1996 by four Heritage organizations it is an international organization created under Dutch law
Dedicated to the protection of heritage following conflicts and disasters but has only really become effective since about 2014 um when there became a small bit of funding available for a tiny Secretariat through funding through my University it comprises those founding for organizations and now 30 National committees with another 15 under preparation who
Together vote in an elected board and a president and for some deaf reason they elected me president um three years ago or two and a half years ago and we envisage that as a triangle set within a circle okay and so the triangle has all good self-respecting triangles
Has three points and those three points are those three sectors Heritage humanitarian and uniformed and as put to me by an American Colonel um nearly a year ago now he said oh I get it sir the space within the triangle is where there are no stupid questions because we all start in completely
Different places those three sectors but we all have one aspiration uh together as a goal and in Blue Shield language that’s the maintenance or creation of those healthy peaceful stable sustainable communities because once you have those the Armed Forces can go home the humanitarians can go home
And the Heritage sector can get on with whatever the Heritage sector get on with and that goes back to normality and and stability and with those communities you build the same level or the higher level of healthy peaceful stable sustainable societies which is a step towards that um end goal of Global Peace
But impacting on the work of that triangle is the political context which can be benign or absolutely not benign the legal context increasingly important the media context and of course down at the bottom those communities that we do all of this work for so to try and address well I was asked
To address about this Heritage interpretation in armed conflict it’s almost impossible to do it because you’re in the middle of a conflict okay it’s primarily a peacetime activity which should if done well help mitigate the need for any conflict but we mustn’t forget of course that Heritage interpretation not only identifies Who belongs
And who is included but who does not belong and who is excluded and so that goes back to the political context in the broader circle of the Blue Shield should we think of a different interpretation for Heritage sites in peace time and then armed conflict should we can we
Perhaps not but one I would leave on um for discussion but world heritage education sorry interpretation should surely contribute to that goal of UNESCO and that’s something that Arena book of are the last DG and the current DG got um very clearly culture stands on the front line of conflict
Um Irina wrote in 2015 or said um should be at the front line of Peace building and I apologize I should have told you about this slide I forgot but this is not a very nice slide but it’s not a very nice topic that we’re talking about
We’re talking about arm conflict okay so this is the village of brocco in former Yugoslavia which brings all of this together in one trench okay and that trench was dug by a large JCB um you can see in the background and the population of that Village brocco were
Taken to the side of the trench and machine gunned into the trench okay the trench though was not then filled up with the Earth taken out of the trench to create the trench it was filled up with the destroyed Rubble of the mosque of the village of brocco so burying
Out of play out of sight out of mind not only the people but their tangible Heritage okay and in that they not the perpetrators not only knocked the mosque down but they took it to what archaeologists would say natural so there was no chance for an archaeologist
To go there in five days five months five years 500 years and say yes there is a ground plan of a mosque here there must have been a mosque here at some point in the past no chance of doing that you can’t get a clearer understanding of those that relationship between there
You can’t get a clearer understanding of the same relationship between the way that the so-called Islamic State persecuted the yazidi destroying their churches and shrines and killing their people and most recently the international office of sorry international organization and migration did a survey on rohingya refugees coming out into the
Refugee camps outside Myanmar and when the iom asked about what was the most what were the important things that were impacting on the mental health of the people in the camps 73 of them said the most important thing that was undermining their mental health was the loss of their tangible and
Intangible Heritage 73 percent of them and so for the first time ever the iom have started building cultural centers in those refugee camps and it led to the complete change of thinking in the icrc um not the uh work with our anger but this whole package um where in 2003 the icrc international
Committee of the Red Cross wanted nothing to do with protection of Heritage 2020 Eve Decor then the director General um says as you can read the protecting cultural property and cultural heritage against the devastating effects of War unfortunately remains a humanitarian imperative today perhaps more than ever so to interpret during conflict is
Extremely difficult you have to plan in peace time okay um protection in conflict is extremely difficult but there are examples where this has been done very well one of them is in 1917 when the British depending on your point of view occupied liberated or conquered Jerusalem okay and the British government the political
Entity behind this um were very worried about the predominantly Islamic population of Jerusalem causing problems for the military occupation and essentially fighting it either by words or deeds and so the first thing they got the field Marshal in charge to do was not to go into Jerusalem in his armored car on his
Horse but to walk in showing that he came as a friend but then the second thing they did was the next day um he issued a proclamation written weeks before in London for him um so planning um but that Proclamation stating that all of these shrines and religious
Places of all three of the major religions would be protected by Alan Biz men and then that really good bit of um cultural property protection was turned into brilliant cultural property protection by somebody on his staff because they used troops from Muslim battalions of the Indian army under allenby’s control to protect all
Of the Islamic sites and with that one decision there was no opposition from the majority Islamic population while the military occupation took place it when the politicians took over in charge completely different story but when the troops were in in charge nothing and you probably can’t see but the soldiers in
This image are all Muslim troops from the Indian army so how do we put all of this together um UNESCO has Global priorities it has themes one of the things that you will miss from those is the word peace it has six cultural conventions
Um if I had time I would be mean to you and ask you how many of those mentioned the word peace we don’t have time so very simply one of them does only one of the six conventions why does an international organization that was created for World Peace allow
Five of its conventions not to mention the most important word in its lexicon it’s the 2005 cultural diversity one that does mention it as one of nine objectives and only in that and a culture of Peace at the end of that objective okay so it’s not a
Very central part of even the 2005 convention the world heritage convention which of course doesn’t mention it at all is unesco’s most successful convention my argument that I’ve been trying to bash on about for about the last decade or more um is why aren’t those 1154 now world heritage sites
1154 ambassadors for peace for UNESCO but that missing idea through the whole package there is no mention of it in the nomination process before that in the tentative planning in the management plan process in the operational guidance and there’s no real mention of it in the delivery of um unesco’s top level thinking
One exception 1998 World Heritage in young hands was created as a or started in 95 published in 98 this world heritage in young hands kit now it’s still available now translated into I think 32 languages um criminally out of date and desperately in need of revision but
It does have one of its four key chapters completely related to world heritage and a culture of peace so we’ve already had this paraphrased um in an earlier uh presentation but taking the words of President Kennedy and changing them slightly that’s not what UNESCO can do for you as world
Heritage experts but what you can do for UNESCO and in particular management site people so back to Adrian’s wall Roman army Roman Frontier and um Roman Empire it took me most of seven years to convince one site along the wall to add a different flavor of interpretation to
Their work and Tully House museum in Carlisle they agreed to take one wall of a new gallery on Roman on those three topics of the wall and call it the living wall and they look go through um 15 world heritage sites from around the world I think and look at them across
The globe across history and ask the simple question do these things ever deliver what the um people who ask them to be built want and the answer to that is it doesn’t really matter because what it’s doing is it’s addressing Freeman tilden’s to me key issue provocation it is making the visitor
Think and at the end of the first week without paying the person who wrote this um the one of those visitors wrote this I’ve been visiting Hadrian’s Wall for 30 years I had never he underlined it three times um thought about it before okay and that’s what surely we should be getting
All world heritage sites to do it’s not a direct you can have world heritage and peace um if you do this it’s provoking people to think about Heritage sites and about the past and about the present and about the future I’m going to gallop through these they
Can be made available if anybody wants to go through them but we’ve been doing we had a project all lined up before covid um and the based on an initial research project looking at a Desktop review um we’ve just completed one for natural and mixed sites of all of those now 11 1154
Um 100 only 160 of them referenced peace typically within the attributes and statements only 16 acknowledged unesco’s founding objective and six of those um in the UK so we started after covid a small research project interviewing 16 out of the 33 UK sites um asking what they were doing about
That what was stopping them doing work about world heritage and peace and what might help them get over that very little is being done even of the ones that pushed peace in their work um several sites are talking about things in a slightly different way which could
Encompass the same but there is great interest in thinking about how they could implement it further but the barriers there is no push for UNESCO if only UNESCO said this is what you should be doing they’d do it but UNESCO doesn’t they’re not sure what the promotion of
Peace means in the context of their particular site something that they we could help them with there are no examples of good practice but one of the biggest issues that they came up with is why should we what’s in it for us why should we spend time and effort and
Energy doing this when UNESCO don’t tell us we have to when it’s not in any of the policy or other instruments that we have to jump through those hurdles to get world heritage status and why should we do that when we haven’t got enough resources to do the other stuff that
UNESCO insists that we do do so we’re in the middle of a a nut the next phase of this project um we started off at the beginning of the year with a initial Workshop um we’ve provided support material for presentations for websites Etc and we’re now in the phase of
Um those 16 sites trying out how they could use their site to put across ideas about peace and we have got the final Workshop plan for March of next year and then we’ll be doing a publication and a report and then the aspiration is to develop a an
International Project based on all of those results and I couldn’t help but think of a better place than doing that but through that here in Korea links to the sdgs there are loads um I’m not going to go through them because I’m being looked at already for
Nearly being at the end of my time but um they’re there the links are clear and there so do they does interpretation at unesco’s sites the world heritage sites contribute I think the answer is no could it absolutely will it it’s down to the sites it’s down to the center
Would you like to pick it up as a project thank you very much for listening [Applause] thank you thank you Peter you have raised very important question why the piece is not the top priority of the UNESCO world heritage program and how extremely difficult it is to have a
Heritage interpretation in the time of the conflict I think now Rohit is connected to uh the zoom so I would like to welcome Dr Rohit jigasu who is the project manager of the climate change disaster risk management of icram as the next presenter Rohit is a conservation
Architect from India and served as an executive of eCommerce for several years uh Rohit are you there uh yes I’m very much there good please go on thank you right thank you so much for inviting me uh it’s a real pleasure for me to join this forum
And uh present uh on the topic of uh Heritage interpretation in relation to climate resilience so uh we all know what climate change is uh doing uh the projected uh see the temperature and precipitation um fluctuation is really a cause of concern we have enough data to show how
The average surface temperature has risen in the past and where we are projected to go in the future uh even the average precipitation as you can see here is really uh changing uh also what we have to understand is that the climate change is not really something
That is witnessed in the same uh way around the world there is Extreme variability in the impact of climate change from uh from one place to the other and especially cities are much more being impacted by climate change and on the other hand they also have a
Impact on the climate change so I mean uh we have to keep that in mind as we understand climate change phenomena uh greenhouse gas emissions have also been really On The Rise and we know that ozone layer has been depleted uh quite substantially and we are if we don’t do
Anything uh if we don’t meet the target set up by the Paris agreement uh we are doomed as has been pointed out very clearly by the scientists and as this graph shows that if we are even trying to do start to do things uh uh we are
Not going to really stop the pattern or the changes from uh from we cannot stop them but we can just arrest them a little bit but if we don’t do anything you can see where the red line in the left graph goes so we are extremely in a
Very vulnerable position at the moment which also means that we are increasingly increasingly witnessing uh extreme climate related uh disasters uh and this is just uh statistics from 1990 to 2016 which shows how the number of droughts floods uh storms extreme temperature events heavily increased uh
In the past few decades and now climate change is not just a guessing game it is just something that we already know is happening and we have enough evidence to show how it is impacting uh us um and how it is likely to impact us in the future
So in terms of world heritage climate change is actually one of the single greatest threat uh to all kinds of Heritage and especially I would start with natural world heritage properties and we know that uh that the kind of uh threats that we’ve witnessed for World heated properties uh
Compared to alien species and tourism visitation is in fact uh more so we we know that this is one of the major factors now that is impacting uh World natural heritage science uh as I mentioned before climate change impacts are widespread and diverse and here you can see how various Heritage
Sites are being impacted so as you see here most of them 60 of them uh and now again I’m talking about uh natural heritage sites are impacted by current temperature changes while there are also impacts on such as uh shifting of habitat or flooding or droughts or chemical changes in Oceanic Waters or
Desertification climate change impacts are affecting all kinds of ecosystems and here is the classification being done by ICN to really understand how mangroves uh which are actually at the highest level of vulnerability to climate change are are there with the comparison to uh tundra or deserts or temperate grasslands Savannahs and shrublands
Um flooded uh grasslands or tropical tropical dry broadly forests and other kinds of typologies of natural world heritage properties so we need to kind of understand how the impacts are also kind of different in terms of the the negative impact on the ecosystems of these sites now moving to World cultural
Heritage properties we also know what has been impact the impact uh very recently we had devastating floods in Pakistan and uh several world heritage properties and this one which is very important uh property uh because it is one of the symbols of Indus Valley Civilization mohenjo daro has been
Really affected adversely because of the floods uh so the climate change is not just uh leading us to um increased frequency of rainfall but it the intensity of the rainfall is also much higher which means that a lot of amount of water comes in a very limited
Amount of time and doesn’t find a way to um to really dissipate or to spread itself with the result that water is stagnant in these sites for many uh weeks and causing a lot of damage to the material of these properties uh only last year we had floods in
Germany and in Belgium and many historic settlements uh were very much impacted again because many of these historic cities and now I talk about world historic World hated cities where the drainage and infrastructure is a huge problem and with this High rainfall in a very limited time period uh we have a
Huge problem of really uh being able to uh to enable the drainage of water in a very short period of time now many of our heritage sites which are archaeological in nature are now finding themselves at high risk especially if they are in the middle of the Contemporary Urban environment this is
One of the uh archaeological site of Badin in the middle of Hanoi Vietnam and again we find that it’s not only the problem of flooding which is a huge issue but also the higher precipitation and causing humidity conditions so the changes in the precipitation or fluctuations in precipitation and
Temperature are posing extreme threat to the material fabric of these archaeological sites which are already fragile now coming to the other kind of impact we see uh is due to forest fires uh where uh many of the natural properties like Rocky Mountains in Canada and even cultural world heritage properties such
As barcelon in Greece where earlier this year there was a huge risk of these being threatened because of the forest fires that had happened around these this site so sometimes it’s not only the question of the site itself at risk uh by the kind of changes or uh the the
Phenomena happening within the property limits but it’s also what’s happening in the buffer and in the surrounding context which is uh actually creating risk to many of the world haters properties uh so we need to kind of again look at uh natural properties and cultural properties sometimes uh not separately
But as together and see how uh they are being affected because of climate change now the fact other thing that we have to also keep in mind is that the nature of materials um and uh construction systems are sometimes now at high vulnerability because a changing environmental conditions for example in this case
Adobe construction is no longer able to really withstand the higher uh you know uh amount of rainfall and rather cloudbursts because this climate originally was much more dry in nature so Adobe construction had evolved in this area because uh it was a very unique climatic condition where microclimatic condition uh where this
Construction could really perform very well but again now with the changing condition we if we find that these kind of adobe constructions are washed away are damaged also we find that there are new kind of Hazards emerging in many of these sites for example areas where there were no termites or
Insects of certain kind uh were not are now seen because of the very fact that there is higher humidity conditions so again we also find that uh we we are we are vulnerable the sites are vulnerable to new hazards where these were not there before now uh slow and Progressive
Risks were always there and are going to be there but the the what is of concern to us right now is that there are the the rate of deterioration or the rate of the is accelerated which means that if there is erosion the erosion was always
Happening but the the rate of uh erosion in many of these properties is accelerating exponentially uh which is again a huge issue uh because we cannot really see it as as at the same rate as there used to be before um so the other thing that I would like
To mention here is the cumulative impact of various hazards coming together when climate change for example in this case uh World hated Stone town of Zanzibar in Tanzania has this combination of Hazards one line on one hand is a sea level rise but on the other hand we also have a
Challenge of cyclones which are increasing in in their frequency and intensity uh and then higher rates of flooding because of these Cyclones uh accompanied by many times fire uh because of heavy winds so one can understand that the desire the events which are resulting are really more complex now when climate change is
Really combining with many other factors or many other hazards and and creating the devastation and devastating impact on heritage now just to uh come to the impact understanding not from the scientific scientific point of view because here now we are also talking about uh understanding climate change and world heritage from interpretation perspective
Uh we also need to understand how uh site managers who are the key stakeholders of these properties how they witness or how they understand the impact of World Heritage properties so again I am coming to the question of interpretation uh interpretation is important because it’s not only the scientific uh perspective which is
Important obviously based on the evidence but also the uh what we get from the perspective or from the experience of the key stakeholders at the site including site managers so this was a online consultation that was done uh in 2019 and 20 uh as a form of a
Survey to prepare for the drafting of the climate change policy which has been revised now it is still stuck because of many political reasons but anyways uh the the important thing I want to mention here is the fact that climate related impacts uh have to be also understood from the perspective of
Um from the site managers who are not just seeing the direct impacts like uh sea level rise or high temperature or flooding but they are more concerned about the impacts in terms of increased costs of property maintenance or management or the direct damage to the historic Bill Fabric or the landscape
Features or the impact on tourism which is really not a direct impact but it’s a very high indirect impact resulting from climate change again the impacts on biodiversity uh impacts on local communities especially indigenous peoples um the water shortages that are being seen and then the loss and degradation
Of intangible Heritage again uh now we know that there is much broader range of impacts than just what we can understand directly uh in terms of the impacts on the physical Fabric and as has also been mentioned by other site managers in this survey economic losses including poverty hunger of associated communities the
Force migration or displacement of people are the diminished capacity to address development needs of the local communities and very importantly relation to the Past speaker the previous speaker I would also say that the relationship to conflict and violence is also to be recognized so we have many kinds of connections of
Climate change and uh we have to also understand as I mentioned before that the damages to these world heritage properties are significant but there is going to be higher frequency and severity of these kind of disasters related to climate change in the future uh so what does it
Mean it means that we cannot only rely on the data from the past to tell us what’s going to happen in the future uh yes past data of events that have happened can give us an indication that what is likely to happen but we are now witnessing a huge Black Swan effect
Which means that these events are highly unlikely to happen but would have severe consequences if they happen so very a case that we which is very easy to cite now is uh covid-19 pandemic which we had not expected to the to the extent it happened but then suddenly we were
Really caught in it and the impacts we all know what happened so uh in terms of again looking at where we are projected to move in the future it’s it’s really important for us to really say um that there are there can be many different scenarios uh you may think
That you will end up in the future in a certain um pattern or certain trajectory uh but there might be a exponential growth or a surprise Factor so you may actually end up uh in the future in us in a very different kind of uh situation and we
You cannot just rely only on what your data tells you from the from from the past that is there so uh it’s it’s uh it’s really really critical that uh unlike linear growth which results from repeatedly adding a constant exponential growth uh has to be really addressed in
Terms of repeated multiplication of a constant and uh and therefore rather than looking at it as a straight line we need to see these kind of Curves so uh that essentially means that we have to move from deductions to predictions we have to really go in a more uh modeling kind of environment
Where we are projecting different scenarios for the future uh and therefore that that is a uh that has a significant impact in my view in terms of how we look at interpretation because to assess the potential impact of climate risks on Heritage one would need to interpret available data and models
For creating future scenarios that would essentially require shift from deductive to predictive approach for risk communication and for setting the priorities so I think this is something which is really important when we have to draw the connection with Heritage interpretation the other important uh aspect is how do we interpret Heritage
If we have to really understand its relationship to climate change so what does it mean it means that we cannot or we can no longer afford to have a monument or a museum and centered approach where we have this Monument which we are calling as a pristine
Symbol or identity that we need to protect and we just fence it around and then we have no context no relationship to the context because we just want to preserve uh that peace that we have recognized as of higher importance and so we just disconnected from the larger
Context so we have to move away from that kind of uh understanding which is really separating past present and future and looking at it more in terms of the continuity of past present and future so we cannot look at it okay we are only concerned about the past and we
Separate it from the present and from the future rather we need to interpret Heritage now in terms of continuity and evaluative and evolution I think that’s another important factor that we need to recognize and of course we need to also start to recognize the heritage in terms
Of the connection it has with between tangible and intangible movable and immovable and of course natural and cultural so this is of course also has a huge impact on the way we recognize interpret Heritage and understand it with relationship to how Climate Change is Gonna impact and what we are going to
Do to address this climate change impacts and it also means that if we are looking at the build Fabric or the physical built form we have to really look at it in as as something that is intimately connected to people and to environment which are then to be addressed both in
Terms of the interlinkages between culture and nature and the ones that are dynamically in relationship to each other evolving and changing so this is another implication in terms of Heritage interpretation that I would like to hear emphasize which also means that Heritage in in terms of describing it when we start to analyze
It it has to be analyzed as a knowledge system which is geographical historical anthropological and Architectural at the same time so we cannot really separate these different knowledge systems but rather we need to interpret them in terms of the relationship with each other the other thing that I want to now come
To is how world heritage has to be now seen or interpreted as a solution for climate action uh of course it is vulnerable as I have shown you with various examples of what’s happening to our world heritage properties but then look let’s look at the other side of
Side of the coin that it is not only vulnerability but it’s also the capacity or the resilience of world heritage properties that need to be interpreted analyzed uh if we have to really uh understand how they can contribute towards actually addressing climate change impacts so uh this is just one
Example that I have picked up from iucn study where again we see that world heritage can actually contribute in terms of benefits so forests in World heated sites absorb approximately 190 million tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each each year and this has been kind of uh proven through all the
Kind of studies that have been done so here you can see this is a detailed study in terms of how much of the forest is there in each of the sites and that is what is actually acting as carbon sink and which is really important for addressing the
Carbon emissions that we are the impacts of which is really uh is a direct consequence of climate change it also means and I would again like to emphasize in as world heritage to looking at world heritage as a solution means that we also need to recognize traditional knowledge that is embedded
In these world heritage properties because many of this uh kind of these knowledge systems whether in terms of how these settlements have been oriented to capture maximum sunlight so that the energy demand is reduced or how these many of these settlements like the shirakawago world heritage property in
Japan have been organized to really have a relationship to their ecological system you know the way they use the materials that are locally available and in that sense reduce consumption which is really important for addressing climate change is is a key way in which world-hated properties show us the way
To address climate change to combat climate change so we need to kind of also understand how in many of these world heritage properties the way the tradition settlements have been planned even intangible activities have contributed towards towards reducing uh the expansion of these settlements Beyond certain boundaries so in this
Case uh in Kathmandu Valley the the rituals are the traditional cultural practices have actually prohibited people from expanding Beyond a certain boundary limits and in that sense they have been successful in managing uh Urban agglomeration or a urban expansion in a half Hazard manner so uh rather than seeing cultural
Heritage only as a victim of climate change there is Need for interpreting traditional knowledge for coping with the impacts of climate change and its continuous adaptation through experimentation and Innovation and I would say this as an another aspect of Heritage interpretation in relation to climate change that we have to really
Recognize and work further on in this area so the point that I also now want to come to is that of course we are all worried about climate change but we cannot address it in isolation we cannot go on talking about impacts of climate change without looking at other factors
That are combining together with climate change to have the negative uh consequences on our world heritage properties so one of the important phenomena that is having an impact is urbanization and we all know how Urban expansion is happening as I just mentioned earlier and there is going to be of course a
Consequence on many of these world heritage properties um so uh and we know that the many of the uh now world’s Urban population is actually increasing more than the rural population so this phenomena is going to increase uh in the future so while we look at the exponential changes in the
Climatic patterns we also have to understand how they are going to overlap with these exponential increase in the urban urbanization process and the the the the cumulative impact of that on the world heritage properties especially those which are located in the urban context or Urban surroundings that I
Explained in my earlier examples so unregulated sprawl which is resulting in loss of Landscapes and farmland Beyond world heritage properties is actually having a a lot of issues in terms of sustainability of voltage property so we cannot dis disconnect world heritage properties from these larger phenomena
Of urban sprawl and the changes in the land use planning there are a large amount of forested areas or agricultural lands are being changed from uh from to residential or to built areas which of course means there is a lot loss of local ecology so if there was a
Water system which was pristine had a certain uh connections to the canals and the lakes are being disturbed by the new development which is reducing these uh Lakes to just uh kind of cesspools where water is just accumulated and creates much more problems because it’s no longer connected as a system as the
Whole ecosystem has kind of been disturbed by the kind of development that has happened uh just one example of what it’s not of course a world haters property but I just wanted to illustrate that we are having these problems uh also because the development has really uh the way development is happening is
Again adding a kind of uh adding to the impacts of environmental changes so we have to see these impacts as well Transformations that have happened where traditional knowledge as in this case in Thailand in the world United Site of ayuthaya we find that the the original traditional
Houses which were on stilts in which is of course a very uh has a has evolved as that architectural typology in a very close under through a close understanding that the floods are a regular phenomena so you are living with risk you are evolved you are a traditional design uh to to accept
Floods you have adapted to that but what’s happening today is that these are being transformed as you see here into guest houses where you are turning all these uh because you want to have maximum occupancy you you of course close the ground floor and you turn them
Into like a more uh more floor area to be inhabited and of course then these are of course facing more flooding with this higher intensity rainfalls that we see the other connection between climate change is with uh of course urbanization but also epidemics and there has been
Enough evidence now there have been a lot of research being done which has actually shown that even this covid-19 pandemic has a lot to do with climate change uh so it cannot be seen only as a pandemic issue it also has to be seen in relation to environmental changes and
The climatic impacts which is actually changing how animals you know they are altering uh changing animals habitat how they live where they live who is whom is the whole kind of again a system an ecosystem of uh animal habitat has been changed and that is also uh uh has is
Creating uh along with again resulting from urbanization uh the fact that humans are more susceptible to pathogens carried by wild animals as we have now been experiencing uh over the last two three years so what does it mean in terms of conservation in relation to development
It means that we can no longer see conservation against development or development as something against conservation as has been the predominant perspective where uh where the development planners or development practitioners or agencies always see conservation as anti-development and it is the other negative perspective from the conservation side point of view it’s
Important now that we try to bring conservation and development much closer to each other to understand the relationship with them because as they have shown you through various examples uh the way development happens impacts the way we protect or preserve Heritage and therefore we definitely need to see
Conservation as a way of managing development and development has to be seen more in relation to how we deal with Heritage how we understand heritage so uh conservation goals are have to be mainstreamed into development process it cannot be seen either or or something you put against the other so we need to
Go beyond mirror protection and we need to see how Heritage can actually contribute towards sustainable development sustainable future so what does it mean in terms of Heritage interpretation it means that Heritage interpretation has a crucial role to play for contributing towards the society community and thus in achieving sustainable development goals
So one needs to really make an effort to interpret Heritage and how it achieves this larger objective it’s it’s enough to say that it is important but it is also needed to be able to interpret it for the larger audience to understand this connection which also means that the sustainable
Development agenda has to be combined together with the agenda of climate change adaptation disaster risk reduction and Heritage conservation and management and Beyond showing these four circles we need to have enough evidence and enough kind of analysis and interpretation to show how these come together uh so that we’ll raise larger
Awareness it also means that we have to not just look at disaster mitigation again there is a question in terms of interpretation that I would like to mention is how we express the vocabulary from different disciplines because Heritage conservation has a has a vocabulary which is different sometimes then the disaster risk management
Vocabulary and climate change has another one and sometimes there is so much confusion for example mitigation is understood in a in a very different way in disaster Management Field which means that we want to reduce the impact of any uh Hazard while mitigation for the climate change means that we want to
Reduce carbon emissions which are two different things but all cause called as mitigation so again the question is how interpretation can help us to bridge this Gap in vocabulary that is a huge issue if we have to bring all these different disciplines uh together and to achieve the critical challenge of
Mainstreaming Heritage for climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction so if we have to really make sure that nature and culture come together at different scales and along different sectors we really need to make an effort to through inheritage interpretation to see the connections so because there is a huge problem Heritage
Sector is seen as a standalone sector where we don’t understand at the at least in the larger level how they are connected to energy Mobility Health sector education and governance uh in terms of land or water and environment infrastructure so we need to see all these connections which are critical for
Us to reduce risks and also to achieve team inter ministerial or interdepartmental collaborations because again if we don’t bridge this Gap through which is existing because of changed different perceptions understanding of vocabulary and and the way of doing governance along the ministry of environment which is normally in many countries in charge of
Climate change but has nothing to do with Ministry of Home Affairs which is responsible for disaster risk management or Ministry of culture or Urban Development so again this is something that has to be addressed as I mentioned to you before uh in terms of planning and design interventions at various
Levels from side to the region and also for bringing together top down and bottom-up approaches and I just want to very quickly mention this problem again which where I see the Heritage interpretation has a huge role to play on one hand we stock very big we are talking about the Paris agreement the
1.5 degrees Celsius benchmark back we talk about reducing carbon emissions which are huge higher level goals but we are not able to connect them to what we need to do at the site level because at the site level maybe we need to do uh things which are as simple as improving
Our maintenance or monitoring practices or developing small unique tools for assessing the climate risk assessment so how do we bridge the gap between the bottom-up approaches and the top-down approaches I think in terms of climate change and World hittish Properties there is a huge gap between this kind of
Uh discourse that happens at the top level and what we do at the at the lower level not to say that things are not happening very interesting things are happening uh though not at the appropriate amount at both the levels but there is very little connection between the two so we need to
Kind of again use Heritage interpretation as a way of connecting uh the bottom up and the top-down approaches and integrate uh adaptation and mitigation strategies in the regular Heritage management procedures I think this is the key for us because if we keep on talking big but we are not able
To influence our heritage management practices uh at the local level and at that same time connected to the policies that are existing for the city or the region where world heritage properties are located and to the to the systems for protection and management of Heritage I think the the we are not
Going to make very successful so we need to make this connection and here I would like to just come down to uh an approach that ekram in collaboration with iucn in its world heritage leadership program has been taught talking about which is a place-based approach for Heritage management which is essentially saying
That you can’t look at World Heritage Property only through its core area or the buffer area but you have to look at it Beyond its context Beyond its boundaries and look at the larger social economic geographical and environmental context because by just focusing on management within the property limits as
You designate you will not be able to really understand how we can address these huge issues of climate change that are affecting us which means that risk reduction approach needs to interpret world heritage properties beyond their designated boundaries of core and buffer zones as I mentioned considering a wider
Territory to which ouv and other Associated values of the property are rested and where risks are created if you have a dam at 50 kilometers away from the site the the what you do in terms of developing that dam is going to have an impact on your side so you can’t
Manage floods in your site without looking at the development of that huge infrastructure 50 kilometers away so there is has to be a link between where risks are created and how risks are transferred to your property having direct and indirect impacts so that’s another important thing that we need to
Really look at from the point of uh you know really using Heritage interpretation to improve management practice with the risk lens in these times of uncertainty and and focus on these issues of mitigation preparedness adaptation multi-hazard approach and building back better to reduce vulnerabilities so that’s where I feel
That the lens of resilience is very important for us to really see not only to bounce as how we were before uh but rather to reduce vulnerability and balance forwards because we cannot just go back to where we were before so this has to be a thin balance between protect
Writing ouv but at the same time reducing vulnerability and this is going to require us to really use Heritage interpretation to see how we can balance the two because that’s uh going to be important and that’s why I say reducing risks and building resilience means that
We have to interpret two sides of the same coin in a very effective manner to be able to address so I guess coming down to the volatility leadership program and just explaining uh what we are doing there in terms of various activities uh including a manual uh on managing disaster risk where climate
Change is now included as an element and also the pandemics as how they connect to disaster risks so we are trying to have a holistic perspective and also this updated manual is really advocating a place-based approach that I just uh explained it over to you and the impact assessment toolkit has already been
Published as as you know about and there are have been other other activities that are happening as part of the program including several training programs where we are now trying to connect people nature and culture in terms of using Heritage management for building resilience this was one of the
Courses we did with the Samuel spaffa in Bangkok Regional organization last year so we also need a lot of work to do to to build capacities to bring this uh this approach forward to decision makers and site managers so this was done using Brunei as a case study last year we also
Have been doing people nature culture forums again to again use this kind of uh understanding uh to really raise awareness and build capacities so uh so this is also an important way for us to develop new tools for example climate vulnerability indexes uh is a tool that has been developed and we need
To of course really update this tool make new tools which are able to really address these issues as I mentioned uh at the site level uh where site managers have to be able to also kind of participate in this issue of addressing climate change and as I mentioned earlier we also need
To make many new Publications where we need to show how traditional knowledge can contribute towards reducing climate change impacts and disaster risk reduction uh this is just one of the publication that we have just published with in collaboration with un office of disaster risk reduction where the the
What we are trying to show is not what is traditional knowledge but how traditional knowledge can be contributing to address the Contemporary challenges of disasters and climate change so I’m going to conclude uh with this another important aspect where we need to recognize the potential of Heritage for building climate resilience uh where
This potential has to be uh interpreted creatively for raising awareness among decision makers as well as communities and for developing learning resources for building the capacities of site managers of world haters properties so this is another element of interpretation for capacity building and awareness raising that I wanted to
Emphasize thank you so much foreign thank you for your rediscovery and redefinition of Heritage that it’s not a passive victim of a disaster but it can be a source of resilience against the uh crisis thank you uh now as the last presenter of the session two I would
Like to welcome Dr Aang Ming Chi the general manager of Georgetown world heritage Incorporated in Malaysia minxi will be talking about the Georgia town and Georgetown Heritage celebration which is one of the best practices for Community engagement and well-being Ming Chi are you ready you go
Okay I have a timer here so I will be on time all right um thank you to stay in the session it’s always challenging in the afternoon so my name is my surname Ming Chi it’s my first name I’m from Georgetown Penang Malaysia I’m a site managers before I start may I
Just know how many here are site managers can you raise your hand okay I’m alone good um May I know how many of you uh community communities local people okay too then the rest of you are okay no answer fine um I asked that because I want to make
It in relations uh to you so I hope my presentations will make some points um I’ve been asked to talk on Heritage interpretation and Community well-being in Georgetown Heritage City Malaysia and I’ve been thinking of like how to do it mainly we will try to stay at this four uh factors
Um we will try to I will try to explain you know when we interpret Heritage like by who for who and how I asked that question every day and I still don’t have answer because it’s they it’s very fluid you know every situations and new things keep on coming
In and it helps you to love Heritage because the job as a site managers never the same every day and that’s the beauty about Heritage and of course like we are going to bring you down south where it’s a bit warmer than here where Georgetown as a multicultural living and for Peter
Is a peaceful city as a site managers are as a web design and of course like Georgetown will Heritage Incorporated yes I know the name is long and it happened to receive a body mass my office name is there and you can Google it we are the sign managers and I will
Try to share through one of the projects we’ve been doing that’s called Georgetown holiday celebrations and maybe there are some takeaways and if I can finish on time we’re gonna see a video all right so there would be a lot of visuals um for sdg I will copy their
Visuals and you see these visuals in my PowerPoint that means they are related and for policy there’s no visual so I try to come up with my own visuals I copy from the internet so if you see this green thing is about environment you see a lot of people happy together
They are about Social Development and you’ve seen the money is for economic development and of course like you know peace is always like that so I try to relate it into my presentation so now let me bring you to Georgetown Malaysia another round of survey may I know how
Many of you been to Georgetown Malaysia raise your hand I’m also alone here don’t worry you are my potential visitors so then I can tell you whatever you know um Malacca Heritage City and Georgetown Heritage city was inscribed as a word design in 2008 7th July 2008
Um so this is a Serial site and I’m in charge of Georgetown Heritage City and together with my partner in Malacca Heritage City we we shared this name called historic cities of the streets of Malacca okay this is a pictures into our properties um when you talk about what I decide you
Have to talk about the ouv outstanding Universe values we have three first one is about Multicultural trading towns which is about 500 years that it has an imprint on architectures and urban form and technology and Monumental art don’t ask me why is it so long I’m not
Involved in the ouv writing I come in into the business after we become a world design so this is actually one of the issues that I’ve been talking about yes it’s good to be recognized as a word inside but looking into the trace a lot of people
In the my city now is talking about okay we have to save the trades but if we read the ouv very carefully it’s not about the trade itself but it’s about its imprints into our architecture in our Urban in our Technologies and in our life so I think the understanding of
Our oov and attributes is also another potential area that we have to work on the second of UV is like you know we are the living testimony on the Multicultural heritation tradition of Asia and European Colonial influences you see one here a mix of a lot of culture Siamese Chinese and Malay and
Malaysian so we are very diverse on our self itself and of course you see both tangible and intangible heritage and it’s a challenge of managing a voltage site when you have to refer into the intangible song Break like full with sometimes I look into the convention of
The ich which helped me to find some answers and the next one is I wear a mixture of influence that create a unique architecture culture and downscapes so you see a lot of ranges of Shop houses and townhouses along one street so you see that developments in the size
Across different time and different style the site is about 259 hectares the one in the red color I’m not sure how to work on this but anyway otherwise the red color is the property or we call it the core zone is about 109 hectares and then the rest of them is the buffer
Jones the management of our site we have four kinds of Heritage they are Heritage building category one has this building Category 2 modern or Heritage building replacement and their infield developments our control and management of the building itself is not about where you are it’s about what you are so
If you are important Heritage building and you are at the buffer zone we still treat you with a very uh a lot of rules and regulations and then the site this big about 5 300 buildings and we’ve we have about 9 000 residents and about 100
000 local visitors that come to the side and at the peak we have 300 000 visitors that just come for fun it’s a lot of work so the state government of Penang established Georgetown wool Heritage Incorporated gtwhi on 21st of April 2010 as the site managers we have
36 full-time positions we are still hiring go to our Facebook for more informations we can hire Koreans um we have before Kobe we have 60 projects annually and we receive about 1 million uh US dollar estimated about that but annually for our operations and projects also
This is my team we took this photo on the 7th of July this year okay now coming to the case study Georgetown Heritage salvation as you can see here is a annual project that we do we we work on this project and other projects based on these few main principles
Number one Community Based projects it’s not just any committee come in and then you are complete based but you have to really listen to them understand their View and it’s also like place-based knowledge no we want to understand what is the place all about and uh talk a lot on meaningful Community participation
And interpretations um I believe that Heritage should be made available accessible and affordable for everyone and in particular to the local people and of course I um every time you do projects money time is always Limited so I prefer to work based on people public private and professional
Partnership because even you have a lot of money you do a very successful event but if the people is not getting involved it’s the public is not getting involved it’s it’s just a beautiful show it’s not meaningful it’s not going far and nowadays um really try my best to engage the youth
And when we Define youth I would not do survey here uh it’s age 30 and below so it’s I constantly remind myself if we don’t have youth today to buy in what we do very soon no one will be taking care of the heritage so it’s a huge project
You know it’s for three days of Celebration mark your calendar uh next year it will be on 7 8 of July 2023 is a Friday and Saturday uh we start to plan the programs already um it takes out about seven months of preparations uh sometime we go up to 60 project staff
We normally will involve about 20 Partners like local Community Partners about 50 programs and normally it’s about 20 at 20 000 visitors and 80 of these visitors are local visitors now I want to read interpretations through our previous year posters so first year second year and third year
We can see it’s a bit more formal is the language of the design will tell you is a very formal celebrations um but then you start to come in on our third anniversary that is in 2011 to 12 and 13 which I understand at that time
The local Youth and the artists start to come in and give their influence into the Heritage celebrations of course I won’t go into the program because I want you to go into our website and read what did we do but you can see that you know gradually in 2014 and 15 there’s more
Cartoonists you know it’s more lively and we also work on teams during these two years I come in as a into the office as a general major in 2016 and I was trying to like Breakthrough because we do the same event every year and then
Say yeah how am I going to break through it then I start to borrow the domains from ich conventions so we start to do like the traditional Sports and games and the next year I do oral tradition and expressions and then when we are celebrating on our 10 year anniversary I
Start to want to find what is Heritage and then we our team on that year is called potentials of the past in the present and for the Futures because that is the year that we will start thinking about like you know what is the next 10 years I think that
Is also the exercise that everyone is doing this year because it’s a 50 years of the conventions do I have the answers I’m not very sure but then in 2019 we work on rituals and festive events and you know this guy or he or she and
It’s very famous is kovit so no one expect Kobe will come and that is me thinking of with my dishes and all my Macaulay and social hello what should we do with Heritage celebration so we have to call it off and start to do something it’s actually
Quite stressful for everybody but so I’m glad that you know we’re back to normal again and 2021 is even worse because you don’t know when life will be back to normal again outside waiting like okay what’s next so we did a lot of things online in 2021 and this year we were only
Receiving the information that the international borders of Malaysia will open up in May so we quickly organized a three days event um and now you start to see the logo so um most of our Georgetown Heritage salvation you’ll see some similarities number one we really promote gender
Equality and what I see now in particular from this photo up there um is a I was a lion dance uh drummers it’s all girls drummers so I was like very impressive with that I was asking their master I was like wow you have the old line dance and I said
When I was young I want to do it my mom don’t let me to do it so you see generation is moving forward so Heritage you know you can do achieve gender equality and down then there’s a photo of a lot of people with the mass these are the kids from the children
Protection Center so we created a special program for them so that we want to involve every every sectors in the in the Heritage celebrations um and all our poster we try our best to do is available in all four languages maybe in Korea when you do events it’s
Only Korean and English in my site and you cannot do like that you have to be English you have to have Malay you have to have Chinese and have to have Tamil it’s challenging but yep we can do it and the next one is I you know on the environmental sustainability which also
Involved in the climate action and the clean water and sanitation I think they are related to one another and in Malaysia where our average climate is about 32 Celsius sometimes you go up to 38 is super hot so when we do events we encourage people to bring their own
Water bottles and then what I do is like you know from down there we we only prepared this one the water as a refueler no cup no butter my first year has coated Like Hell by everyone you prepare water but there’s no cover I said bring your own cup I asked you to
Bring your own cover I’ll post it is I bring your own car and this year they bring their own cup so I think like yeah it’s successful you know then they know that you come to Heritage celebrations you should bring your own cup and the next thing is like we recycle
Most of the equipment that we use so we really try to reduce down the rubbish first of all it saves you money second of all is save the Earth it’s very difficult in particular when I insist that I don’t want to use plastic plus it’s the cheapest it’s most available
But still we are able even we use plastic my condition is like we are we must be able to recycle the plastic so I think it works so far next one is on the sdg 11 16 and 17 and also about the fostering of peace and Security in the policies these are the
Some of the logo of this year partners and I think when you work together with the community you let them understand that you respect them that sense of unity is there and we also targeted our audience you know our visitors as 80 local every year is like that so visitors from
Outside you’re welcome to come in but this year in particular we write letters to all the schools in Penang and say bring your kids out you know let them participate because I always say if you want an event to be successful attack the eight years old because eight years
Old want to come that and Mom will come if that and Mom will come Grandpa and Grandma will come and then you get five people at least to your event and yeah it was a lot of people we expected uh about 1005 and 3005 came out
So it was good I know so we have to manage the crowd um and and make sure everyone have a happy evening on that day and of course like when we talk about inclusive Economic and Development this one is something that I always think about Heritage and tourism
Do we Define it as a Heritage product or tourism product or it can be both but for me it’s like you know we have to always focus on the locals on the domestic Market first because sometimes the international visitor is a is the first to go and the last will come back
And I really hope and now working with the local communities of like you know we hope that income from the tourism industry can contribute to the Heritage conservation and management because even you talk about uh interpretation when I ask my colleagues in the tourism sectors they don’t necessarily understand you
Know the importance on Heritage interpretations because um they come in the roles of the site managers you know whom we are exposed as a frontliners to all the stakeholders whom we can deliver the message to the stakeholders and get their impacts and document it and share with more people some takeaways
Um is that you know I think build Heritage living Heritage natural heritage they are they are one they are not separated yeah it’s almost like your fingers it’s like yeah the thumbs are fingers but they are together you need them to function together as one and Heritage shall benefit the local Community First
It’s always them coming in first um I appeal to the youth because I believe that they are the Futures and when we talk about what it is conventions sdg or the sustainable development integration policies I think we have to really step out from just looking at heritage heritage
Because we are so small the market is huge the stakeholders outside have a very big impact and then we have to make ourselves relevant to them in order for the Heritage sectors to move forward and of course like resources for the site managers is needed and then I’m trying
My best to work with my other colleagues from all over the world of trying to find sustainable resources and in particular support for the works that we do one of the biggest challenges is that you know we are on the side and we always get requests and people assume that we have answers
Yesterday I was here and then I received a call from my office to say yeah someone called looking for topoe to be the fat guy uh topwin said he’s fainting in his house and need us to go and help him that’s is that the work of the assigned managers
Not necessary but you are so close to the community and we have to address on almost all the issues so I think the resources provided the site managers all in in particular from the center is really necessary for our day-to-day support yeah I always say this to make
Sure that you know we the side miragers always think that we are crazy because all the workload that we have to do but until you meet any other side Majors two crazy people together then you know that you’re not crazy anymore you’re so normal because the challenges that you face is really real
This will be my last slide um my information is here um this is me during the covet time I’m well protected and I would like to end my presentations by sharing with you the video that we have and if you need more information you can always visit our
YouTube channels and for we pick I have two books that is most related to the interpretations there’s a book on Georgetown where I decide written by my communities he have his own interpretation and stories on Georgetown you know from his point of view we are helping him to print the second Prince
Now and also we have a oral history documentation project and this book is available online on our websites so you can hear the stories of people of Georgetown and I look forward that all of you come to Georgetown one day soon and thank you very much so okay please help me to play
[Applause] [Applause] [Applause] Like the Heritage means a lot here to Mila because I’m also born in Georgetown so yeah it’s kind of like home it all brings a sense of unity brings everyone together like you can see here there are people of different race culture everywhere but everyone sits together and everybody enjoyed whatever they’re
Seeing and they’re having a good time It’s just nice to hear the whole cultural thing I think it’s a very good time to enjoy the time with my family at night very beautiful Thank you There is so many different influences you know like from India from China and from Malaysia and so so just seeing like how it’s all mixed together and how it’s also everything its own thing uh yeah I’m really Amazed by that I like I really like the music and it’s very enjoyable
Uh I’d say the variety I really love seeing all the cultures be able to self-express and I love also seeing cross-cultural sharing yeah I see a lot of participation from the crowd which was really fun I think the MC did a very good job foreign [Applause] Thank you [Applause] Foreign Foreign for your as always very fun and informative presentation uh thanks for bringing us the uh your precious expression uh experience as a site manager with a very specific examples and case studies we’re behind our schedule in the session two so we’re going to start our discussion right away so please uh
Panels on the stage please thank you very good oh okay thank you very much for your bearing with us um so we have uh listened to our very interesting for a presentations very powerful and straightforward um before we go into our discussion I would like to uh share
The very interesting results of uh the recent survey that we did recently um we asked the what’s your idea or like keyword for the 50th anniversary of the convention and more than 140 people in the Heritage area have um answer to the question so it will be
Shown on the screen so the question was in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the world heritage convention what is your keyword or idea for the next 50 and probably as you can see the bigger word is that many more people answered so um you see the words like development diversity sustainability
Inclusion and peace Community these are all words that we discussed in our session so it shows that how important your subjects are for the next 50 years for the Convention as well so my first question would be so as marking the 50th anniversary of the convention and going
Back to 10 years back to 10 years back when it was 40th anniversary of the convention we had a Kyoto Vision that says the community is important so that completed the five C’s and 10 years back one 30th Anniversary we had a Budapest declaration that that Community communication conservation capacity
Building so we it’s important so we always had the big agenda or idea to Way Forward but this year unfortunately we didn’t have our world heritage committee so we didn’t really have the talk to discuss about this issue so I would like to ask what your or keyword or idea about the world’s
Convention for the next 50 and I would like to invite the floor after uh your answer so who would like to start is that working now yes um okay we’ve in fact almost gone through this process at the University recently where we have structured a new a couple of new modules
For the Masters courses that we teach around the five C’s but we’ve added a sixth C and the six is criticality so we want the students to be critical of the five C’s and critical of UNESCO in a both positive and negative way in criticality um as to
How are they doing and my simple argument as you may have noticed is that they’re not doing very well in terms of world heritage and peace and for me the the best thing for the next 10 years is actually to put world heritage and those 1150 potential ambassadors for peace as
Really ambassadors for peace for UNESCO okay thank you very much for your answer Peter um Eileen do you want to answer next yes go follow on yes yeah okay I can probably follow on that I think you know the words have come with this capacity building whether it’s Community
Um whatever and I think I I was around at the 30th Anniversary I was around the 40th anniversary um and we can see these things are being put in practice particularly at um let me say lower levels whether it’s capacity or capacity building programs whether it’s through specific
Initiatives but it’s not really changing at the top and I think the next 10 years has to look at how the top changes um how UNESCO rethinks it’s its approaches you know when you get to the whole nomination or review processes or um missions they still always look at it
From the same lens they you know the people coming on Mission are still instructed by UNESCO to look at it through the same lens they’re not really adapting so I think you know in in resilience we talk about adaptive capacity and I think UNESCO at this point needs to actually catch up with
All these strategic games before we can start defining defining new strategic aims so implementing that the important values that we already discussed so far yes yes thank you um yes uh yeah I mean please yeah like can I add one more C to all the C’s like
I think continue with T I don’t think we need new teams like you know the the teams that we already developed for so many years is sufficient the thing is like things that we should continue we have to do it things that is not working
We have to crack it and I totally agree that you know one thousand one five one one five three four five four one one five four um and we didn’t count in the serial size that you know maybe one nomination have two sides and you have a lot of
Site managers who who are working every day to day Saturday Sunday morning and nights do take care of the size and I think one of our colleagues mentioned about I think interpretation in the operational guidelines how often is read and you go go and find out how often
Site managers is mentioned I think it’s really time to put in the the importance of people who are the Freightliners into the decisions making into the day-to-day supports and I noted on the politics of the conventions and the center must be struggling a lot but I’m also telling
You the signages also struggles a lot we we are maintaining and conserving the heritage site for the future Generations but we also need support and and the day-to-day to tell us that yes this direction yep yep you can go ahead and even just I always say like even just a
Hotline that we can cause like I’m facing some issues like can you listen to me I think that will really help you know we are not asking for more we just want to be hurt and be taken seriously although we are not the focal point but you know I think that kind of
Mentality will really need to change in order for the whole convention to move further yeah that was very uh down to earth a very practical and site manager’s perspective thank you sure of course and following on from um Arlene’s thing about the structure and and UNESCO the top has to to change
What we mustn’t forget is that UNESCO is a political organization it is driven and its agenda is a politically driven agenda by the state parties within UNESCO the Secretariat in Paris is just that it’s a Secretariat and it can’t change the way UNESCO Works UNESCO is driven by
Those State parties and that’s something that we we tend to forget um and we blame Paris or the world heritage team for not delivering properly and frequently they can’t because their hands are tied by the politics of the organization and it’s just something we we mustn’t forget
Uh yes it can be a political uh uh seed parties but we can also hope for the collective uh intellectuals role as well yes um Rohit do you want to also add a another C or any other idea I don’t want to add sleeves but I want to say that
All the Seas have to be connected with each other this is the problem right now we don’t connect communities with capacity building capacity building with communication communication with conservation and conservation credibility these cannot be seen as three five isolated seas that have to be addressed in isolation or separated from
Each other I think what we need to do is how can each of them complement the other and that’s where I would see the focus has to be because there’s a lot to be done in that domain thank you you say you didn’t want to add
Another C but it’s a connection so we have another c as well yes thank you thank you yes thank you collection is another C yes exactly yes um do you have an uh any questions or comments or uh if you have any keywords uh to want to add please yes please
Yes we have a question from the floor Yes give up one moment to get a translator thank you in some cases I don’t see a clear UNESCO guideline or standards the city of Busan is actually working very hard to list its Heritage in onto the world heritage list but we haven’t been successful the hanyang
Castle or the the walls the Tanya meaning the old capital of the Tucson Dynasty also had some difficult times the recent tragedy at itaewon also to me seems like I have been somewhat really somewhere related to the fact that we have lost a lot of our heritage
I would like to refer to the world heritage as a boat as a ship and every boat has an anchor and I believe that each City has to reorganize itself to work Under the Umbrella of world heritage so I’d like to make a suggestion I don’t
Know if you or the activities Oh but then I think he was saying that recently in Korea we had a lot of uh issues with the heritage in regard to the development and conservation and also uh for uh the um also the dissonant Heritage so he hoped that we should have
More policy regard to it so I’m sorry rohitpo that you didn’t get the translation but then yes okay yeah okay thank you any other uh idea yes uh please Professor Han yes oh my God thank you thank you and my name is Han piran I’m from econ’s career and I think I
Appreciate all the wonderful instructive presentations and I was in Melaka I’m especially interested in the Professor Eileen always his presentation Community inclusive approaches in urban Heritage interpretation you classified the players in urban Heritage markets into International disruptive Industries and local players and you mentioned that the local prayers needed to be supported and
Have more room space and considering the former the international disruptor Industries and local players are interconnected and they have different business field areas so and given the local prayers are beneficiaries of Heritage tourism why do you think the local prayers need to be supported only and have more room space
Would please have some comment the remarks to my kitchen yes local players benefit from tourism but if you look at it particularly in New Markets they don’t have the same capacity that outside players have even in somewhere like Korea a small town bigger players from bigger cities will
Come in and push out local players because they have better Market understanding more Capital more skills and so on the international players they come in they you know whether it’s hotel chains whether it’s sort of Airbnb or whatever so but the money goes out the money doesn’t stay in
Your economy the money they make go straight out whereas the locals have probably the most unique products to offer your local businesses created businesses food stalls all types of things but often don’t have the capital or the business entrepreneurship skills and you have to support them you know
Otherwise you just end up with places that are all the same they all have the same chain bakeries and coffee shops and so on so it is really important you know the out the bigger ones who come in from outside they have the support they already have the capital whereas
Um knowledge capital and financial Capital whereas your local businesses don’t necessarily and if you support them you create something that’s unique but also support social Equity social support local economy I think all these things are important otherwise they disappear um thank you if I may add to this if you
Allow uh I think a part of the reason is also because the predominant perception among decision makers is what visitors or tourists want are five star hotels uh malls or boutiques I think there’s a need to raise awareness that what visitors really appreciate is more understanding of the local context and
Experience which is more local so on one hand while we deal with this whole problem of the outside business or the economic interest to really capitalize at the expense of the local communities it’s also important to raise awareness among decision makers about the other ways in which tourism
Can be developed which is more friendly or more sensitive to local people and also that there are different ways in which it can be done and also what visitors really want because there is a big mess understanding that visitors only look for some kind of exotic experience while visitors actually
Appreciate local context and local experience much more thank you thank you yes Ming chip please I was going to ask you I I would like to continue with the momentum and I think what we do in Georgetown is we brand it we brand local Brands as an important brand we
Encourage people to go and support the local businesses and of course I when we say well it’s local you know a lot of people coming from the other states but what we mean here is like even you are not from Penang you’re not born in Britain but you love Penang you come
Here and you stay for more than five years ten years and gradually you become someone who appreciate and your money stays there that means whatever that income that you earn from the business will generate into the workers and then you support the whole ecology and I think that is more important the local
Branding during covet time we my office have a project called support local business so we actually took that opportunities to collect their information and put it on our websites so because creating a website is not expensive but maintaining your website is very expensive and since I have to do
It already so there’s no harm to add one more page of the local business so these are some of the platforms that we actually can do is not too difficult but as long as you have the passions and the mission to do it I think everyone can help the local business
Thank you very much for the capacity building and the resilience we should know what is Heritage interpretation and you all in your presentation uh talked about the Heritage interpretation and its case studies but I want a Neil tomorrow have a whole session about to discuss about the what is Heritage
Interpretation and presentation but before that I would like to share our thoughts about what is your heritage interpretation in your realm or area so how do you define it what act or process is the interpretation so probably uh Peter do you want to start because you said uh it’s almost impossible to have
It in the times of conflict right so to me the the distinction between in interpretation and presentation is fairly simple I know Neil will disagree with this and we’ll go through it for some amount of time tomorrow but um interpretation is the message that you want to put across and that message
To me should always include as a a key element the provocation of the message um and the presentation is the medium in which you package that message that’s how I would deal with it yes um Pro yes uh sujang please uh uh uh sorry did you have a question yes please
Sorry I was about to ask you uh during the dinner but uh probably because we do have the publics who are very much uh interested in the issues that probably I would like to bring out uh you probably do know the DMZ area and uh there has
Been an attempt by the Korean government 2008 I mean to to submit the dossier about the site we do have a very very different perspective about the same area between south and north and where probably we can start the interpretations on the site from the perspective of two different side of it
And you know that there must be no right answers but where could be the the balanced interpretation that we can start with um but a really good question and yes I was aware of of that sort of um potential development um let me take it away from um this the
Korean example and put it into an Irish example and in um Northern Ireland there were two communities and there still are two communities um that don’t particularly Get on um for all sorts of reasons but in the uh there was a museum created now in the
I think the 1980s it may be in the 1990s um but which had um interpretation done in two lines so you would follow either a green line or an orange line and they would be interpretations of the same event which were completely different um and the so there are mechanisms for
Doing that but the um by doing that you open the space where there may be a little bit of overlap and where it’s where that overlap is that you grab and say let’s work on that bid and the the similar things are being done in Robben Island for example
Thank you very much uh does anyone have any other questions for pizzas uh argument or no then yeah uh Eileen or aminchi or Rohit can you explain about your your definition of Heritage interpretation Rohit do you want to go first yes yeah sorry uh yes so I feel
Like uh Heritage interpretation is very important because it gives us an opportunity to have diverse ways of communication there is no one way of communication there are many different ways in which you can communicate the same thing to different audiences to communicate different messages to different audiences so I feel that
Interpretation has a huge role to play to not look at communication as a one-way one form of a message conveying a message but really uh gives the diversity to interpreting different messages and addressing the needs in a much more holistic way that would have been just possible by one single communication
Flowing in One Direction so I think that’s something I would like to add as a very important contribution that Heritage interpretation can make thank you I think that meant a communication and participation in interpreting Heritage thank you Ming Chi do you want to go next yeah for me interpretation
Is about people and when people when you talk about people people change every day so I think the importance of interpretation is more of a record of the moment and it’s good to understand at this moment how do we interpret a or b um it’s more important to have an open mind
And to understand that it’s a process and it evolved all the time because if you want to be resilient and the cases of resiliencies that I saw in Georgetown is they will evolve they will change to keep on the element of Heritage will give you the energy to evolve to change
And to keep that spirits to move forward so I think interpretation is about that thank you yes Eileen not I’m totally good but I think also to remember that things changing very very fast at the moment we’ve got this sort of um the theory of sort of overheating
That that things have happened you know and overheating not just as the Earth but also events and um various other things so interpretation in that sense is also changing the modes we use the way it’s happening it’s fluid it’s Dynamic it’s changing and I think you know something
Like Tick Tock keeps up with that not if I know much about Tick Tock but it sort of there are these other modes now constant layers of you know blogs and Vlogs and uh Instagram and sort of wall murals and you know all and they are all
Interpretation they are all parts of the community people identifying with an area whether it’s the fleeting visitor or as a long-term resident somehow making a mark somehow thinking about that Heritage and what it means to them and finding different ways in which to express that interpret it and give it meaning and I
Think it’s trying to understand and work in that environment that particularly in an urban environment but even in a more formal environment of sites and monuments you know we could no longer control the narrative but then how do we Encompass this multiple narrative and it’s constantly changing nature
Thank you so we all have different uh perspective and sense about Heritage interpretation in various uh Realms so I look forward to hearing uh about their interesting debate tomorrow about what is Heritage interpretation and presentation um we are actually behind our schedule for like 15 minutes so uh session three
Is waiting for us so I think we should wrap it up here but before ending our discussion any questions or comments okay okay sorry oh sure of course yes I feel a bit bad too I’m dragging it out um I am so don’t Kang from UNESCO we pick I just want to
Um you know bring the discussion back to the resilience because I uh throughout your presentation I think all of you talked about the the community and their beneficiary uh must be important for the the resilience of the heritage site and places that we would like to protect to and I was
Um I was wondering what would be the driving force to make their recognition through the uh make the recognition into the action by the community Through The Heritage interpretation so how can we make the community and people to actually do something for Heritage interpretation to achieve the resilience of the site
Is that clear it’s like costume clear because I think you’ve got to make it it’s the opposite it’s not you know Heritage makes a place more resilient and that’s the way to look at it rather than expecting Community to looking after Heritage to make that more
Resilient I think you need to look at it as a way of saying if we collectively protect this Heritage it also makes a more resilient community and I think look at it from that perspective and approach it in a similar fashion to what you’ve outlined but take it from the opposite direction
So you need to twist please totally echo on that because when you talk about cultural heritage it it shapes your identity it shapes of something that you believe your inner strength and I think you know once you can find that momentum actually you see individuals and groups that come together they work on
Something together not because of money not because of Fame but they do it because they believe that you know that’s their identity I think that is the the energy that I see in the Georgetown community yeah I mean I live in a very small village but there is
Um a there’s one bloke who looks into the um the history of various places in the village and he’s done a series on all of the pubs in the village um and he’s done well on people’s houses and who lived in those houses and he has the photographs of people who lived in
Those houses and at the same time the parish council is um putting uh protection um railings around the war memorial for example um and they are putting the bayonet back on the soldier on the war memorial which got broken off in the 1950s um but it’s it’s that grassroot it’s the
Immediate it’s the local population looking after in many different ways and those are just two examples their Heritage because it’s important to them it gives them going back to what um Eileen was saying earlier that sense of place identity belonging dignity Etc thank you Rohit do
You do I just wanted to play with regards to resilience one of the major issues is that resilience has become a jargon and only way we can deconstruct or break this jargon is to use Heritage interpretation to bring the real voices or the real understanding of what resilience means from people’s
Perspective because what’s happening is that we use resilience word left right and Center in every possible way is one word from one particular language which has very different meanings and understandings and I think it’s high time that we start stop misusing the word resilience because often I would say here very categorically politicians
Also misuse the word resilience I mean you can say like people of a certain city are very resilient because poor people have no other way but to suffer floods every year so they are resilient because they have no other choice so we have to also use interpretation as a way of really
Um really you know bringing out the true understanding of what resilience or not being resilient means and not leave it in the hands of you know all of the US who are kind of walking and talking and really making their use of this word in
Our own way you know what I mean so I think it’s it’s a Heritage interpretation can play a very important role to to do this in ensure this thank you so we uh talked about the future agenda of the Heritage convention and the resilience and capacity building
Thank you so much thank you Eileen Peter Ming Chi and Rohit and thank thank you everyone for your participation thank you [Applause] thank you Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Thank you Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign So now we’re going to start our session three So based on the session one and two discussing that uh some of the major uh important important major uh issues and the roles of Heritage interpretation in the session three we’re going to discuss about the roles and future
Directions of the weep picks so for our last session for today Dr Neil Silberman Dr sujang Li Professor Mario Santana Quintero Dr Valerie magar as well as Dr gamini will join the session so please kneel over to you yes yes please um we’re going to begin with
Um the this this session is really about the goals of the of uh we pick in the wepic in the uh years to come and so uh we’re going to have the definitive view from uh Dr uh Dr Sue Jung um uh Dr Sue Jung Lee who is really the
The director of of research so um right um it is the last session I mean about the presentations and probably it will be followed by the discussions which might be uh the most important for our Center to have this forum at the end uh I will try to explain to you what the
Rules that we have at the moment and what is the challenges that we have to get on for sustainable development we take only 10 minutes I will talk about interpretation and presentations in sustainable development just basic theoretical aspects and also I’m going to summarize you uh what is the opix main
Focus and functions at the moment and also the future tasks we have at the moment as you all know well and also we have Professor Silverman here from the 2008 anime Charter we have the clear definitions on interpretation and presentations and I can’t deny that we always start the definitions and the
Principles as well from this Charter but at the same time we are trying this year probably the next year and the following years we are trying to develop more ideas on the Define on the definitions and the principles of those two activities probably it can be the interpretation is
All types of intellectual and emotional activity of human beings who understand evaluate and deliver the inherent and extended values and meanings of heritage and also probably we can say that the presentation can be all types of activities of sharing the interpretive activities and content through various technical means and personal or
Impersonal forms of communications then what is the sustainable development and Heritage and their relationships and how the interpretation and presentation can be positioned in those uh Dynamics between those two first of all it should be really important for us that Heritage should be positioned as an essential resource for
Human life and probably we have to understand all together about this uh the heritage is is a kind of essential resource for maintaining our life and also to have the sustainable development at the end and secondly Heritage should be positioned as an asset shared by all communities you probably do know that we
Talked about constantly throughout today’s Forum about the communications and communities which is really important and essential element for us to connect sustainable development and the Heritage together and we truly believe I mean our Center truly believe that the probably interpretation and presentation can help and support those two things can be
Happened and at the end probably the sustainable development can be also the Heritage can can support the sustainable development at the end then what kind of activities in practice actually we can call interpretation and presentation that might be really really diverse ideas on this for example preparing dossier SOC report
Periodic report determining ouv monitoring value change all sorts of things can be the part of interpretation and also explaining ouv via photos Maps texts and drawings and sharing and Communications about those values can be also presentations as well so what we found through the walking group this year by Miss Kang that
Heritage process can be reintegrated with interpretation and presentations all the time so it’s a kind of cyclic process of doing those two things whether that is divided into two or not bearing in mind those kind of uh prerequisite conditions we focused on three main functions so that’s how we our structure has been
Divided into three at the moment of course we do have this strategic development office which can support all those kind of projects and the administrative aspects and networking as well but mainly we do have research function capacity building function And archiving functions of course research function we have divided into four at
The moment the one what we are doing tomorrow is part of the theoretical research and today we have dealt with the policy aspects so one pillar in the research office is policy aspects we are going to deal with the a thematic research and also we will deal with the
Original research as you can see in those kind of four pillars probably are they are all interconnected each other and we can’t do one without the others as well capacity building functions we will focus on on-site training and also we try to develop the curriculum for
Students and publics so we do have a kind of short-term quite clear targets at the moment thirdly we have archiving functions so we have to collect information for resource as well as this should be the participatory archiving not a kind of one way providing the resource to the
Public but it’s a kind of both way Communications to set the platform or for the archivings at the end mainly those three functions should communicate very much so that the our Center should be working as a kind of one Institute so that we have to communicate from the beginning of
Setting out the project every year or maybe short-term and long-term project we have to communicate between those three functions so that research outcome can be actually directly used for the curriculum for the capacity buildings and that also connects to the archiving at the end to do that we need to Bridging the gaps
Between Regional and international and also we have to consider about the different communities right holders and stakeholders we talked about the communities uh this uh Forum a lot but we haven’t classified what kind of communities should be involved and how they are working together in the process of interpretation and presentations
And also we should not focus on the theoretical issues actually we have to Target and we have to tackle the Practical issues as well so that actually the proposal and the inclusive interpretation and presentation can be delivered and can be practiced inside uh by the site managers and the communities
And all those kind of activities we are aiming uh at the benefiting uh to the publics and also different communities through the inclusive presentation and interpretation so that we can contribute our activities in dealing with the sustainable development at the end and those things also we do need a lot of
Communication between the regional and International probably some of you do know that we do have the fund from the Korean government and of course we can’t deny away uh from the Korean government’s request which has a quite uh difficult issues that they face with but that is the Reasoner
Issues and the Reasoner issues will be the part of the international issues so that’s why we probably should tackle the regional issues one by one but at the end it should be accumulated and working as a kind of international aspects as well we should not confine The Limited
Communities we have to extend our perspective into the broader communities and that is one way that we have to design uh in our project not only the capacity building project but also the research project so those are a lot of issues that we have today and we have to
Probably deal with in setting out our project and also the future Prospect as well we have a lot of burdens in our shoulder at the moment we do are lucky we are really lucky to have 19 staff at the moment and we will have more staff in in
Coming years but that is not a kind of a happy thing that we have we are not satisfying about what we have at the moment but more important things that uh probably what kind of aims and what kind of project that we have to design in future so that we can actually tackle
The issues through the interpretation and presentations for the sustainable development at the end so we need your voice we need your ideas so that we can have our right directions towards it thank you very much thank you thank you very much uh Dr sujang Lee I’m going to speak for just
Uh very briefly uh about a research component in the future and uh much of of what I’m going to say has has been discussed and we will con we will continue to discuss it in in the days uh the day ahead uh but I I want to ask
Some some basic questions uh about what directions the research uh should go in uh obviously it it it goes without saying that research is an important part of the connected activities uh that that Dr sujang Lee has mentioned um and uh their research is is absolutely imperative for us ever
Getting to a place where um interpretation and presentation can serve the sustainable development goals of of UNESCO whether that means the specific goals that have been outlined uh uh relating to Heritage or or raising the awareness for all the sustainable um Heritage the sustainable development
Goals now I I want to say that that whippic is really a pioneering organization in the in the fact that with a few notable exceptions most of the the studies and and discussion academic and uh practical discussion about interpretation and and presentation have been largely focused on case studies and uh
We we obviously know that in Heritage and even in more so in interpretation and presentation context is is everything so that the techniques that are described as as enormously successful in a certain case study may be completely inappropriate in another um site a world heritage site in another region um
I I want to uh Echo the the the importance of the definition uh and distinction between uh interpretation and presentation uh there have been many different uh counting of the use of the word in the world heritage convention which which actually only mentions presentation and the operational guidelines which mention
Uh both of them I am by my count there there’s some uh 25 times that uh that basically um uh presentation is mentioned and in the operational guidelines and a couple of times when interpretation is mentioned and they they both appear as as synonyms which is not entirely
Satisfactory why if they’re synonyms why why use both names as has been mentioned the uh the 2008 ecomocinomic Charter attempted to uh capture what the difference is and uh Dr Lee mentioned that interpretation seems to be a wider activity that that in fact can be accomplished by anyone at a site from an
Expert to a a child trying to interpret for herself or himself what the significance of the site is while presentation and I have to agree with uh Professor Stone here that presentation seems to be the medium uh with which the message is is brought across and and can
Be conveyed by a wide variety of of techniques from the the traditional text panels to very elaborate multimedia and digital digital means but the important thing about presentation that that marks it is that it is essentially a one-way means of communication while everybody privately in their own mind can perform interpretation
Only those with a certain amount of Power with relation to a world heritage site can authorize putting in text panels or or making other presentational um programs and so forth however that’s changing too because with social media and the uh uh the the widespread skill with uh online uh applications and
Digital media generally from Tick Tock to to uh social media um even presentation is is becoming a more open uh but what what I want to be a bit clearer about is what is the distinction between the two and and what I mean to say is can interpretation be really good
And presentation be really poor at the same time can that is that is to say Can a really perceptive enlightening provoking idea about a site be uh conveyed in a an amateurish or a sloppy or disorganized way and likewise can the opposite Be Imagined can the presentation be good and the
Interpretation be very poor with the use of like visually uh attractive technologically advanced entertaining and entertainment is is is unfortunately a part of what um Public Communication of Heritage has become and that is to say could we imagine among the world heritage sites or among Heritage sites in general really slick entertaining
Engaging presentations of very distasteful uh ideologies uh interpretation that that violates human rights or gender Equity or Intercultural tolerance I mean one one could imagine with the Technologies of presentation today almost any message can can be conveyed so it’s really a question in the future for the the task
Force and the continuing work of of wipik what uh how do we judge uh interpretation and presentation by the the values of the world heritage convention the values of UNESCO so to conclude in this age of of advanced and very widely dispersed digital Technologies um we’ve got to focus on defining
What are the acceptable parameters or even the realistic parameters of cultural communication as a whole and which stakeholders rights to interpret and present the significance of world heritage sites should be protected um what is the limit of the freedom of presentation of really difficult sites we’re in a world of of great controversy
And which media both formal and informal and importantly in the post-covet period both on-site and online and online as we all know is becoming more important should be used to present certain interpretations so I think in in looking toward the future whippix research is going to help us better analyze the character of
Public Communication about Heritage places in order to understand the basic power of interpretation and presentation to advance or impede the goals of sustainable development so I’d now like to pass the torch or introduce gamini uh why Surya a a senior advisor to ecrom to offer his ideas about the future direction of wipik
Dr Weiser thank you thank you all I I miss you all all friends and anyway thank you for the invitation to join this discussion uh and of course some of the other discussions we had we picked and I think we pick has come up at an important
Moment where we are thinking of the next 50 years I will tell you why I have uh or reasons to uh suggest why research is important and I’m glad that VP has placed emphasis on that in fact some of my the very brief comments will be strengthening some of
The things you heard from people like my colleague Valerie manga and so on and uh the number these three four points why research is leader is of course uh you had the presentation of Joseph King last week you heard there’s hardly anything that world heritage has done on this
Area so we have to do more work and to do more work we need to understand what we are doing in fact I am uh I am I don’t know whether I am celebrating when thinking of my 40 years with the world heritage convention started in 1918. two with the preparation of nominations
And over the last 15 years we he chromed the advisor burning we did contribute a lot including those three manuals and Link in nature culture contributed to sustainable development policies and people-centered approaches and so on but I must say that we have failed in our mission to contribute to uh
Interpretation so that’s number one then number two is there is a standalone strand by a group uh on interpretation I in my previous presentations I strongly argued that interpretation should be an integral part of the Heritage management process uh this is the recent in fact uh some of you Peter Stone Maga
And them they were there when we developed the training course two months course on conservation of Heritage where we placed very important emphasis on interpretation we allocated one whole week because we thought before they started talking about an interpretation they need to understand the entire Heritage management process and
Then my view you may not agree the current knowledge on interpretation is based on practitioners like you and me top down expert driven process aimed that I must say mostly tourists or visitors I’m aware that literature survey has been done so you will understand and then number four is new paradigms have
Been introduced with many people-centric themes that we heard throughout these sessions which can bring a credible we can contribute to Credible interpretation and with that I will go into Five Points about gaps where research is necessary we need to first conduct research to understand the characteristics of the current knowledge
And where it is located in the Heritage management process including those that were heard definitions and so on do we have a sufficient understanding what is interpretation and for whom it is addressed the audience this could lead to understand where we should place interpretation in Heritage management
Process you need to look at what is going on number two we have introduced many novel paradigms into Heritage discourse such as culture Landscapes sustainable development Link in nature culture and so on and all these have brought numerous people focused teams which were a code throughout the
Discussion of VP over the last two years research is needed how to integrate these concerns in interpretation number three research is needed to understand if there are conventional or local based wisdom on interpretation of Heritage in my view what we consider as Heritage cannot be considered as alien
Group of cultural expressions they are within the people they had an embedded interpretation at the time of their Creations indeed there were principles and processes of creation and conservation including traditional wisdom without sufficient knowledge of which interpretation will be meaningless I have sites where we have one million uh pilgrims plus
Point zero zero zero one percent of visitors and these people have an understanding of interpretation of what they are visiting but they are going to be and this is something uh we need to explore further and do we do we need interpretation are there any non-interpretation as interpretation
This is something we need to really do some more research uh and number four is uh we are in an era of uh respecting two umbrella overarching teams diversity and context which my colleagues already highlighted we cannot imposing one size fits all solutions and methods and research is needed to explore
Culture-based Solutions uh particularly insights of conflicts and my last point is research is needed to understand inherent interpretation which I heard from my colleague sujang there are no interpretation is necessary similarly research is needed to understand the notion that conservation I have argued on this conservation interventions themselves are interpretations how do we
Bring this and how do we integrate them and uh so this is uh my last point so uh thank you for the invitation and I think uh if the VP can work towards achieving goals of UNESCO and also uh if we can formulate a good research uh based
Agenda I think we can be the Pioneer to contribute to this process of understanding and helping with the helping the practitioners uh with the interpretation thank you thank you very much we’re go we’re going to move on now to uh Professor Mario Santana Quintero who is a professor at Carleton University in
Canada and is the Secretary General of ecomos to give his his view of the future of the activities of whipping thank you thank you Neil for for this opportunity to to give my opinion and also I would like to thank we pick you know for this uh 20 hours of travel and
Be here in in Korea to to celebrate you know the establishment of the center which I um came to see uh some years ago and and I’m really proud of all the activities and and actually the engagement of you know Koreans and the cultural heritage Administration to invest in this very
Particular topic of interpretation and presentation because I from the country I’m coming from or I live I don’t think there will be a dime expanded in setting up a center that will do this kind of research so it’s it’s really unneeded and very timely uh initiative so I
Really thank you for that so I I mean I probably Neil organ or Valerie could talk much better about research and the topics in relation you know to the development of the science in interpretation presentation I would only consider one aspect which is very close to me digital Technologies I have been
Around for actually I am two years older than the war Heritage convention and I already told you my age so that that basically means that you know I have been surrounded by War Heritage all my life and I I don’t know I don’t think that I will be 50 years more to to
Celebrate the 100 Years of the convention but if that happens well I will be really lucky and anyway uh what I wanted to say is that you know digital Technologies and we have been talking about that a lot today uh there are solution they’re an instrument they are tools to develop and
To stream and to let’s say um increase the capacity of reach you know of Heritage because we have seen with Kobe that many sites were very creative in moving their their sites to the digital world and you know keep people interested and engage with Heritage and then you know we have soon
We have other conference technologies that allow us to exchange and to have an open dialogue and conversations actually I I had the opportunity to participate in the our world heritage transformational information Technologies in each panels that we organized for a month and if it wasn’t for technology we wouldn’t have not been
Able to to talk uh that much and to produce actually the report that we produce and I’m very proud and also for we pick to to have supported that initiative and in particular the development of the catalog that you can see so I think that digital Technologies
Offer a lot of opportunities but they also offer so challenges and the challenges can be seen as economical most because people say well it is much easier to have a digital app than to have a panel but of course the panel will deteriorate but technology will also deteriorate so
I think in that aspect of we maybe invest in some time on how the strategies of a site to actually develop a digital strategy to you know transform their assets and and to to reach more people is very important also I I have to say that many sites are
Impacted by the use of Technology because it’s not it doesn’t come with a with a bill which is really um cheap and in some cases I believe that also there is research needed in the aspects of how an institution can adopt and what that institution can afford to do because
We can have the best Technologies but if they are not affordable for the for the repository organization and it’s also impacting their activities then why do we adopt them and I I and I Echo what Neil was saying that you know presentation can be very good interpretation can be very bad and this
Is the same with technology so we can make it very gloomy with technology but maybe the interpretation is not there and finally my my final point is also that a I think we need to develop an ethical framework I have been doing some research on this on how digital
Technologies because as soon as we digitize and we bring something to to a digital Storyteller platform we have a shared responsibility as experts but it is also a share ownership of the data by the person that makes the interpretation and makes the platform and also the the community
Where this Heritage is located so I think that we’ve shared ownership there is also a lot of share responsibilities and I don’t think that we have developed a framework and we would say you know we have a European for instance we have a European or a Canadian organization that
Goes to a a country a low income country and develops a very incredible uh platform to to forecast the values of that site without actually benefiting the site itself and we have seen that too often in my field and I I think that we should prevent that so I would say
That those are kind of my my contributions to to the dialogue thank you Neil and thank you everyone thank you thank you Mario and and now um I’m going to introduce I would I’m happy to introduce Dr Valerie magar who is the unit manager for programs at uh ecrom Valerie
Yes you can hear me yes thank you thank you very much uh Neil and well my question was to focus more on capacity building so I think there are a number of things that we saw during the presentations this morning one is the the increase in that what we
Considered as Heritage and the means to research document and interpret it that have changed over the last decades in a very significant Manner and the inclusion of very many new techniques as well now with particularly with the digital transformation so I think we we need to ensure that through capacity building different
Audiences are actually considered and to also make sure that different skills different methods and different types of knowledge can be used to transmit what that Heritage is all about and understanding different perspectives from for that Heritage and also understanding that we whatever we transmit through an interpretation and through presentation is actually
Meaningful respectful and inclusive and we we also spoken this morning about equity and the importance of trying to breach uh divides that exist so considering the different needs of uh difference audiences I think will be extremely important and we also heard about the importance of offering tools to involve particularly
The younger people the younger generations and this is something that several of our speakers spoke this morning and Manuel Gandara was also speaking about not forgetting people with special needs to access the site so I think learning tools about that will be important I think another important thing will be
How we provide tools to those who are working with Heritage sites and world heritage in particular how do we communicate to different types of people different types of audiences whether they are policy makers whether they are politicians um Rohit was speaking about Ministries as well but how do we communicate to all
These people what is the role Heritage can play uh for a healthy society and we heard many adjectives for how this healthy society would be but this is essentially I mean how do we perceive Heritage places and how they have evolved over time Dr Ang was also
Mentioning of Heritage and as a process I mean that we we have to understand it over time and how it has evolved so having these tools to also adapt and to be open and to to have this possibility to receive different perceptions I think is incredibly important
I think another important element is to secure and disseminate different ways to understand and approach Heritage places depending on their nature on their extension on their location and on the different media that are available I mean Mario was speaking about digital media but of course I come from a
Country where many of our world heritage sites aren’t I mean there’s no Wi-Fi or there’s no signal anywhere near so this may be very isolated areas and so also understanding those needs or potential digital divides that it may exist for certain parts of the population and particularly the local populations I
Think is also important and also we were mentioning the importance of linking these world heritage sites with the wider setting so that it’s not just I mean of course we have to care about the outstanding Universal value but also taking care and making sure that in the interpretation
We also include all the other potential values and and all the aspects that may be important and these can can include issues related with governance including rights and traditional Community rights but as well as other social cultural economic and environmental issues of the context and we were also speaking about the
Importance of capacity building to make sure we have the tools for multi-directional dialogues to understand those different perspectives and also the expectations related with the quality of life the links to Heritage sites including nature and culture we heard about the sense of place also this morning and also intergenerational dialogue education
Regenerational Development and Tourism and um I think capacity building will also need to include understanding the ways in which Heritage and traditional practices can contribute to reducing uh or mitigating the impact of climate change and Rocket was uh very explicit about this and how these can promote
Means for adaptation so that us as Heritage professionals but also the communities living around the the Heritage sites can also adapt better to not suffer from climate change um and also I think capacity building will have to provide how to communicate uh the lessons that we can derive from
Heritage sites both from the past and from the present from more recent um impacts of both climate change but also other types of disasters and peterstone was also speaking about the issues related with the conflict and um problems related with the armed conflict in particular um another key fundamental element will
Be to the the need to transmit that interpretation is a fundamental part of the management system and government was mentioning it is just a few minutes ago so I think understanding Heritage and understanding why a place is important is at the basis of any decision making that we take
Whether it is conservation decisions whether it is management or if it is all reaching all the way to the presentation and I think it’s also interpretation may also be a key in the transmitting messages about the need for the conservation explaining the vulnerabilities about the site and how
We can explore means to involve the public in actions that will actually help preserve the place so using perhaps traditional practices or creating new opportunities and Dr rang was also speaking about them and how do we involve the local community also in in activities that can also be economically
Interesting for the community but this can also be include special types of visits that we organize around site so also providing our conservation professionals with the tools to um use our own mechanisms and involving the wider audience for example with through drawing for understanding Through Repair
Works that can be done by the public or through maintenance works I mean there’s there’s many other ways that we can involve the public also in a meaningful way in the conservation of a site and finally capacity building should also consider tools to improve communication with different doctors in order to
Identify key values and attributes of a place and the role they can play in defining its character to encourage interdisciplinary and inter-sectorial work to enable work with different actors and communities um and this can include again new and traditional Technologies um and also we should probably be doing
Capacity building for conflict solving I mean understanding how to communicate and how to solve potentially conflicting views of Heritage I think it’s something that we all desperately need of special interest well yeah I think it’s also another really important issue with language and I do not necessarily refer to
Whether we’re speaking in English or in Korean or in Spanish but it’s just a terminology that we are using to also speak about Heritage so that we actually communicate effectively depending on the audiences for different types of interpretation different moments of decision making um and also Manuel gandra was mentioning
This morning the use of uh nowatul for example at one of the sites I mean using local languages is also particularly important to communicate what we want to to say to to those local communities um and finally I think something that maybe we haven’t touched upon but it’s also um
Trying to develop tools and mechanisms to understand the impact of interpretation and presentation I think that’s also working with different actors and methods to monitor the impact of interpretation and presentation I think over time will also be important to show just how important this element of management is and how we can better
Communicate it so that would be it thank you thank you very much uh we just have a couple of minutes left and I I I’m going to call on um Dr Lee to just sort of sum up as as head of the research Department uh the irony really is that interpretation and presentation
Is its own form of intangible cultural heritage storytelling about the past and we know from the intangible Heritage convention that intangible Heritage is constantly evolving how how do you what is the strategy that that you imagine for wipik in the 10 years to come to reconcile the inevitable change and
Development in in recognition of significance with the the rather formalized um Criterion for inscription with ouv how do you anticipate change in the future um first of all I’d like to say that the during the last several years that we have been preparing our setup and also
This year legally uh setting out the research project always problem goes back to the scope of the interpretation and presentations and also who is doing it and how to doing it and what are the parameters of doing it it hasn’t been formally done about all those kind of issues yet that’s why we
Do have a slight tensions at the moment that what kind of subject we have to deal with and who we have to Target for and what kind of contents that we have to include in the capacity building programs and so on so that’s why we started the definition project because at least definition
Project will guide us the scope of the interpretation and presentation and the character of it I mean changing keep changing it is one of the character of it and what kind of parameters and who would do it and sort of things so that then we can probably decide what kind of
Research topics that we do need to tackle in one year or two year and 30 years and then it can connect to the capacity building programs at the end probably tomorrow we can develop more ideas to decide or maybe to talk more about the or to to expand the scope of
The interpretation and presentations because tomorrow we will focus on the definition of it then probably we will have more ideas to come in future years and again that scope will be changing again in 10 years or in 20 years and we probably will do repeating the same
Things to designing the our missions and redesigning our project in 10 years or maybe in five years as well so that based on the definition change and the scope a change of it so that that’s my initial thought thank you very much for that
Um and I can only say on behalf of all of uh the guests here that we have full confidence that that wepic will will attack that that problem of the continual evolution of of the meaning of interpretation and presentation so I I believe that we we need to conclude this
Session now thank you everyone and we’ll continue tomorrow can yes okay okay if I I’ve been told it’s perfectly okay oh thank you thank you so much I actually have questions for each of you but I’m not sure if the time will allow me to ask all the questions but regarding the research part I want to ask Dr Vijay Surya and sudong that
I’ve been working on the interpretation policy uh in within the world heritage system and as I’ve been um studying that system I have been realizing that the um there are it’s not always a good thing yeah so I was wondering whether when I initiate a certain research or think
About a research idea should I start with um skeptical attitude toward world heritage system or should I focus on like good functions of the world heritage system I want your advice and for uh Valerie I would like to ask whether personally you think that um is it ideal to
Um to is do you think it’s ideal to have the capacity building for the community to the degree that they don’t need any more Heritage interpretation experts or professionals do you think still even though we are raising the communities to build their ability to interpret their Heritage
Themselves do you still think it will be still the the experts should be needed in that Heritage interpretation in the future that’s my question and for Mario um sorry for Mario I just wanted to ask you whether the digital technology should be included in the world Hertz system because
The digital using utilizing the digital technology is a very um sometimes it’s very beneficial for interpreting or presenting the Heritage slides and the values but at the same time on the other side it’s pretty much depend on the funding and like sub uh Financial ability of certain Heritage sites or
Government and like utilizing the digital technology too much may bring some imbalance I think so I was wondering whether it would be good to address this using digital technology for Heritage interpretation and presentation like within the policies or guidelines in the world heritage thank you
You asked me can I go first okay uh based on your allowance I would you could ask me in the office I could answer to your questions already um yes thank you very much for your question and that that’s really important question as well if you ask me uh my personal perspective
Uh because I served for the government for the last 12 years already I think policy is a means and tools and techniques that our way of thinking and our philosophical aspects and principles can be actually applied into practice so sometimes policy can be you know uh not productive policy can be really uh
Giving us the negative aspects yes of course I truly believe that you can start from the skeptical approach but in a productive way I think as long as you are then probably everybody will agree with you from this skeptical point a skeptical perspective because you are heading toward the the better and and
The positive aspect okay yeah can I continue can I continue sure yeah okay you asked me also the same sort of question uh don’t worry I will tell you very briefly when we in 1982 prepare the tentative list it took only three minutes okay there was no guidance nothing
And when we wrote uh three nominations in 1982 about uh 30 pages document uh it we did it overnight and remember world heritage has evolved and it is still evolving we did not have a definition of outstanding Universal value until 2005 operational guidelines and we did not
Uh there was a reference to Management Systems uh in the operational guidelines of 2005 and we conducted a research and expanded what is management system which led to the resource manual and in 2005 operational guidelines there was a reference to statement of outstanding Universal value there was no format for
That and thanks to a research program posted by our late colleague herbstoval but when we started we had to go and he had left us myself and my colleague Joseph King we started the research project with little money and then looked at how do we define statement of outstanding Universal value there were
References there were various little bit pieces and so on we did finally came up of course discussing all that raise your body and finally put into a committee and then the s-o-u-b you are using is that was generated at that piece of research so don’t worry go ahead uh I
Told you I we couldn’t contribute to this subject or the 450 years you may be the best to look at that and please don’t worry uh go ahead I still remember when we were developing the statement of outstanding Universal value there was a big question about adding
Management how can management be part of the value and there was a long discussions but then it was included finally and then of course uh two or three years ago we made some references sorry revisions at the in the operation guidelines to that also that can change so please
Go ahead you will be succeeded thank you and I would I would like to to Echo uh what Dr Lee uh has said that a a skeptical Outlook is completely legitimate and warranted but the important point is that it must not end with just simple critique it has to be a
Way to find new ways even in the formalized structure of world heritage we can find plenty to criticize about the way it has has operated and how far it has to go but but your goal must be to find a new solution to allow more people access to to express creatively their
Relationship to the past and I will turn it over to Mario to speak about the digital uh question you thank you Neil and thank you for your question I I think that as I said you know um you you can apply what you can afford okay but afford the technology also
Means several things right it means do we have the capacity uh do we have the infrastructure uh do we have the digital assets do we need to acquire them do we need to have a digital storytelling expert that will help us to make the platform so it is a very expensive
Approach nevertheless I mean many sites very small museums in particularly in Canada they adopted digital Technologies during cobit with very little investment right and they were able to reach people so I think that that one thing shouldn’t exclude the other I I visited the house of Luis baragani Mexico recently and
It’s a wonderful place to see and for Architects like myself but I was a stroke that is very difficult to access and you know for someone that doesn’t have you know has some physical limitation it will be very difficult to see the house to understand
Their values Etc so what do we need to do do we need to retrofit the house so we are giving access to people that should have access or can we use something alternative so maybe digital Technologies can be an alternative way of giving access to this group of people
That we have excluded in the past and also so I see that is not because benefit idea of you know this is as much as I’m going to invest I’m going to get my digital platform and Excel and everybody’s going to come and see it and they’re going to be very interested I
Think it’s much more complex than that right but we also have to see the long-term benefits and also the engagement because I see in many sites that they adopt you know very sophisticated technology but this technology becomes obsolete in in few years and it’s not updated so we also
Have to have what we call in digital Technologies data management plan so what is it that you’re going to do to to keep this this thing going now I I forgot to mention something that I I think is also a really important aspect is that we’re living now in an
Artificial intelligence deep learning world where when we open our phones and we use our computers there is tracking algorithms looking at what we do how we do it and they are making offers right of what we should do so I was thinking as we were talking about interpretation and presentation that also
Um you know Warhead decides could kind of make use of this artificial intelligence in other ways right can we tailor-made something according to someone what are the interests of the site Etc no and I was looking at for instance anchor but where you know people go and see the sunshine this the
Sunshine yes it is not the sunrise but when it goes down Sun said Thank you thank you Neil and so so you know they have this carrying capacity using some monetary tools and they can say well today you should go to this Temple and tomorrow you should go to this other one
So they are using actually artificial intelligence and deep learning to understand how people move around the site to make it a little better so I think technology by itself is not bad it’s just the way we use it but I think investment is always not a very easy straightforward formula thank you so
Let’s get Valerie’s view on a couple of these subjects you mentioned accessibility uh often we think of accessibility as part of the interpretive or visitor experience as rails and ramps and things like that alternatively we think of uh you know outside the some sort of remote interpretation but there is a deeper
Meaning to accessibility that the accessibility scholar Ian Ford has talked about deep accessibility that deals not only with physical access but intellectual access for all kinds of people of orientation of being able to recognize a narrative and so forth in in your work have do you have any thoughts about
Going Beyond rail rails and ramps for accessibility yes I mean depending on the what you’re trying to achieve with the different sites but I mean there are a number of techniques that can be used to provide that deeper level of access whether it is through sensory experiencing of a site whether it is
Tactile or through smells or through different ways of understanding a site I think also I mean I I fully agree that digital means is another way to provide access to those areas that are either difficult to access or that cannot be accessed for conservation purposes and also I mean some other sites might
Might also be closed because of beliefs I mean they they it’s just not appropriate for for those sites to be visited even if you may know that they are there and that they exist but it’s not necessarily a good thing that you you open them to to just anyone who who
Is not initiated or who is not part of the the Traditions so that in terms of accessibility and the the other question was also about communities and capacity building I would say that I would use the term capacity building mostly for conservation professionals I mean I think that’s where we are
Comfortable with the term and I mean we are it’s about the learning uh dialogue and we we learn from each other when it is when we speak about communities I’m not sure we are always doing necessarily capacity building I think there may be some activities of capacity building
Where we share conservation issues about the site but when it is about understanding the site I think it’s more about involvement and or dialogue I mean I would use other sorts of terms rather than capacity building that seems like you’re going to teach them I mean it
Looks more like a one-way dialogue even if it’s not necessarily that and the fact that communities might you might help through that dialogue also understand different aspects of uh of a site and get a deeper understanding of what the site is all about I don’t think it will
Never be a limit to what conservation professionals can do around the site because there will be new data coming out there will be new information there will be new means of reaching or accessing the site and we will keep involved also because we need to preserve the site to manage it and and
Have other types of activities and in the same way that I would also not necessarily use capacity building for policy makers or politicians I mean you might want to use another term so that it doesn’t sound I mean that it’s more inclusive and it’s more effective in in
The end to communicate and to be able to reach the goals that you want which is about having a common view and possibility of a better understanding and protection of a site uh I think that this I want to thank the the panelists uh this is a really interesting important discussion we have
To uh wrap it up now uh and I would just with the the final word about that question about is there ever going to get to be a time where you don’t need experts or professionals and so forth to deal with communities well there you know uh it’s more a
Question of the role of Heritage professionals is going to change from in a sense dictating what the message is to mediating between various sometimes conflicting um uh ideas of of the significance of the site so it’s going to be much much less the expert and much more the mediator in
In my opinion but I think we have to wrap it up now and uh let’s look forward to to more discussions tomorrow on all these these tricky and uh very important questions so thank you [Applause] have one just last sentence um we have two days uh forums but
Today’s Forum has been fully prepared and and orchestrated by hanji Kong and would you give her a big plot [Applause] thank you this session three was uh extremely helpful for the development of Wikipedia and we will share your ideas and suggestions and opinions with all of
Our staffs that we pick and reflect to our project okay thank you so much for all today I think this is the end of the first day of the Forum uh tomorrow we will proceed our Forum on Heritage interpretation Concepts and definitions and challenges which will share the
Outcomes of research of we pick and relevant stakeholders and uh experts as well so uh thanks for staying with us all day so thank you very much again and we hope to see you tomorrow again thank you bye foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign Foreign
We don’t have time for an intro. “Midnight Mass” is a psychological horror show on Netflix from Michael Flanagan, who is the creator of the family trauma trigger fest “Haunting of Hill House” and the second gayest thing on Netflix, second only to “Barbie and the Dolphin Magic”, “The Haunting of Bly Manor.”
He’s known for creating, like, thought-provoking, humanistic stories that explore the horrors within ourselves as much as the horrors outside of us–blah blah blah. The whole series falls under the category of religious horror, which is like a sub-genre of horror, if you will.
So, religious horror relies on presenting things like motifs and symbols from real-life religions as fact within a given universe. It exploits and subverts the familiar rituals and concepts in order to scare the holy ghost straight out of your poor little bones.
This includes everything from, like, “Carrie” to “The Exorcist” to “Rosemary’s Baby”, “Midsommar”, and, of course… [Music] “God’s not dead, he’s surely alive…” “God’s Not Dead” follows Josh Wheaton, who, after refusing to do his homework, is instead forced to teach a college-level philosophy class that he and his fellow classmates are paying for.
He has no magical powers or skills and is forced to fight the sadistic, monstrous, maniacal professor to the death using only the powers of friendship and God. It has three sequels entitled “God’s Not Dead 2”, which stars Sabrina (the teenage witch)
Refusing to let her grandfather eat bacon, “God’s Not Dead 3: A Light in the Darkness”, where Reverend Dave reads the bible to scare off a bunch of construction workers, and “God’s Not Dead 4: We the People”, where they take it all the way to the top!
We’re gonna focus mostly on the first one and the third one–the first one because it’s the big one, the third one because I actually like it, and the other ones are… The fourth one’s a trip is all I’ll say.
We’re not gonna be breaking the films apart; we’re not gonna be fact-checking them (that has been done a million times). If you’re looking for an in-depth breakdown or, like, a very long explanation of everything that these movies get wrong, there are so many.
I will link some of them, including a really good series by Big Joel, in which he abbreviates “God’s Not Dead” to GND, which we will also be doing. So…thanks. Now, you might be asking yourself, “What does the Christian grassroots kickstarter love
Actually starring The Newsboys series have to do with the eight-episode, critically acclaimed miniseries, “Midnight Mass”? Apart from the obvious answer, which is tone, we have 19th-century existentialism, Russian literature, and the Christian Bible. Also, I have seen them both. That’s the main thing they have in common. That’s what got us here.
I saw one, and I saw the other, and I was like, “Hmm, I’ve got nothing else to do for six months.” “Seriously, you’ve got to get a life.” “Yeah, tell me about it.” In September of 2021, the man behind the mass, Michael Flanagan himself, said of using the
Bible as a kind of source material, that he was shocked for the first time comprehending what a really strange book it is. He said, “There are so many ideas I’d never heard before in church, and the violence of the Old Testament God is terrifying–slaughtering babies and drowning the earth.
It really struck me that I didn’t know my faith at that point.” And I am not here to give you a cliff notes of the Bible, but he’s right. He’s not NOT right. Like, Revelations, which is technically New Testament, sits somewhere between, like, season
Three of “Game of Thrones” and “Saving Private Ryan” on the gore scale, okay? The seas are turning to blood. The rain is turning to blood. The sun is scorching the earth, and there are evil demon creatures rising up from the
Bowels of the cosmos to dump, like, literal bowls of hellfire onto a decaying planet, ravaging its way through every molecule of joy and life left on its dry, cracked surface like Elon Musk running through Silicon Valley! Full disclosure: I was kicked out of CCD before I could make my confirmation.
CCD, if you don’t know — if you grow up Catholic, but you’re too poor to go to Catholic school — is what you do, like, a couple nights a week in addition to, like, Sunday School so
You can get your communion and your confirmation and, like, be holy in the eyes of the Lord, okay? It’s a requirement. I hated it. For reasons I will not disclose, I was not allowed to complete my studies and make my
Confirmation, so I don’t know if, in those last three months of eighth grade, they teach revelations, but I was never taught Revelations. I don’t know if they teach it in Catholic school; I would ask my mom, but it’s 1 AM, so…no.
Anyway, it is absolutely terrifying, which makes it perfect for filmmakers who are looking to, like, twist some religion into their horror. “Revelation.” The 1973 cult classic “The Exorcist” takes the concept of demons and devils and possession from intangible fears to absolute fact when 12-year-old Regan becomes possessed by an
Entity claiming to be the devil itself. That possession and following exorcism result in very real physical damage for the characters and the people around them within the universe of the film. Other films, like “Midsommar”, utilize religious structures and emphasize, like, the dangers
Of groupthink, blind faith, and what can happen when a simple religious belief falls into the wrong, twisted train of thought and barrels off the track. 2014 cinematic masterpiece “Left Behind”, which arguably religious horror for religious people, with its coordinating book series, is also a decent-ish example of this.
Relative unknown Nicolas Cage stars in his breakout role as a pilot who is flying a plane (as they do) when suddenly, boom, half the people in the world are gone because it’s the rapture…and he got left behind. So, then it’s just him and Chad Michael Murray in a very weird rendition of “Speed”…?
But with a plane? Because they can’t land? Because all of the TSA workers evidently were great Christians and went up to heaven, so there’s no one to, like, coordinate a landing, and the world is falling into just sheer chaos below them.
So, they’re just driving around until they run out of fuel, and, luckily, his daughter–his godless daughter–also got left behind. And she’s, like, about to but she stops and calls her dad, and she commandeers a truck and, like, moves shit around and makes a runway so they could land the plane just in time
For the whole world to catch fire. It’s a hoot. Highly recommend watching it. Anyway, so, “Midnight Mass” does something similar, creating a very unique monster element by looking at the darker, more graphic imagery of the biblical texts like Revelation and stories like the Old Testament stories and taking it at face value.
The story is set mostly between the holy days of Ash Wednesday and Easter. It’s initially following Riley as he returns to his hometown of Crockett Island. Crockett is a strongly Catholic community, very isolated, and they become increasingly violent after a new priest rolls into town and starts performing some miracles.
So, we have these two worlds: the “God’s Not Dead” universe–a high-concept fantasy world in which the American education system functions as a tool for an oppressive regime designed specifically to smoke out and crush any and all faith in Jesus Christ as the savior per
Satan’s bidding–and we have “Midnight Mass”–an introspective horror series that takes place on a remote island where Catholicism dominates the social climate and lulls individuals into a twisted sense of righteousness and moral superiority. Two pieces of media coming from wildly different perspectives, serving wildly different agendas,
Both relying heavily on religion (specifically Christianity) as not only a theme and, like, motivator behind production but as the backbone for everything from the plot to the characters to the dialogue itself, takes notes from traditional religious structures and texts and utilizes scripture and its many interpretations.
Both “Midnight Mass” and “God’s Not Dead” offer prime examples of how religious interpretation and representation exists in our current media landscape. Also, it has vampires. Nietzsche (bless you) – Part two. There are not many things that myself and the creators of the “God’s Not Dead” franchise
See eye to eye on, but, on one front, we are united. And that is that any man who likes Ayn Rand is not to be trusted under any circumstances. I do not care who you are; I do not care if you wrote your thesis on it; I don’t want to hear it.
Ayn Rand is a red flag so bright it’s on fire. A burning red flag. Several, several burning red flags, in fact, lit up and lined up, spelling out the word “run” like an SOS on a remote island. And the “Gods Not Dead” crew absolutely knew this.
They had to know this because there is absolutely no other reason for Ayn Rand to be on this board unless they were trying to signal to the audience: “This guy = bad fucking dude.” This board solely exists to clue viewers into the kind of venomous thinkers that Professor
Rattlesnake is going to use to poison the minds of all the hopeful possible Christians out there if discount Logan Lerman does not step up his game. “Friedrich Nietzsche, Ayn Rand, George Santayana, Democritus…” Stakes. We have stakes in this film. Professor Radisson, resident bad dude, waltzes into class, declares God is dead, and then
Requires all of his students sign a paper agreeing to that fact and/or fail the class. Which is bonkers, but we’re gonna let it slide because “Midnight Mass” has vampires. Honestly, that’s gonna give “God’s Not Dead”, like, a lot of leeway just for the record.
So, in this nightmarish fantasy universe where the education system is the villain and philosophy classes look like this… “I would like to bypass this senseless debate altogether and jump to the conclusion whi–jump to the conclusion whi–jump to the conclusion whi–jump to–jump–jump–jump–jump to the
Conclusion which every sophomore is already aware of: there is no god.” The infamous God’s-not-dead mantra that 19-year-old liberal arts students everywhere have tattooed on their biceps, courtesy of the late 19th-century German philosopher and existentialist Friedrich Nietzsche, rears its ugly head. And we’re not getting on me about my pronunciation of Nietzsche.
I’m gonna try, but I went to the same high school as all of you; all I ever heard was “Nietzsch-ee”. So…bleh. He’s not here to correct me, and he has yet to pay for his crimes, so…”Nietzsch-ee.” Nietzsche was born in Röcken, Germany in 1844.
He was the son of a Lutheran pastor, and he was a super influential thinker, mostly known today for being the reason that that film major you dated sophomore year of university turned into a douchebag for a whole semester.
Also, the nazis got real hype on his work, which, he was mostly senile by that point, but it wasn’t exactly a stretch. It doesn’t take a genius to make the leap from “uberman” to “eugenics”, okay? It’s…it’s not even a leap. It’s not even a step.
It’s an elevator–a very, very packed elevator where everyone walks out smelling like shit. Anyway, Nietzsche–some of Nietzsche’s other notable contributions include the idea that man must accept itself as the part of the material world, physical world, classism, and also that time that he murdered God with gay science.
“The Gay Science” was published in 1882 and is severely lacking in homosexual overtones, if I do say so myself. The Homosexual Chemistry gets the most credit for popularizing Nietzsche’s murder of God because of this, like, sick ass quote, right? It’s good. It’s a good phrase. It’s a good one.
If you really want to know more about, like, where the ideas come from and, like, why that’s an important statement–because that was not, like, the thesis, right? “God is dead” is not, like, the end; that’s not his big proclamation–I would say you should read “Thus Spake Zarathustra” or “Zarath-uh-stra”? I don’t know.
It’s basically where this man, like, achieves enlightenment and, like, comes out of a cave, and, but kind of like Cassandra, sort of struggles to get anyone to believe him. He goes off for a couple of chapters about how humanity is just, like, a bridge between
Animals and the uberman/mensch/overman/superman–it’s a translation thing–but also, like… Then it goes into a whole, like, “faith is for the weak; we should just tough it out and be smarter like me; climb the metaphorical mountain, and you can be freed from the pain of regular life and prejudices and moral values”.
Then, he shits on Christianity for a little while, goes back into the cave, and starts over. Don’t fight me on that. He was all about being the “higher people”. He compares himself to Beethoven or something at one point! Nietzsche was kind of a dick. I shouldn’t put that in there.
I can’t just call Nietzsche a dick. Eh…he’s kind of a dick. And he’s writing all of this during the Enlightenment period, so he’s got–like, all these people are really already questioning the very Christian foundations that many societies had been built on. Science is advancing. It’s the tail end of the Industrial Revolution, right?
Things have changed; the world is different, and Nietzsche believes that God does not serve us anymore. The belief in God no longer serves us. So, when Jocelyn Wheatboy’s philosophy professor comes into class that day and says that it’s a metaphor, he’s mostly right.
Nietzsche never thought God existed in the first place–which is confusing because to say God is dead clearly implies that God must have once been alive, but Nietzsche did not think that God was alive. Nietzsche thought there was no God ever; he was not into it.
And there’s this misconception, I think, with the “God’s Not Dead” films that, because they are bad, they do not understand what they are talking about. Because they are not well made and they are unrealistic to a secular audience, that they must be using concepts and terminology that they just–they just don’t get.
I do not think that that’s the case–not only because I think that that’s a weak argument, but also because Professor Ratballs does not come in and require his students to write down the phrase “Nietzsche was right.” He doesn’t ask them to write down, like, “All hail Nietzsche.”
He asks them to write down “God is dead” because Nietzsche wrote down that phrase and made that statement famous. And because that is the quote that the film is referring to, people assume that that is the version of the phrase in which the film would like to engage. Maybe? Sure? We don’t know.
If you’ve learned anything from the two videos that I have made, you should know that we’re not here to take things at face value. We are here to always go one step too far–to go down the road less traveled by until we hit a cliff.
Wherever you–when you think you’re at the end, just keep going a little bit further. I want to give these films a fair shake, so we have to read beyond the quote itself and start looking at the concept of God being dead because that, my friends, is not a Nietzsche original.
Nietzsche’s use of it in The Queer Biology is most likely a reference to the philosopher Heine, who, in his work, “Religion and Philosophy in Deutschland”, cites Immanuel Kant’s first critique as “a sacrament brought to a dying God.” Okay! Sorry!
We’ll talk more about Kant in the ethics section (because there will be an ethics section), but, for now, all you need to know is that Kant basically was the guy who was like, “We can’t know anything about God. Real (question mark) (question mark) (question mark)?” and sort of just pushed that question
Out of, like, academic philosophical thought and into religious theological thought. He was just like, “Not my circus, not my monkey,” you know what I mean? Heine dug this and called Kant the “great destroyer in the realm of thought” and, his
Work (the first critique), as “the sword with which deism was slain in Germany.” What am I doing writing? Who do I think I am? “Who do you say I am?” So, then, Nietzsche comes along, fast-forward, with his, like, metaphysics of becoming and
His new enlightenment mindset, and he was like, “Yeah, God was dying; now he’s dead. We have killed him; let’s move on.” But saying that “God’s Not Dead” wants to bring Christianity back into the godless, communist academic hellscape that the world has become is also not a complicated read. It’s the plot.
Which means that we need to go even further back to the beginning because the idea of God dying and God being killed does not come from atheists; it doesn’t come from philosophers; it doesn’t come from scientists. It comes from Christians. Part three – The Christian Redemption Cycle…
…adds an extra six minutes to your laundry cycle, costs 50 cents extra, BUT it is the only one that will get those blood stains out. For those of you unfamiliar with the origin story of Christianity… *I am not here to give you a cliff notes of the bible* …here’s the cliff notes.
Jesus: son of God, but also kind of God (it’s confusing, roll with it); sent down to earth; has some hot takes; gets killed for those takes; is dead for, like, three days; rises from the grave; pops back to earth; forgives humanity for all of its debauchery.
That is the, like, literal-ish situation as it was recorded in the best, most detailed account of JC’s life: the New Testament, which is obviously biased. That’s a hot take on its own, right? [Eerie music] If you are looking for a more historically accurate understanding, “Let’s Talk Religion”
Has a really great video as part of a collaboration series about the likelihood of Jesus being, like, a real human dude. For our purposes, though, we are discussing the crucifixion itself with the presumption that it was at least a physical event that happened to a physical person, and it served
Then as an allegory for the beliefs of his followers and became the kind of bedrock story for what we now call Christianity and it’s 7.5 billion denominations. Because, whether or not we know that it happened, the idea that it happened–the story of it–is
The one thing that they all kind of-sort of-sometimes-maybe agree on: son of God dies for our sins; we know this because he comes back, and he tells us. And he has a really important theme of sacrifice; evangelizing; spreading the truth against
The grain; sitting in the darkness with nothing but your faith beside you; the ability to balance the scales of sin in the eyes of God. All of those elements and storytelling things sort of bubble out from this event. The death of Jesus Christ becomes both a physical and a psychological event.
The crucifixion of a dude who is going around with different ideas on God has a really profound effect on the psyche of the individuals who really believed that he was the S.O.G. They live on for three days thinking that God is dead. And, like, what the fuck does that mean?
They don’t know if he’s gonna rise again; they have no idea! They’re in the olden times still, like, with that Old Testament God who is super not kind all the time. The relationship with God is so different in that time; pre-C.E. humans were evidently rather disappointing in the eyes of the Lord.
At least we had the power to be disappointing, right? To disobey commands and ideas–intentionally or not. We were less like a game of Sims and more like a studio apartment full of, like, a shit-ton of puppies and kittens–seven billion puppies and kittens just running around, shitting
On the carpet, peeing on the plants, knocking things over, and occasionally killing each other. In pre-Jesus world, it was completely possible to be abandoned by God, not just on an individual level, but all of us. To be punished by God for your behavior, right?
With things like lightning strikes and famines and pimples. So, it makes sense that, while most people were kind of like, “Okay, Dave, whatever,” when Jesus said that he was the son of God, the people that did believe him were pretty
Fucking concerned when a bunch of their fellow puppies murdered him on a goddamn cross. Because, sure, he said “son,” but he didn’t mean that God got married, settled down, and Jesus was, like, off at college on Earth.
God, like, took a part of himself, put it into this woman, made a baby, and she came out, and that’s what we got. It’s a weird–it’s very weird. It’s, yeah, like, we’re not talking about immaculate conception because that is… Jesus wasn’t the immaculate conception, by the way. It was mary.
Anyway, that’s a pretty terrifying time to exist. It’s not a fun time to be a follower of Jesus. They weren’t quite called Christians at the time. So, when we talk about modern-day Christians living perpetually on Holy Saturday, we’re talking about them living psychologically in that space between Jesus’s death on Good
Friday and his resurrection on Sunday–i.e. Saturday [Applause]–constantly waiting for the second coming; for Jesus to return and validate all of their good work and forgive all of the sins that other people–I mean “they”–have been doing. Only, Jesus cannot rise again if he is not killed in the first place, and he didn’t exactly
Die a second time on that Sunday. So, what do you do, right? What–what do you do then, right? You go back to the beginning: eternal recurrence. Start spreading the word. Only, you can’t spread the word to people who already believe, so you need to find people
Who don’t believe–people for whom (wait for it)… God is dead. If I had a mic, I’d drop it. First episode of “Midnight Mass” includes one of my three favorite scenes in the whole series. It’s so good I googled “mass times” after it.
It takes place after mass, right outside of St. Patrick’s church while everyone is introducing themselves to their hot new priest, Father Paul, because he just gave this, like, sick ass sermon. “The crockpot…” So, Riley had been dragged to church by his family but did not go up to take communion.
Which is accurate; you’re really, like, not supposed to take communion if you haven’t been to confession and you’re not, like, practicing. It’s just–it’s rude. When I go to church, I don’t take communion. And you do get some looks. People notice; it’s very obvious when you don’t go.
So, Father Paul notices this, and he’s like, “Yo, saw you didn’t take communion,” and, instead of, like, shitting on Paul’s god for five minutes, Riley just says that he’s just not, like, really in a state of grace at the moment.
He’s trying to be nice about it; he’s trying to, like, let him off the hook. He’s like, “I’m just not feeling it.” And Father Paul looks at him and just says… “Uh, turns out I’m not much use to people who are in a state of grace.”
Such a perfect moment, and it’s right off the bat in episode one. It’s one of the reasons that this show immediately comes off as palatable to religious-wary folks and non-religious folks and probably even religious and probably even Catholics.
I have not actually asked any Catholics, but I cannot imagine that they’re that mad about it. It’s not that bad! And, like, I’m half Catholic; we never shy away from drama. We put children in, like, wedding garb and princess dresses to eat some crackers for the first time.
There’s a reason that they still wear those fucking robes and drink out of these, like, massive goblets, right? Like, it’s not necessary. We just like it. Catholics get a bad rep for being boring because, like, it’s true, but, also, we all like a little bit of sparkle.
Don’t let any of them tell you they don’t. So, this scene exemplifies the pulsing undertone of the capital-C Christian redemption arc. Riley had been this devout altar boy, like, practicing Catholic (he prays when we first-first-first meet him) who has been in a terrible accident, experienced trauma, and has been left with
Just, like, grief and doubt and self-hatred; he’s lost his way; he’s living alone on Holy Saturday; feels abandoned by God. He’s in this place where God is dead, surrounded by believers–like, concerned loved ones pressuring him to do things like go to church to make communion, to find faith because they think
It will fix him or because they think that it will look better from the outside if he does all of these things. Either way, all of these people just trying to shove him into the arms of a dead God as
Soon as possible, and it’s Father Paul, the priest, who just sort of shrugs, and is like, that’s kind of the point. He’s like, “Yeah, it’s fine.” He’s like, “You don’t have–like, that’s why we’re here.” He’s like, “That’s the whole damn reason.”
This stranger–on his first day at a new church, being love-bombed by, like, a desperate people trying to prove their devotion like precocious middle children who don’t feel seen by their parents–gives Riley an olive branch that we didn’t know we wanted him to have. And, suddenly, things change; because, suddenly, we trust Paul.
We maybe kind of want Riley to take this journey back to God, right? Because we want all of our protagonists to be happy and achieve some kind of security and safety and overcome their traumas and their shame.
And, at this moment, like, that’s being presented to us in the form of Catholicism, of Christianity, as this pastor coming into town like Jesus himself trying to make things better. In contrast to that setup, protagonists in “God’s Not Dead” films are rarely non-believers.
And they are technically ensemble casts, but the central characters in these films are typically not seeking any kind of salvation–religious or not. Usually, they are the ones doling it out. Josh Weedleboro is not presented as having lost faith and looking to re-enter, like, communion with God.
In fact, he is presented and remains one of the most steadfast, firm-believing Christians in the whole series throughout all of the films. He’s in, like, all of them, and he just never loses that. “Do you have a Bible?” “Yeah.”
Time and time again, he insists that he has to do this for God, sacrificed be damned. He loses sleep; his grades slip; his girlfriend breaks up with him, and he might have to go to the Newsboys alone. “My mother was so right about you.” But he stays devoted.
Because the emphasis in that version of the redemption arc is not on the lost and the fallen, who exist mostly as prizes, really, like adding up one by one like points at the end of a video game at the end of every film.
The emphasis is on the stalwart belief of these Christians who exist psychologically beyond the resurrection in a world where Jesus has already returned and given salvation to his followers. They are high on that forgiveness and proof of God. [Music] “When I, in awesome wonder, consider all…”
So, we have the characters in “God’s Not Dead” functioning in, like, a Jesus-like role, and, then, we have the characters in “Midnight Mass” pretty much functioning as, like, the apostles. Even Father Paul. All of its protagonists are psychologically in the place of the apostles either pre-crucifixion or between the crucifixion and the resurrection.
They’re all, like, wandering aimlessly, sort of searching for God. This is a very good reflection of Catholicism versus Evangelical Christianity that we see in the American South and what is presented in “God’s Not Dead.” Catholicism is all about that guilt with a capital-G. It’s about repenting your way back to heaven.
We’re still making up for the sins of Eve. We’re still guilty. Your baby is born guilty; that is why you baptize that shit. It’s just the way that it is. Whereas, you know, American sort of Evangelical Christianity as we know it in these films
Is presented with its strong focus on saving–on being saved. It’s got its roots in Protestantism. And the importance of giving your life to God and, like, verbally and physically acknowledging Jesus as your savior, being given salvation through the power of that faith and that belief alone,
Is very much reflected in the way that these two pieces of media approach the redemption cycle. Either way, the death of Mr. Jesus Christ of Nazareth is a core component of Christianity at its very base–at its very, the very bottom of its soul, it’s there.
And that story of sacrifice and martyrdom and redemption and fighting for your beliefs–all of these elements in this story are still found in the modern storytelling context that we know, like the hero’s journey and things like that, right? There’s, like, “leaving home”, “call to action”, “moment of doubt”; like, all of those can
Be sort of found in this redemption cycle as well as in other biblical tales. It’s why films like “Silence” and “Noah” are able to captivate audiences both religious and non-religious alike. It’s why “Left Behind” exists; it’s why Pureflix was able to make four of these films in the first place.
There are so many ways to tell this kind of story–to talk about redemption and forgiveness and faith. And all of them start with the death of God. Part four: God death – Causes, symptoms, treatment Episode one of “Midnight Mass”, we open on a flashback.
Red and blue lights; glass on the ground; Nickelback in the background; it’s nighttime, the scene of an accident; and we pan to our first protagonist, Riley, where he sits on the side of the road, all banged up, praying the “Our Father”.
For those of you who don’t know, the “Our Father” is basically the “Party in the USA” of Catholic prayers. It is the Billboard top 100 25 weeks in a row: stone-cold classic. It’s “Bohemian Rhapsody”; it does everything you need it to do; everyone knows it; no one forgets it. It’s *french kiss*, right?
It’s just iconic. And it’s definitely the only one I remember. “Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name; Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us;
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Amen.” Put a bit too much feeling in that. Sorry. So, Riley’s on this curb; he’s praying; he’s obviously horrified by the situation; scared out of his mind; not at all injured in this car accident; spends four years in prison;
Reads all the books, and comes to the conclusion that there is no God. There can’t be. And, therefore…atheist. On the other side of the void, in “God’s Not Dead”, our prominent long-time atheist, Professor Rodelson, is being a menace.
“But know this: if you truly feel the need to continue with this charade, I will make it my personal mission to destroy any hope of a law degree in your future.” “Know thyself, darling. Know thyself. Which I suggest means knowing your own limitations.”
We don’t get any kind of fun, like, flashback sequence for him. Instead, we just find out later that, long before Henry David Adam Rattlebomb was starting pissing contests with 19-year-olds instead of doing his job, he was a believer. And, as a child, he was, like, super gung-ho on God.
Then, his mom got sick, and he, like Riley, prayed to the Lord to save her. She was not saved, and, therefore, he reasons “No God”, thus…atheist. So, both of these films have come to the conclusion that a common cause of God-death for the individual
Is “Bad things happening to good people and prayers unanswered”–which is a fair conclusion given that philosophers and theologians and just general humans have been losing their minds over this forever. Fyodor Dostoevsky explores this and like 57 other concepts in his 1880 novel, “The Brothers Karamazov”.
Bet you thought I forgot that I mentioned 19th-century Russian literature, didn’t you? Nope, not even a little bit. We’re just getting started, but I didn’t want to scare you off. Because this book is way too long to summarize, but the gist of it is Mr. Karamazov was a
Shitty dad; he’s got three sons who pretty much get raised by different people. Alyosha ends up being, like, super religious. Ivan is a smart-ass philosopher; Dmitri is a soldier-turned-criminal-turned-like, kind of decent-dude. There is an inheritance; there’s some murder; a lot of asides; a lot of dialogues; and a lot of quips.
It’s really great; you don’t need to have read it in order to understand what I will be talking about when I reference it; trust me, Josh didn’t. But I love it. I love Dostoevsky; “Crime and Punishment” is one of my favorite novels. I think that his writing is just magical; it’s so good.
What you do need to know is that, during one of the many long dialogues between the brothers, godly man Alyosha is listening to diet Kierkegaard Ivan express his struggle to square the suffering of children with the existence of God. So, why should they serve as fertilizer for someone’s future harmony, right?
That is what Ivan says. In this world where suffering is often seen as a punishment by God for sin, how can innocent children who have not sinned be allowed to suffer and, on that note, why should they embrace a Lord that allows them to suffer, right?
His Euclidean ideal justice system that relies so heavily on acts of evil being punished directly (just as acts of good are rewarded directly) clashes with this idea of a benevolent, all-forgiving god who could return at any moment, empty out hell, and release all humanity from sin.
Ivan’s rejection of God differs slightly from Riley or Radisson’s in that Ivan is less concerned with the existence of God and more concerned with the value of God. He basically tells Alyosha, “If God exists–if THAT God exists that’s allowing child abusers
And monsters to walk free, and that is the world we live in? No, thank you. I politely would like to return my ticket,” right? That’s what he says. So, Ivan is really on the struggle bus here, because Alyosha is not doing him any favors because it’s Dostoyevsky.
And Dostoyevsky is a Christian whose middle name is “devil’s advocate”, and he was in, like, a shitstorm of grief when he wrote this–on top of just, like, a very long and painful life. And, so, basically, Ivan just ends up sort of exhausted by Alyosha every time they have a conversation.
“Today is critical for us, and I am finished. Complete honesty. How does it make you feel?!” So, he descends into full-blown madness over this (which I get–family triggers all of us), but, before any of that, he just kind of concedes to the argument, right?
He’s just kind of like, “Fine, it’s not God that I don’t accept; it’s the world that he created.” And that’s, like, enough to settle that chapter and move on. Now, Jasper Wedone tries to take a page out of this book and, basically, in his third
Argument with Professor Radisson, just starts, like, rattling Dostoevsky off on him and morality and quotes and just gets into a screaming match with Professor Raddison that cultivates in this moment: “It’s a very simple question, Professor. Why do you hate God?” “Because he took everything away from me!”
Plot twist: he was never really an atheist; he was just sad. And, luckily, when he gets hit by a car 14 minutes later, Reverend Dave just happens to be right there just in time for him to accept Jesus into his heart with his dying breath, thus saving him from eterminal damnation. Whew.
In a piece published by the University of Pennsylvania press, Eric Von Der Luft describes a key difference between the death of God from a Christian perspective and from a Nietzschean perspective, in that Christian’s the loss of God is something that happens by accident;
It stems out of a lack of faith; of spiritual blindness, right? The belief in God for the individual is killed by the oppressor, who simply does not know the truth. And, for Nietzsche, it is an act of defiance in the face of near-constant tragedy and turmoil.
It is not something that happens to humans but something that humans do. WE have killed him. Humans have deliberately done away with that which is no longer beneficial to our progress. Nietzsche was kind of obsessed with his own little idea of progress–not progress, like,
As we would see it in 2021, where people become more equal and understanding and respectful, but more of a spiritual evolution for himself. A metaphysics of becoming rather than being. Searching into yourself and searching for the self and understanding yourself and your connection to the world was of the utmost importance.
He wanted humans to be in a perpetual motion; constantly changing and becoming our sort of best, ideal versions of ourselves–like, the most awake, the most enlightened, the most perfect. Are you seeing why the nazis got so hype on this?
Anything that sort of hinders or interrupts that forward motion (like the idea of a perfect God who is infinitely better than man) has got to go. For Nietzsche, believing in God is like chaining your wrist to a block of cement and throwing
The key into an incinerator; a form of self-imprisonment, like a castration of the soul. Humanity has done and needs to continue to assert its free will and refuse to believe in the great man in the sky, therefore killing his presence in the collective consciousness and allowing us to become… superheroes.
And that is how Riley went about it. When confronted with the cognitive dissonance of bad things happening to good people, he reads all the books and comes to the conclusion that there is no God and just does away with that which is no longer beneficial to him.
Was he doing this with the intention of becoming the superman? No. But… Irony is gonna iron. Riley’s atheism is a choice; it is the killing of God in a deliberate and permanent fashion. He does not ever voluntarily take the sacrament throughout the show.
He does not return back into the covenant of the Lord. It is an evolutionary step in his psychology, arrived at following years of research and (not unlike Ivan) intellectual reasoning. “A lot of time to read in there, and I read it all: Torah, Quran, Talmud, Dao De Jing.
Came out of that an atheist.” Radisson’s atheism is a product of a cruel world; it is something that happened to him that caused him immense pain and suffering always and, most importantly, (like Ivan’s) is temporary. And, so, despite being set up for what could be a typical Christian redemption arc–Riley
Returning to the faith, the prodigal son both physically and spiritually—his story ends with him still outside of the covenant of the Lord–technically speaking, if we’re taking free will into account, which…we’ll get to. “Free–” “Free will. That’s the ball game, wasn’t it? That’s the whole thing.” When Riley killed God, it worked.
When Radisson killed God, he came back. And, so, there’s this, like, recurring theme in “God’s Not Dead’s” universe where, if a character refuses God, their life is… *Sobbing* …like shit with a capital-S. Bad things happen to them. They get cancer. Their moms die. They burn down churches and kill people.
Last one was an accident, but still–point still stands. These characters are consistently punished until they are either putting their faith in God or they’re just abandoned to wallow in their misery forever. *More Sobbing* The only solution to their pain and troubles…is Jesus. Part 5: [Music] “Why should I die?”
In order for Riley to stay out of jail, he has to do these weekly AA meetings; but there are only, like, four people on Crockett Island, and none of them are ready to admit their powerlessness to the blood of Christ just yet, so he is forced to go all the way to
The mainland every week so he can get his little paper signed by the dude for probation. This is a bummer because there are only two boats: one that comes to the island and one that leaves every day–that’s all you get.
So, if he misses that first boat and he misses this appointment he’s capital-F fucked, right? So, Father Paul is like, “Hey, I will start a chapter here so I can sign your paper, and you don’t have to go all the way to the mainland anymore.” And Riley’s like, “Sick!
That makes my life a lot easier. Let’s do it.” And this sets up a series of dialogues that happen between these two characters–these long, drawn-out scenes of conversations between Riley and Father Paul in this empty rec center right next to the church.
This feels a lot like the scenes that we get between various characters in “The Brothers Karamazov”, where you have two people with drastically differing opinions on a subject just playing, like, intellectual tennis just back and forth, back and forth, ripping open
Cans of worms one after another and letting them crawl all over each other like that was the point the whole time; pushing and pulling for answers and completely ignoring the nagging feeling in the back of your head that everything is meaningless and there is no truth because
We are forever trapped within our own personal perception of the world no matter how much talking we do. We’ll never truly understand if the color that I say is red and you say is red is actually the same color! Our stupid, weak little puny retinas could be interpreting entirely different sensations
In our brains, and we would have no idea because, technically, the same thing that we saw is also the same thing that we said, but it’s different and we don’t know. So, these long back-and-forths in “Midnight Mass” echo a lot of the discussions from “Brothers Karamazov”
Almost beat-for-beat, with Riley initially playing the part of Ivan or even, like, Nietzsche himself, when Father Paul says to him to say whatever he wants about Christianity. “…just not want to offend you.” “That’s tough to do. And AA is not about protecting people’s feelings, is it? It’s about recovery.”
Father Paul’s not doing this to convert Riley. Father Paul is doing this because he thinks it’s what he was sent back to Crockett Island to do, which is help people. So, when Riley makes the argument that Radisson makes and that Ivan makes, and he says,
“Bad things happening to good people…what’s up?” and Father Paul gives him the basic, like, “Who knows what the big man’s plan is; it’s got to be a good one,” Riley doesn’t hold back. He says “God works in mysterious ways” is just something people say as an excuse not to hold themselves accountable.
And Father Paul says this: “Look, there’s nothing in the scripture or in the world, for that matter, that suggests God negates personal accountability.” And, so, it’s this kind of dance around the subject of “God real (question mark)?” Because Father Paul very clearly believes in God and Riley very clearly does not, and
They’re trying to have this discussion about the structures and the way that people use religion in their lives because that’s something that they’ve both experienced. “We can all just stand by and watch Lisa Scarborough wheel herself around town. We can watch Joe Collie slowly drink himself to death.
We can watch so many people just slip into these bottomless pits of awful, and we can stand it. We can tolerate it because we can say things like, ‘God works in mysterious ways’.” So, Riley’s talking about the way that people use God, and Father Paul is kind of talking
About the way that God uses people. “God can take that pain and turn it into something good–something with purpose. Suffering can be a gift; that just depends on us.” And this is another one of those reasons that it’s so palatable, I think, to religious and
Non-religious people to watch “Midnight Mass”, because it takes these discussions very seriously. And it’s one of the reasons that Christians love Dostoyevsky and so do non-Christians, right? It’s not taking a side; it’s opening the discussion. And you get a sort of similar dynamic in the second “God’s Not Dead” movie, where Sabrina
The teenage witch is having, like, a dangerously close to flirtatious discussion with her non-religious lawyer when he asks her about why she became Christian. So, she tells this sort of vague story about her being in some kind of a bad place without
Any details and coming across a church with a sign that said “Who do you say I am?” And that scene differs greatly in depth and length because it’s an ensemble film; it’s not an eight-episode miniseries. They have a lot of story lines to get through, and, also, it’s important to remember that
Their target audience is Christians; so, the fact that there isn’t much time spent on or giving details about Grace’s pre-Christianity backstory makes a lot of sense and is very in line with Evangelical Christianity in the American South and, like, the American West. [Music] “And I was struggling with a lot of things.”
Evangelicals are born again when you accept Jesus into your soul; into your heart; when you re-baptize as an adult. Who you were before doesn’t matter. Who you are now is what’s important. You can accept God into your heart with your dying breath, and that’s enough.
Which, for the record, I do think is a very beautiful sentiment. And it works within the narrative, because Grace’s story is not about what belief in God gave her the strength to do or change; it’s the idea that simple belief was all it took.
She’s not trying to sell him on having to make all of the tough choices and do the things that she had to do after she found God; she’s trying to sell him on the feeling that believing in God gives her. “As I read it, I could hear the Lord speak to me.
So, that was the start of a journey that didn’t end until I found the answer.” But she doesn’t tell you what the answer is. “Please don’t forsake me…” When our journalist character is in remission, she finds herself in the church with Jude, where she confesses that she’s really struggling to believe.
And he actually does kind of echo the sentiment that Father Paul gives in the beginning of “Midnight Mass”, which is: that’s the point. [Music] “He delights in using us in ways we never dreamed of and giving us things that we never even knew we wanted.” The “God’s Not Dead” franchise paints this struggle to believe as not an individual struggling to achieve the state of believing but as the individual wanting so badly to believe but being bogged down by the world. It’s not that she doesn’t want to believe or she doesn’t believe, it’s that she wants
So badly to believe that the world is coming for her. “He who believes in me will live, even if he dies, and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.” *Screams* “Do you believe this? Then invite him into your heart, and make him the Lord of your life.”
The carrot that GND is dangling in front of its Holy Saturday characters is liberation from anything and everything negative. The message in the first two films is “just give Jesus the wheel, and he will drive you straight to heaven without a single surcharge. Sure, bad things happen, but they’re not your fault.
They’re not your fault as long as you believe. They’re the big, bad American education system’s fault. They’re the world’s fault. They’re the government’s fault. They’re the atheists’ fault. “What makes you so sure?” “Speed of change. Viciousness of the opposition.
The message of the gospel has us standing in the way of a lot of things that powerful people want, and our resistance to change that message because it’s not ours to change has made us a lot of enemies.” Grace isn’t about to lose her job because she started preaching during geometry class.
She’s not about to lose her job because she answered a question. She’s about to lose her job because the slimy, fire-breathing demon children of the leftist overlords are throwing chains around the Bill of Rights and shoving copies of “The Origins
Of Species” down the throats of hard-working American Christians and, God, why won’t anyone listen to Jordan Peterson?! And this sounds ridiculous. “I do think I have an unusually high regard for the value of evidence…” Because these scenarios are ridiculous. “You understand that I might die.” “I’m sorry about that.”
Sabrina would never have been fired or given any sort of discipline for answering a question about the story of Jesus in the Bible whilst they are talking about martyrs and influential thinkers. A philosophy professor would never force his students to sign a paper or fail.
Social workers will not shut down your homeschooling co-op because you taught your kids about Noah’s ark. These are not things that happen in the real world; but they ARE things that happen in the Bible. Jesus? Obviously literally killed for hanging out and doing miracles.
Pretty sure John the Baptist gets, like, imprisoned and then beheaded for calling out the king on his BS. Jacob ends up in prison. So many people go to jail; so many people end up in prison for believing in God. People get stoned, right? The seas run red with blood.
Like, this is the world of the bible. “Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer. I tell you, the devil will put some of you in prison to test you. You will suffer persecution for 10 days.
Be faithful–even to the point of death–and I will give you life as your victor’s crown.” *Screaming* Religious horror is about taking the more abstract elements of religion and legitimizing them as fact within a given story. When we look at the “God’s Not Dead” films as an exploration of the traditional Christian
Redemption cycle, placing its Christian characters in the place of Jesus the prophet and atheist characters as disciples on Holy Saturday, then what we have is the American education system and, later, the government serving as the infamous persecutors as stand-ins for
The devil himself, coming down with rage and fire and constant temptation that must be overcome somehow. “If we stand by and do nothing, the pressure that we’re feeling today is going to mean persecution tomorrow.” “What makes you so sure?” Imagine that you don’t read fantasy.
You don’t grow up reading “Harry Potter”; you don’t grow up reading “The Hunger Games”; you don’t get to read the Percy Jackson books or things like this; you don’t watch these kinds of films; you don’t watch a lot of TV; everything is very curated. What you do read is the Bible.
What you do do is go to Bible study three times a week, and what you grow up to do is make films. This is the kind of film you would want to see; like, this is reality. [Music] [Applause]
Belief in God is the only thing standing between suffering and not suffering in this world. Questions like, “Who will wipe the blood off us?” or “All things are lawful, then?” aren’t questions that need answers in the face of a dead God; they’re experiences of suffering.
Not knowing what is right and what is wrong, being lost and confused, is a form of suffering in these films–a product of God’s death for the individual. And, by extension, any and all moments where one does not have faith in a Christian God are experienced as moments of suffering. “You’re beautiful…” [Music]
“…I wish you didn’t have to do that.” So…so, these movies are racist. There’s no way to get around that; we’re not sugar coating it. I’m giving them a fair shake but not there. They’re racist in addition to also being specifically very, very, very anti-muslim.
Ayisha is our character who is stereotyped as being, like, forced to cover up with a hijab and is presented as like– I’m sorry, I think–so, this is the point–this is the point in the script–I just realized
This is the point in the script where I started referring to people for whom God is dead as “deadlings”…? So, just henceforth…deadlings? So, Ayisha is stereotyped as being forced to cover up with her hijab and, like, presented as a deadling.
God is dead for her, and she is experiencing all of the horrible suffering as a direct result of her not being raised in a Christian household. She is kicked out of her house, not because her father is abusive and making a bad choice,
But because he doesn’t believe in Jesus Christ as the Lord and savior. Apart from the blatant misunderstanding and sheer lack of respect for Islamic culture and practices like hijab-wearing, the film also goes out of its way to make it very clear
That just believing in God is not enough; it has to be a specifically Christian God–their Christian God. “No, Papa(?), Jesus is my Lord and savior, and he died to save me from my sin.” And, now, we have a similar-ish story in “Midnight Mass” after the miracles start happening on
Crockett Island, where Sheriff Hassan’s son, Ali, wants to go to church and see what it’s all about because he’s 15 and his best friend’s girlfriend just started walking out of her wheelchair, right? Fuckin’, I would go too. And the sheriff is not stoked about it.
It’s actually really, really, really difficult for him that this is happening, because Bev Keane is so shitty, first of all, and also he has, like, a lifetime of racism and intolerance behind him. His wife had recently passed, and he had kind of converted to Islam for her, and they raised
Their son in this, in this faith. And, so, it opens up, like, a whole bunch of wounds that his son is now questioning. “If he handed Lisa Scarborough a miracle but let a child die of a brain tumor across the way on the mainland…no. No, that’s not how it works, Ali. It’s not.”
He’s not just upset that his son might be considering Catholicism. He’s upset because he feels like he’s losing his son. But, instead of kicking his son out of the house and right into the arms of Bev Keane,
It kind of opens up this dialogue where they discuss the different ways in which one can be connected to God outside of the bounds of any specific religion. The line that sticks out to me that he specifically says is–he says, “We already have him. We already have God.”
“I will not tell my son not to look for God. Son, oh. We already have him.” “Midnight Mass” also gives the opportunity for Sheriff Hassan to actually explain a bit about Islam to a room full of Christians and Catholics, and he breaks down that Muslims
Do actually believe that Jesus was a prophet–just not the last one. And, full disclosure, I didn’t know that. I had no idea–absolutely no idea. I…like I never…I spend a lot of time thinking about Christianity and thinking about Catholicism
And its split from Judaism, and I really have sort of left the other Abrahamic religion on its own, so i feel…I felt kind of shitty, but, um, but now I know. So, I’ll look into it. Also, that scene and, like, an hour and a half or so spent on Wikipedia and Google is
Kind of all that I have to go on, so please correct me if that was wrong or I did anything incorrect there. Please feel free to leave resources or any other information in, like, comments and stuff, as I would like to be corrected, and I would not like to spread misinformation.
Speaking of misinformation, “God’s Not Dead” doesn’t leave space for that kind of an explanation or any kind of education about any other religion because it simply will not do. You simply cannot be saved by Jesus if you don’t believe in Jesus, so…
That’s their logic. I do low-key think they tried to correct this in the third film. The thing about the third one is that they tried to correct a lot that they did in the first two that people really were not happy about; and one of the things was, I think
They were trying to be more tolerant; they were trying to make it seem like they were being more tolerant, but they definitely weren’t ready to give Muslims a chance, so they were, like, just having the judge be Catholic (which is a miracle on its own).
One of the two branches between Christianity and Catholicism is that Catholicism focuses really, really heavily on guilt–I mean repentance, sorry. It’s about feeling guilty, admitting you were wrong, feeling guilty, actively repenting, feeling guilty, saying ten Hail Mary’s, feeling guilty. That’s, that’s, that’s it. That’s the whole shebang, uh, to be honest.
There’s other things? There’s other things. The idea with the ten Hail Mary’s is you confess your sins to the priest through the screen, and, then, he kind of assigns you how many of what prayer you should say to make up for it.
And, technically, it’s like…repeating this prayer is for you to believe it, right? It’s the more that you say it, the more the words can sink in and the more you’ll be able to mean it. What it is, though, is spiritual capitalism. And we’re gonna get into that later.
But it relies on repenting for your sins first in order to gain forgiveness later…maybe. You’ve done wrong, so you have to make up for that; you’re constantly trying to, like, play catch-up to make sure that you are sort of in the right balance. Have you been to church enough?
Have you given enough to the collection? Have you gone to confession? How many times do you go to confession? Like, what are the good things that you’re doing? How many prayers are you saying to make up for all of these other terrible things that you’re definitely doing? Like…breathing.
We don’t breathe without the Holy Ghost. So, that’s a core foundation of Catholicism, and that comes all the way back—allll the way back–to pre-pre-split; like, Roman Catholicism pre-schism. Schism’s a big deal. I love a schism. There’s a million and five schisms, I think, exactly.
I think it’s, like, one million and five-and-a-half schisms that Christianity has had since its inception. But hot boy summer of 1054: THE Schism. The schism is, basically, when Western Roman Catholicism split from Catholicism and what we kind of now call Eastern Orthodoxy.
That’s important because that is kind of spread over to Russia; and what do we know when we’re talking about Russia? What are we talking about with Russia? Dostoyevsky and “The Brothers Karamazov”. So, that is the version of Christianity that they’re dealing with. So, now we have three (if you’re not keeping up).
We have the, like, American Evangelical Christianity that comes kind of from Protestantism, um, and has that emphasis on saving. We have Roman Catholicism or, more so, modern, like, New England Catholicism, which is, like, a bit irish, a bit all over the place–all guilt, all day.
And we have the Eastern Orthodoxy, which, that’s Dostoyevsky’s kind of wheelhouse. Same as Nietzsche, though, he’s in the enlightenment period, so things are changing; lots of political structures are changing; things are going crazy all the time everywhere. And the form of Christianity that we see in “Brothers Karamazov” is much closer to what
We get in “Midnight Mass”, in that there is a lot of that emphasis on kind of guilt and repentance, and there’s a strongly held belief in this book that one must suffer in order to repent and be forgiven, right?
We have characters who feel a tremendous amount of shame and guilt and desire to suffer as penance for God. Joe Collie is an alcoholic; he’s a loner; he’s a deadling. A few years before the events of “Midnight Mass”, he’s out in the woods drunk, shooting
What I’m assuming were dear I guess, and accidentally shoots little Lisa Scarbrough in the back, paralyzing her from the waist down. He wasn’t exactly well-liked before, but now he’s public enemy number two. Do I need to tell you who public enemy number one is? “It’s just, you’re wearing a gold chasuble today.
Shouldn’t it be green today? We’re in ordinary time; seventh sunday of ordinary time.” Joe Collie mirrors Dmitri in a lot of ways, one of them being, you know, terrible crimes in the past; a lot of it being that people have just given up on them.
In TBK, everybody just kind of assumes that Dmitri has killed his father or will kill his father. Like, they all think that he’s gonna become his father; he’s kind of seen as just, like, a lost cause. They’re like, “He’s a scoundrel; whatever,” and it really takes people kind of believing
In him and…and fighting for him to…for him to get the opportunity to grow as a person, and he does. Joe Collie is in the same boat. Everybody’s given up on him; they don’t think he’s capable of change; they hate him for
Shooting a little girl; and they don’t think that he’s worth their time or their love; and this is a struggle for Ivan in Brothers Karamazov as well. He says, “One can love one’s neighbors in the abstract or even at a distance; but, at close quarters, it’s almost impossible.”
Which is the same thing that Riley points out in one of those first AA meetings, where he says, “Yeah, everybody’s talking about how God loves everybody and we’re all God’s children, but they let Joe Collie drink himself to death; no one wants to give Joe Collie the time of day.”
Interestingly, though, Ivan really focuses on the suffering of children and the abusers of those children; and Riley really sees the Lisa Scarborough/Joe Collie situation for exactly what it is–which is just an awful, awful situation. Admittedly, um, Ivan’s not talking about, like, an individual situation; he’s talking about kind of grand scale, but still…
Neither of them can square this, right? This “God letting terrible things happen and allowing suffering”; it’s just error 404, please check your connection and try again later. It does not compute because it’s a cognitive dissonance. What is a cognitive dissonance?
A cognitive dissonance is what happens when you have two or more thoughts or experiences or beliefs or rationales rattling around in your little goldfish brain, existing in opposition to each other. The fact that you are a goldfish is not consistent with your understanding of a goldfish.
The fact that it is raining outside is not consistent with the fact that the weatherman said it would not rain. Unicorns are not real, but also… The little wires inside of our brains are desperate for consistency; normalcy. They like when things make sense.
We like watching the wine moms slot all of their cans right into spaces along the inside of their fridge, fitting perfectly across in a line. We like watching the Tetris pieces fall right where they’re supposed to. We like watching people organize things and do their…satisfying videos is an entire genre for a reason.
We like it when things come together nicely; we like it when things make sense; we like it when movies have good endings. We don’t want to be confused; we don’t want to be scared. It scatters our little brains and makes us malleable and weak like this dental guard
That I had to buy to stop myself from stress-grinding my teeth into nothingness while I lay in the dark for eight hours, every night, desperately hoping I’ll be sucked down into the wormhole of my subconscious for just a few short hours.
Cognitive dissonance fucks with your brain; it fucks with your sense of self and your sense of reality. And this is what happens when you are told that God is good always, and, then, not-so-good things are happening on God’s watch.
In order to resolve this issue, one of the incongruent thoughts must be abandoned, thrown away, spat on, and left for dead in a mysterious alleyway. My own experience and self-image does not line up with what I know to be the experience and image of a goldfish.
Then, I am either not a goldfish or I am not myself. Which, frankly… If the weatherman says it’s not raining, but it’s clearly raining outside, either the weatherman is wrong or my perception of reality is wrong; which, frankly… Either unicorns are real or this doesn’t exist.
Riley, Professor Radisson, Ivan — all presented with the same cognitive dissonance. The solution for Ivan is to return his ticket. The solution for Riley is that God is not real. The solution for “God’s Not Dead” characters is this… “God is good.” And the solution for Father Paul is, well… [Intense music]
Part six: “What do you want, Paul?” [Music] “Excuse me?” So. Here’s how it went down. Monsignor Pruitt: super fucking old; totally losing it; whole island sends him to Israel, the holy land; as, like, a make-a-wish before you die kind of thing.
On this trip, he does die (more or less), walking alone in a desert, totally off his rocker, runs into an angel who saves his life, makes him all young and hot again, sends him back to Crockett Island, takes this angel in a Trunkit, then he goes back to the Island,
Calls himself Father Paul, and starts lying to everyone constantly. One of the lies that he tells comes up during an AA meeting with Riley, right after Lisa Scarborough has begun to walk again. Riley, in an attempt to ease the cognitive dissonance of that shit, lays it all out for
Father Paul, and he’s like, “Look, scientifically, I get it. I can explain a misdiagnosis; I can explain miraculous recovery. It happens. I get how she can physically walk again. What I don’t get is how you knew she would be able to do it.”
And what this tells us is that Riley has enough faith in Father Paul as a person to know that he would never have asked Lisa to stand if he didn’t know she could do it. And the answer Father Paul gives him is that he just knew.
And he says, “I know that’s not enough for you. I envy you. I wish I could see the world scientifically and be able to reason like that,” but he just doesn’t know. And it’s out of his hands.
But, the truth is, he knows it’s not gonna be enough for Riley because he knows it’s bullshit. Father Paul knew she could walk again because he’s been spiking the communion wine with the blood of the angel that made him young again–not because of any kind of intuition.
He didn’t have some weird feeling; he didn’t walk on a ley line, okay? He’s been deliberately trying to make everybody on this island young again because he’s got dreams he wants to relive. Father Paul Monsignor Pruitt has been lying to everyone everywhere since he got here. His name’s not even Paul!
He made it up! He named himself Paul after Paul of Damascus. You know what happens to Paul in the Bible? Paul is sent through the desert to Damascus to arrest Jesus Christ and, on the way there, God steps in and is like, “Hey, please don’t arrest me, you lunatic.
Instead, go to the city, wipe your browser history, and wait for instructions.” “Lord, what do you want me to do? Then the Lord said to him, ‘Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.'” I wasn’t kidding. And I’m not shaming Father Paul for lying.
We all have to lie sometimes. He’s got this big ass secret that he does not understand, topping off a very, very long life full of secrets and lies from before any of this madness began. All of them, all of the lies, varying degrees of commandment breaking, right?
We have some sod–I’m not gonna say sodomite, he’s not. Although, by biblical definitions…he might be a sodomite. By medieval definitions, he’s certainly a sodomite. Ask Eleanor Janega. So, he gets to the island with this trunk full of angel.
How he got it through customs, what he did with the rest of his things, God only knows; but he gets there with a lot of conviction, right? He’s confident. He knows what he’s doing. He gives this whole, like, long ass confessional sequence basically to us and to himself, I
Guess, justifying his actions, explaining everything he is doing and how it is the right thing and how he’s doing capital-G, capital-W “God’s Work”, and that is the Father Paul that is sat across from Riley when he is talking about how people treat Joe Collie and the
People on the island and how they use God’s will as justification for treating people horribly. It’s that Father Paul who says absolutely fucking not. He argues against Riley’s idea that he can’t believe in a higher power and also own his mistakes.
He tells Riley straight up that there is nothing in scripture that says God negates personal accountability. We talked about this already, I think. Oh, I do this every time. And this is pretty powerful stuff, right? It means a lot. It’s impactful.
You can tell that this is coming from a man who has made mistakes and done things that he regrets; who is still making his peace with the Lord; a man who has lived a full human life already. The thing that’s so captivating about Father Paul for people is he’s this young man who
Has the wisdom of an elder because he was; because he lived for 80, 90 some years. He was on his death bed; he didn’t remember who he was. In certain lights, this is a gift from God–to have lost to yourself, and to be able to be
Young and in a position where you’re respected, and be able to share that kind of wisdom with people is such a gift. He has the knowledge and life experience and wisdom of an old man and the confidence of
Someone finally getting a do-over; a chance to go back and fix everything; to do the things he didn’t do; say the things he didn’t say. It’s the one thing that we all want and will never get, and he has all of this. And, so, when he says this to Riley, it matters.
It’s inspiring; it inspires Riley; it inspires the kind of confidence that Riley’s gonna need to have in him to say, “I don’t know how you knew she could walk.” But he’s still a dirty liar; he tells himself and us that he’s doing all of this lying to
Protect the people of Crockett so that they are prepared for when the real miracles come; for the healings; for the words from God. He doesn’t want to upset them, and he doesn’t want to scare them before he can help them.
He wants to let Lisa run again; he wants to help people get sober; he wants to make people feel young again. But old habits die hard, and the man just can’t stop lying. And I’m not saying that he shouldn’t have lied; I’m just saying that it’s this lie that
He tells to Riley about how he knew that Lisa could walk again that is the beginning of the end. This is the first turn of the screw, where the dynamic between Riley and Father Paul begins to shift. No longer is it the steadfast intellectual reasoning of Ivan and the holy man Alyosha
Discussing the suffering of innocence and the responsibility of God. It is something different now. “I really don’t have an answer that’s gonna satisfy you. Not you.” Father Paul tells Riley that it must be nice for him to be able to explain all the miracles via science.
He envies Riley’s freedom from the belief in the transcendental because his own personal belief in the transcendental, his proof, now has consequences. It’s not just big ideas and big plans in a trunk. It’s happening; and, sure, it’s fine now. People aren’t needing their glasses; their backs don’t hurt; everything’s fine.
But, as the miracles continue, and the healing becomes more, Father Paul begins to feel more and more powerful because he is, right? In the eyes of his community, he is practically a god: completely infallible. At the same time, his dependency on the angel blood that made him young in the first place
Is wildly out of control. It’s turning into a full-blown addiction. *Hacking* And, so, another cognitive dissonance rears its ugly head, and every step that Father Paul takes to relieve that dissonance–take more angel blood, pray, try and do more good–all
Of that just leads him further and further down the rabbit hole of violence and contradiction that becomes harder and harder to square with his belief in God as he knew it, before his twilight era. By the time that he is just a priest standing in front of an alcoholic, asking him to become
A vampire, he is visibly unhinged. He is like Ivan, who, if we remember, slid so far into madness that he started having conversations with the devil himself, and he still couldn’t win. He is shaking; he is sweating; he is talking to himself; he is repeating prayers over and
Over and over again, like a shark who can’t stop for fear he’ll never start again. Father Paul has worked himself into a gordian knot of anxiety, and Riley has just been chillin’. Riley, who made a calculated nietzschean decision to reject God for his own betterment, has absolutely no difficulty with this conundrum.
In the face of absolute moral insanity; bathing in the light of the promised absence of guilt and pain; in the reign of the freedom from moral dilemma that Josh Wheaton promised his philosophy class, came with blind faith, Riley is like, “Absolutely fucking not, you psycho.” Riley is having none of it.
In “God’s Not Dead”, the act of believing, of giving yourself to God, is the gift of living in a world that is black and white; free from the consequences of regular life. No longer do you have to be tolerant of others; no longer do you have to make the choice between
Right and wrong and deciding what the best move is. God does it for you. And, if you choose wrong, well, that was just his plan in the first place. You get to try again next time; and all you have to do is believe; all you have to do is believe.
And believing is not something we can see or quantify in those films, but “Midnight Mass” makes the act of believing a physical one. You have to enter the covenant of the Lord by drinking the blood of Christ in order to receive that gift.
Jesus’s actual blood and flesh were not on the menu at the last supper, okay? It was a metaphorical idea. It was an act of “choose to drink this” and “choose to believe”. “Midnight Mass”, being religious horror, makes that real. It is real blood. You have to really choose that.
The existence of God does not negate personal responsibility, nor does your belief in God negate personal responsibility. Evidently, God itself, in an act of supernatural mercy, is the only thing that can abolish any kind of moral responsibility–in a physical act of sending the blood of something transcendent down.
The characters in “God’s Not Dead” are constantly reminding themselves that God is good; God is good always, and always God is good, over and over again. He uses all things and works in mysterious ways that we can’t see the whole picture.
If we could; if only we could see the world the way that God does, then we would understand; there would be no cause for guilt or pain or suffering or confusion. And that is what the angel gives us; it gives the people of Crockett; it gives Father Paul,
Practically on a silver platter: the ability to feel and see like God. All they have to do…is drink. “God’s Not Dead” requires faith and rewards it with proof; “Midnight Mass” offers proof and rewards action. Part 7: Easter Rising “Wait ’til Easter.
If it weren’t for that and Christmas, some people would never come at all.” *Screaming* So, Jesus kicks it. He decides to let himself be crucified to save humanity, comes back, restores faith, fucks off. Time goes on, societies advance, kingdoms and empires rise and fall and scatter, and
There is no second coming in sight. Centuries passed. Christianity starts creeping its little claws all over every continent, digging its way into the laws and the royal courts and all of that jazz, and still no sign of Jesus. So, we start to get philosophers and metaphysicians working tirelessly to provide some kind of
Evidence that supports the existence of God. Neoplatonism emphasizes the transcendence of God; Descartes was like, “God is perfect, and a perfect thing can’t not exist.” That seemed to suffice for a while? But people keep thinking, and people keep thinking about other things, and people want to have other kind of conversations.
So, as long as you weren’t publishing blasphemy, and you sort of tack on a footnote about God being the perfect creator of all things, the church would, like, more or less leave you alone and let you write about all the trapezoids you want.
So, that kind of covers the general population’s belief in God, right? But what is true of the general public is not always true of the individual, and three days is a long time. When the three days are a psychological, metaphorical experience, three days can start to feel like
A lifetime; and a lifetime is just about long enough for some of that capital-D Doubt to sink in. And this remains true for forever. People’s belief in God diminishes the further and further away we get from the resurrection.
And that is because, in order for God to have any personal meaning for the individual, he must bring himself down to the individual’s level. In order to surpass that “the court says you have to believe in God, so you say you believe
In God” barrier, in order to have real meaning for a person’s life, he has to send part of himself down to earth. He has to get on our level. He sends part of himself down to earth in this human form as, like, a gift to humanity
So he can teach us some shit; but the problem is that, like, Jesus can’t just, like, move to Miami and, like, live out the rest of his life selling cars and be, like, “Alright,” and die at like 97.
Because, if he did do that, he’d just be some dude who’s going around saying that he’s God, and when was the last time that that worked out well for literally anyone involved? Which brings us back to the thesis point: he has to die.
But, if he dies, then that means that God can be killed, and that makes God a lot less godly, you know what I mean? Plus, you’ve got like a shitton of people just living their lives thinking that God has died and abandoned them. No bueno.
Not to mention that he’s got shit to do upstate, so he can’t just stay on Earth forever. He can’t just die and float on up to the heavens like every other good Christian. Also, he’s got all these apostles hanging out, trying to write a book, and what kind
Of a friend would he be if he just left them with that kind of an ending? He’s all-knowing. He knows what happens when Game of Thrones ends. He wouldn’t do that. Which brings us to the next necessary element of the Christian redemption cycle.
The death of God is the first; God has to die. Second part is that three days, those three days of waiting; he’s got to be dead for somebody somewhere or Christianity doesn’t work. And the next necessary point on the Christian redemption cycle is this: the supernatural proof. He’s got to go back.
“We have to go back, Kate.” Big man gets nailed to the cross, dies, takes a quick detour into hell, frees all the sinners (except for Solomon; fuck Solomon), comes back to Earth, takes a bow, forgives humanity for all of its sins, then zip-zap-zops back up to Daddy.
Which is some next level proof-of-the-divine shit, right? This is in line with Red Seas parting; this is bushes burning; this is angels flying down in a desert to tell you what to do. The resurrection serves as that necessary supernatural element that will sustain faith for a very long time.
The resurrection will sustain people for a long time; and Descartes will come in, and he will sustain people for a long time. But man cannot live on metaphysics alone, and that “son of God” candle only burns so bright for so long.
Eventually, say 2000 years later, in this post-Easter Sunday world where God can be killed not physically but spiritually for the individual, it’s a lot harder to believe. And it becomes increasingly difficult to carry out this redemption cycle without that supernatural element.
The “God’s Not Dead” films really struggle with this because they place their characters in the position of Jesus, but they’re not really able to fully accomplish that true, “I am God, believe in me” vibe, right? Like, no one can do it like Jesus can.
As Eric Von Der Luft says in his essay, “The bridge between infinite immortality and finite mortality must be made by the immortal making itself mortal, lowering itself to humanity’s level.” Which means… Vampires. We’re talking about vampires. Part eight: the morality of eating people.
Father Paul/Monsignor Pruitt: old, wrinkly, in a desert, gets Benjamin Buttoned by Dobby on steroids, comes back to Crockett Island and starts drugging everybody with Dobby’s blood. We learned all of this, remember? I just talked about it. Father Paul gave that confession to himself because he felt really shitty about being
A damn liar, which I get because I’m also a damn liar sometimes, and it’s one of the ten commandments, but, in his defense, it is the ninth one; and anyone who’s ever read a Buzzfeed listicle knows nobody reads past number six.
He feels bad, but he does it anyway because he’s got big miracles on the horizon. Lisa walks again; the woman that he had an affair with 40 years ago and had a secret love child with: she’s young and hot again; Erin’s unborn child mysteriously disappears
From her womb completely as if it was never there. Okay, maybe they’re not all great changes. So, like, WE know that they’re not all great changes, but Father Paul does not. Father Paul thinks he is doing the Lord’s work, and he is riding that train as far as it can go.
That’s all he’s ever wanted. He’s a priest. That’s that’s that’s the gi–that’s the gig. That’s the gig. He swore to never have sex all of his life because he wanted to serve the Lord. Mmm…he failed the first time around, but this time…this time’s different. He feels like Moses.
He’s got an angel commanding him to save people, and it’s all fun and games until he gets addicted to the angel blood, and kicks it–only to come back again…full Dracula. *Screams* “Monsignor, ah, thank God.” For the record: Father Paul/Monsignor Pruitt has died twice. *Laughs* *Gunshot* …comes back full Dracula, immediately murders Joe Collie.
Joe Collie, who was just there for some guidance because he’s trying to get sober, and he was gonna buy a drink, but he didn’t, and he came to Father Paul instead, and Father Paul ate his brains. Michael Flanagan morally fattened Joe Collie up like a pig for slaughter, and I will never
Forgive him for it. So, he’s eating Joe Collie’s brains out by the skull, and who should walk in but Bev Keane: top-tier Christian; Queen of God’s work. It’s all over, right? It’s only downhill from here. The number one Bible follower has just walked in on you eating someone; it’s got to be over,
Right? Wrong. Bev Keane has been waiting for this moment her entire life. “Okay…okay.” So, there’s this moment where we have these two devout religious characters who have already interacted with what they believe to be proof of the divine. Bev is already aware that Father Paul has been made young again.
They have the opportunity to take this as a command. Father Paul’s body, the body that was resurrected (a la JC himself) is demanding the blood of Joe Collie to survive. It is physically craving and calling him to, well…
At the same time, in a year far, far away (Genesis 20:22), God rolls up to Abraham and is like, “Hey, so you know that kid you have? That kid that you love so much? That miracle baby that I gave you and your wife after you were childless for so long?
You know that kid?” and Abraham’s like, “Yeah, Isaac. Super into dinosaurs; really good at darts; love him; he’s the best,” and God’s like, “Yeah, I know, he’s great. So, here’s what we’re gonna do: we’re gonna take him…and some wood…maybe a knife…we’re
Gonna take a little road trip, top of that mountain over there you’re gonna…*gestures*…burning offering for me, and we’re gonna call it a day. Right? Got it? Solid. Awesome. Seeya in three days. And Abraham does this.
Now, if you don’t know the story, God swoops in a la ram ex machina and, like, gives him a sheep to slaughter instead at the last possible moment. And, in religious context, I have been informed that this story is about faith because Abraham
Is like, “I told you, Isaac, he would never make me kill you,” and everything is just hunky-dory. And I cannot tell you how much I do not understand that read. I hate this story; I am obsessed with it; I think it is the best story in the Bible;
I think about it all the time; I am always thinking about this. I remember being in CCD in, like, second or third grade and being taught this story and just being like, “What the fuck are you guys talking about?”
It’s horrifying; it’s terrible; it is gut-wrenching; I feel sick every time I think about it. It wasn’t until two years ago (two years ago!) when someone laid it all out for me in excruciating detail over the course of like two hours that I finally began to kind of understand what
It is that apparently everyone else sees in the story, which is that the message in the story is not “You must be willing to kill your kid for God,” it is, “God would never make you kill your kid.”
It’s like, I always thought it was a reward; I always thought that God only sent that ram because Abraham was like this close to doing it, and he was like, “Solid. He would really kill his kid for me.
I’ll…I’ll let him have his kid as a prize,” not that you should have faith that God always has another plan. The thing that people say about it is, “You can never see what God is leading up the other
Side of the mountain,” like, a ram was coming up the other side of the mountain the whole time, you just didn’t know it. So, you have to have faith in God. I…I just really…I just thought it was a God-fearing story.
I swear to God, I always thought it was just the absolute wrath of God, who would make you kill your own kid, and, even knowing this now, I still don’t really see it. I get it on, like, a cognitive level, but I still read this story as about a man who
Has to spend three days with his beloved son just walking him to the slaughter; and what, in God’s name, Isaac must have been thinking; and how do you get past that? How do you…how do you look your father in the eye when that ram comes down?
How do you go to breakfast every morning after that? How do you look your kid in the eye after you were willing to murder him? Like, how do you… I feel like even understanding that story requires a level of faith that I just don’t have and couldn’t have.
Um, it’s probably why I couldn’t make my confirmation. And there are other reads of this story, I’m sure; for me, I find it more interesting from that angle, but that’s just why it’s such a good story; that’s why it’s the best one; it’s so good. In fact, everybody loves it.
Even moral philosophy professors. Bet you didn’t think that had a point, did it? Abraham’s near sacrifice of his son, Isaac, has long been a topic of debate amongst philosophers, amongst the Kierkegaards of the world. Because, like, what do you do when God commands you to do bad things?
If you couldn’t tell, this is the ethics section. “For Christians, the fixed point of morality, what constitutes right and wrong, is a straight line that leads directly back to God.” “Oh, so you’re saying that we need a god to be moral? That a moral atheist is an impossibility?”
“No, but, with no God, there’s no real reason to be moral. I mean, there’s not even a standard of what moral behavior is.” We’re in the ethics section, which means we have to lay some ground rules. For this section, we are presupposing the following two premises: 1. Killing people is bad.
2. Everyone is aware that killing people is bad. These are our assumed norms for this topic, because, just as there is a cognitive dissonance with God being all-powerful and also not stopping bad things, there is a cognitive dissonance
When you’re being commanded to do something evil by a good God, especially when we are working within a framework where most of the moral decision-making is based in Christianity. So, if we have a perfect cartesian God, then that God would not command something evil. He COULD not command something truly evil.
So, any command that is being given must, therefore, be good. Abraham killing his son cannot be truly evil. That is way out number one; justification for doing the thing. That is what Bev Keane does, and she runs with it straight off the tracks, right into the sunrise.
But, like, what if you’re not Bev Keane? Because we can’t all be Bev Keane, try as we might. And, sometimes, you really really really really really don’t want to do the thing, but God is telling you to do the thing.
If God is telling you to do the thing, then is it morally wrong not to do it? Robert Adams, in “Finite and Infinite Goods: A Framework for Ethics”, suggests a moral constraint on our obedience to God’s commands. And a moral constraint is essentially a rule that helps one identify what is the ethical
Choice. Kant very famously had a moral constraint against lying all the time, and it drove poor Chidi insane. That is the problem that Adams is trying to solve with his moral constraint, saying that, “If, upon reflection, a purportedly divine command seems to be evil, then one should
Not accept it as a commandment of God’s.” So, if it sounds bad–probably not God. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a goose. If it sounds too good to be true, it’s probably too good to be true.
And what Adams is doing here is using a critical sense to assess morality under God’s transcendent goodness, saying that we should always question any human view about what God is, because humans are not transcendent; we don’t have a perfect transcendent perspective. Let me just get…
How obvious is it going to be if I have this cough drop? Probably. I’m losing my voice. So, we, as humans, should always question and be critical of any human assessment or human understanding of God and what God is or any empirical test of value that humans provide.
We have to be critical of our evaluation of morals and ethics and not just say that everything is okay because God said so. Because we have to believe that God would not command us to do evil, which means that we have to hold ourselves to a standard that we do not truly understand.
“God’s intention concerning evil is to one day destroy it.” “Well, how convenient.” We have puny little fish brains. We cannot understand what is good, because the only thing that can really understand what is good is God because God is perfect and God is only good.
So, any understanding that we have is just, like, a sad little echo put together from scraps falling off a table that we’re, like, hoping looks like good. “Every day, the more I give myself over to God, the more I hear the voice of his angel, and you will too. That’s okay. That’s good.
Know you will be moved to act, and there will be things you cannot change.” We cannot truly understand what is good; only God can. Therefore, any commandment presented by God should be followed. The moral constraint means that, in between these two steps, we take a minute and we say,
If upon further reflection, that commandment does not add up to what our understanding of good is, it should not be taken as a commandment from God. Which means it’s not God telling you; it’s the devil. We could definitely still be doing wrong by not following God’s commandment but, morally
And ethically, we are justified in not doing the thing. With the understanding that God is only good in a transcendent way that we cannot understand, even that idea that we cannot understand God’s transcendence is a human idea.
Any traits or attributes or ideas that human beings are putting onto God need to be critically assessed before they are taken as fact. So, had Abraham said, “Killing people is wrong dude; I’m not gonna do it,” he would have been equally justified in that act that he was in doing the act.
However, Risler disagrees with that in his work because, “in the case of Abraham and Isaac, Abraham does ultimately decide that he must sacrifice Isaac. In order for him to reach that conclusion via Adams’s framework, he must alter his perception
Of the meaning of evil in order to accommodate that for which he does not understand.” He argues that we shouldn’t be messing with the moral aspect of the whole thing but the psychological. Because we’re stupid. We’re stupid humans, and we’re dealing with a cognitive dissonance; our brains are cracking
Under the pressure; we cannot be left alone to decide what is morally right and what is morally wrong; that is what God does. God is supposedly so perfect that we literally cannot understand his commands. So, instead of putting the constraint on the morality of those commands, we put the constraints on ourselves.
The psychological constraint that Risler presents is, “If, upon reflection, one is certain that a command is from God, then one should obey it.” Basically, we’re gullible. We’ll believe anything’s God if it smells good enough. Adams’s idea is still intact.
If God is commanding something, then it can’t be evil, but we are definitely off the hook for deciding whether or not something he’s commanded is evil. That’s not our job anymore. Our job is just to decide if we are actually receiving a commandment from actual God.
So, they all should have just not done it, right? Or am I missing something? Hold on, am I forgetting something? Let me see… “And Abraham stretched forth his hand and took the knife to slay his son, and the ang… *Screams* Oh… Right… That…
“Given the limited nature of our epistemic abilities, and given our inclination to try and doubt that God would give a seemingly evil command, I am inclined to think that achieving certainty that God is commanding one to do something abhorrent would require direct supernatural intervention, such that, despite one’s best attempts at doubting the
Divine authorship of the command, one would simply remain certain that God has issued a particular commandment.” So, he has a point… Unfortunately, so do the people of Crockett. “Just then, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of God shone around them,
And they were sore afraid, and the angel said, ‘Fear not; fear not; be not afraid!'” Boy, oh, boy, do the people of Crockett have a reason to believe that commandment came from God. *Shouts* So, when Father Paul and Bev rope the mayor and friends into their crazy scheme, they
Have no issue following this order, because, as far as these people are concerned, that commandment came from God. Catholicism has a long-standing belief that, if your priest pulls a Lazarus on you, you should probably do what he says. He’s always been the mouth of God; you’re not gonna start doubting it now.
And, yet, you could probably argue that, like, that’s the same justification Bev Keane uses, but I think we all know that Bev Keane has been waiting for a moment to justify murder her whole life. Either way. Bev justifies cleaning up the body by quoting Deuteronomy (“…where one must obey the priest
At all times.”); but she also quotes Matthew 10, and she kind of spits out, “Think not that I come to send peace on earth. I came not to send peace but a sword”; a passage that can be interpreted in a number of ways.
R.T France, a new testament scholar, argues that, in context, it means something closer to, like, the sword of social division cutting family ties and dividing individuals who choose to follow the faith or choose not to; not necessarily like a military sword.
Whether Bev Keane is convincing the mayor to sever himself from his previous beliefs about the whole murder thing or just saying that Jesus came in with guns ablazing, we’ll never really know; but, regardless, she yells at him not to cherry-pick the glories of God which is just…it’s just beautiful.
Especially when you remember that Jesus also specifically said that he did not come with a sword at one point; that’s in, like, his story; I think that’s before he, uh, before they arrest him one time. Editing note: I went to find the source for this, and he didn’t actually say that he didn’t
Come with a sword. He said to his friends to put down their swords because they who draw the sword die by the sword. But he also immediately follows it up with, “Do you think I cannot call on my father,
And he will at once put at my disposal more than 12 legions of angels?” Which is just very…it’s very, like, “my daddy’s a lawyer” vibes. Anyway… Having two contradictory thoughts and reasonings is just kind of part of the territory when you’re dealing in a cognitive dissonance.
And you start to see how Abraham’s cognitive dissonance that Father Paul and Bev and everyone is now dealing in–this, like, “murder is wrong but God is making me murder” thing–is really starting to weigh on these characters. I mean Father Paul is crumbling; Bev is higher strung than ever; everyone is nervous all
The fucking time, and more and more people are forced to face this moral conundrum of a God-given command to break a commandment. But here’s the thing: you might have justified your action in the eyes of the lord morally speaking; but that does not mean that the rest of the world agrees with you.
“Erin Greene. I’d like to finish our discussion.” So, sure, when Father Paul gets brought back to life via God, makes friends with a winged raisinet, and wants to murder people, it’s pretty easy for his, like, devout followers to justify following him in his footsteps, right?
It’s easy for them to say, “Alright, this is fine.” But what about the next person who becomes bat food? “How convenient.” Riley, on the other hand, has already given up his faith in God. He has reasoned his way to atheism.
Riley is not a Christian who’s lost faith; he is not an angry atheist; he is like Nietzsche. He’s got his own beliefs and his own ideals. And, when he gets presented with “God has commanded me to eat people, and eating people
Is abhorrently evil,” it’s not exactly a challenge for him to chalk premise one out the window like the baby in the bathwater and make the unselfish choice instead of the self-serving one. Which he does. In an act of sacrifice, Riley turns himself into dust. *Screams*
Part nine: the morality of eating people, part two The lord is burning my throat. Unlike the rest of Crockett Island, Riley was not waiting for supernatural intervention. The potential Christian redemption cycle that he was being set up and primed for in the first few episodes is long off the table.
This happened when Father Paul lied to him about how he knew Lisa could walk, remember? That was the moment that the tables started to shift. That is when the idea that Riley was just a person not in a state of grace that Jesus was surrounding himself with was taken out of the equation.
That storyline was cut off; flipped on its head (narratively). Suddenly, his difference in belief, like Sarah’s and Sheriff Hassan’s, are front and center as part of who they are and part of their arcs. The more miracles that start happening after that moment, the greater the divide becomes
Between people like Riley and Sarah and Sheriff Hassan (the people who don’t have a Christian belief system; the deadlings) and the Christians. Tensions begin to rise in a similar manner to that of the third “God’s Not Dead” film, where, the more righteous and determined Father Paul becomes to fight for this church, it
Becomes a bigger and bigger problem. In “Midnight Mass”, it ends up in a full-on war. In “God’s Not Dead”, it ends up in like a glorified pep rally. And, in GND, the only way to relieve that tension is for God to come down and personally
Speak to Reverend Dave and tell him, “Cut the crap.” Which he does. He lets it go; he lets the church go, and he decides to build a church elsewhere. I don’t know if I explained the plot to the third one at all.
If I didn’t: basically, this kid accidentally kills someone and sets a church on fire, and Reverend Dave is like, “Please, school board, fix my church,” and the school board’s like, “Maybe we should just tear it down,” and then that’s what the fight is about. He doesn’t want them to tear his church down.
But, eventually, God comes to Reverend Dave after he punches a kid and is like, “Bro, you gotta take a step back,” and Reverend Dave does it. This, by the way, is why I like this movie; I think I said that in the beginning. I do actually really like the third one.
I think it’s…I think it’s watchable. There’s a lot of interviews where the actor who plays Reverend Dave says that he wanted to show him as, like, a normal guy, like, “Pastors are regular dudes.” And the way that they do that in the first two movies is just, like, have him spill his
Coffee a lot. But, in the third movie, they really took it seriously, and they they showed him not just being like a normal person with like a family and family troubles, but being, like, someone who makes wrong choices sometimes, even in the eyes of God, and who has to, like,
Atone for them and has to change his ways. And that, I think, is a really, really great, like message. I think that’s a good way to take the story; I thought it added depth; I’m here for it; I love the third one. I’ll watch the third one if I have to.
If I ever end up quarantined again in, like, a youth group, and they want to watch “God’s Not Dead”, I’ll be like, “Put the third one on,” and I would be fine. He does literally build a new church outside of the college campus, and I’m sure that there’s
Some kind of, like…there’s probably a connection there with, like, Solomon building a church in hell and, you know, Jesus building churches and stuff, but we’re 18,000 words in. I’m…I’m done; I’m calling it. Anyway, for Riley, “God’s is dead” does not insinuate that God was ever alive at any point,
Which is what makes it so interesting that he then becomes the Jesus of this story. He goes from being the apostle to playing the role of Jesus in this story, being the one to understand the truth in the way that no one else can; making a sacrifice for the
Betterment of others; literally dying as opposed to giving up his beliefs and living the way that Father Paul was living in that moment. He gets the most Christian death of all of them. He literally gets greeted by an angel of the woman that he killed as forgiveness and is,
Like, carried up into the heavens…more or less. He gets the most Jesus-like ending without having to believe in Jesus at all, and the characters who have been waiting desperately for this return of Jesus–the ones who have been living out their redemption cycles, waiting for more proof of the divine, waiting for
The resurrection, trying to prove their worthiness in the eyes of God–when Father Paul and Bev Keane stand up there and say drink this rat poison, lay down your life in the name of God, trust that he will bring you back, a lot of them are willing to do it.
And this is exactly what Nietzsche was worried about: their belief in a transcendental, all-good, all-powerful God that is more than they could ever understand, and the, frankly, very good arguments that Father Paul and Bev are making, hinder their ability to make a moral judgment.
The supernatural proof that they have been provided hinders their ability to make a psychological assessment. They’re unable to be critical in any way. Morally speaking, the only way that they have out is the first way that we talked about; they have to change a premise. And they choose to change the second one.
They can’t argue that this isn’t coming from God; they can’t argue that it’s morally wrong; they just have to believe that their perception of what is morally right and morally wrong is wrong. They have to change the second premise, and they have to decide that eating people is, like, probably fine.
Because, if they don’t, then they can’t follow God’s commandments; and, if they’re not following God’s commandments, they are actively denying the Lord and, therefore, actively following the devil. They are now vampires, a lot of these people. A lot of these people are now experiencing not only the physical sensation of desiring
That person’s blood, the changes in the way that they’re seeing things, you know, the world looks different now. And they also are experiencing that, like, absence of guilt and shame; that release from all pain and responsibility. Of course they decide that they should be killing people. What else would they do?
“Do you have guilt in your heart for doing what you had to?” “Not at all.” “Then ask yourself why God let that cup pass you by.” It’s a euphoric feeling. There’s no pain; they’re drunk with it; they’re caught up in the power; in the fight for God.
And it’s sort of like ships passing in the night when we look at “God’s Not Dead: A Light in the Darkness”, because Reverend Dave has also become increasingly violent and aggressive in his own fight for God.
He is wrapped up in his desire for justice; he is grieving, and he wants to believe that Jude’s death meant something. He wants to believe that his friend wasn’t just killed because some poor kid was sad that he got dumped.
He wants to believe that his best friend didn’t just die because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. And, if he could just get this church fixed, if he can just keep it there, then maybe it won’t hurt so much.
Everyone is telling him that he needs to stop; that maybe he’s taking this too far; and I think that part of him probably knows that, but he’s so caught up in this desire to fight for God–to live out Jesus’s story, to be the Jesus in the redemption cycle–that he just keeps pushing through.
He’s searching for the same liberation from pain and suffering that the characters in “Midnight Mass” have already received. “Murderer.” “Well, I suppose so. But here’s the thing: I had no guilt; none. And, knowing that I should feel guilt, but accepting that I did not, finding grace where the guilt should be, I…”
As the night rages on in Crockett Island, we watch a handful of characters slowly come to realize what it is they are doing. They are killing each other; they are killing their parents, their children, their friends, and they don’t even care.
The line that Jonathan Waterboy so neatly drew for us in the first “God’s Not Dead” film? Washed away. Soaked in blood. Can’t see it anymore. And they want to know why God would allow that to happen.
If the idea is that following God is following goodness, why would God allow us to live in this doxastic state where we understand that what we’re doing is wrong, but we also understand that what we’re doing is good. Why would he allow us to live with this cognitive dissonance?
Why would he allow humans to live in a world where they cannot tell what is right and what is wrong? Why did God command that Abraham murder his own son? Are they all just Abraham waiting for a ram to be brought up the other side of the mountain?
Is there any moral weight to what happens at “Midnight Mass” at all? Or were they all just going to end up in the same afterlife anyway, and nothing matters because this is the way that it was supposed to happen? Lisa’s last line indicates that the monster itself died, so his blood stopped working
To cure her. Was all of this just so that they could destroy that demon? Are they Jesus, or are they the persecutors? What is their role in this story anymore, and why would God allow them to be confused like this?
The massacre that they have carried out on Crockett Island has pushed a very simple cognitive dissonance as far as it can possibly go; and now everyone is feeling a bit abandoned by God, even the most devout. So, Mildred is Sarah’s mother, the woman that Father Paul had an affair with years ago;
And she is the reason that he is doing all of this. He wants a second chance to get it right with her, and to get it right with his kid. He’s watched Sarah grow up with another man as her father, and he hasn’t been able to say anything, and he regrets that.
That’s at the core of why he’s doing all of this, and everything else is just fodder. “That’s why I put that thing in that trunk; that’s why I bribed and lied and smuggled it back here. That was the reason; I didn’t want you to die.”
Mildred was pretty stoked when she was young and hot again, but Mildred has not been a fan of what Father Paul’s been doing since he gave a very violent sermon. And she says to him when he kind of confesses what he’s done…you know what, just play the clip.
[Music] “But that’s over now, John. We made our choices; we lived our lives. She grew up, and we faded away, and that’s how it’s supposed to work. It’s supposed to be over.” So, after Father Paul tells Sarah’s mom that he just did all this so she’d be hot again,
They walk out of the church, and they find Bev Keane and the other vampires being absolute fucking menaces, okay? I think it goes without saying that Bev Keane was not one of the characters who came to any sort of realization about what she was doing over the course of the night.
But, either way, Father Paul walks out, sees her being a cunt, and just kind of suddenly realizes that maybe he got this wrong. “It’s between them and God, isn’t it?” “No.” “I’m sorry?” “No; we got this wrong.” “Oh, don’t be ridiculous” “Oh, Beverly, please, look at them, would you? We are the wolves.”
And it’s heartbreaking; because this is the moment where you realize that he was never a villain at all. He really, truly believed that he was doing God’s work; and the realization that maybe he was wrong ,and maybe Mildred is right, and we’re not supposed to get do-overs, and
People aren’t supposed to behave like this, that realization hits like a cold bucket of water. “I was wrong. We…we…we were wrong. We are wrong, and this needs to stop.” And when he comes into the church a few moments later and sees Sarah–his daughter who doesn’t
Know that she’s his daughter, that he so desperately wanted to be with and to take care of and to start over with—is pouring gasoline all over his church, just everywhere, preparing to burn that shit to the ground so that there’s no shade for the vampires to hide in in the
Morning, he looks her in the eyes and just says, “Good.” He gets it. It took all of, like, five minutes. And, just like Reverend Dave, he sacrifices his church. Because it is the best thing for everyone involved.
Two sides of a coin: these two devout religious men choosing to sacrifice and give up a place of worship that has meant so much to both of them and has played such a pivotal role in their own personal journeys to being men of God and followers of the Lord and leaders
In the church. They both give it up. The only difference is that Reverend Dave makes this decision after he gets his supernatural proof, after God commands him to chill, and Father Paul makes this decision in SPITE of his supernatural proof. “Don’t be ridiculous.” “Oh, Beverly, please, look at them, would you?
We are the wolves.” “John?” The people of Crockett Island, except for Bev Keane, have their return to consciousness moment in spite of their supernatural proof. Whether it is a feeling of physical guilt returning, or like an intellectual understanding
They should be feeling guilt and yet they are not, they suddenly have been forced to accept both of our premises. The only way out is through. They have to accept that eating people is wrong, and God has commanded me to eat people. They’re thrown smack into the middle of another inconsistent belief system.
Instead of engaging with the psychological constraint and saying that maybe this wasn’t God that commanded them at all, or throwing out the premise that God has any moral authority in general and discarding their belief in God, instead, the people of Crockett Island
Choose guilt; they choose personal accountability; they make the choice that Riley made, and they choose personal accountability. There is a parable in “The Brothers Karamazov” about a woman who was sent to hell for being a terrible person; but she really doesn’t want to be there, so she tells God about this
One time that she gave an onion to a beggar on the street, and he’s like, “Alright, fine.” And, so, she gets the opportunity to be pulled out of hell via holding onto an onion root. While she is holding on desperately to this onion root and climbing to her freedom, all
Of the other sinners also start trying to grab her ankles and be pulled up as well, and she’s not having any of that, so she kicks them off, and suddenly the onion root disappears, and she’s stuck in hell. Getting very “Hadestown” vibes but with an onion.
It’s like the Orpheus and Eurydice country vegetable medley. The idea there is that moral redemption is always possible up until the very last second. Had she just allowed the others to come with her, that would have been enough; that would have been the good deed.
The onion didn’t matter; no one cared that she gave an onion to someone one time. You can always do the right thing, even if it’s with your dying breath–sometimes even after. And “Midnight Mass” kind of echoes this parable when, after having slaughtered and/or cannibalized
Most of the island, the remaining people of Crockett choose death; whereas “God’s Not Dead” sort of sticks more to the original understanding of the Abraham and Isaac story. Cause Abraham could have said no at any point. Up until the moment that he had his blade pressed into Isaac’s neck, he could have said,
“Ehh, maybe not.” He could have had a Father Paul moment where he said, “Maybe I got this wrong,” but he didn’t. So God sent a ram instead. Because the story of Abraham and Isaac is not about morality; it is not about moral decision-making.
It doesn’t matter if Abraham was able to decide whether or not that was a moral action; it doesn’t matter if he was on or off the hook, because that story is about faith in God; that story is about belief.
Pastor Dave could have stopped his aggressive fight for the church at any moment, but he didn’t; so God had to step in and tell him to cut the crap because, like the Abraham and Isaac story, what’s important in the “God’s Not Dead” films is not morality; it’s not action; it’s just blind faith.
Just like it doesn’t matter what Grace was doing before she gave her life to Jesus, it doesn’t matter what other choices Professor Ratball has made in his life, as long as he chooses to give his life to Jesus and accept him as a savior with his dying breath. That is all that matters.
It doesn’t matter how Abraham felt about killing his kid; none of that matters. The only thing that matters is that he trusted God, and that is why God sent the ram. In “Midnight Mass”, choices matter. Choices are important. Actions in the face of God are what’s important.
The “God’s Not Dead” movies, they use the closest thing they have to a supernatural element as a reward for faith: they cure cancer, and they give joy and happiness to people who have given faith. We don’t know if the characters in “Midnight Mass” are saved or not; we don’t know if they
Are redeemed in the afterlife; we don’t know if they’re in hell; we don’t know if they’re given an onion; we don’t know what’s going on. The only character that we do see beyond the ashes is Riley; and Riley is then escorted
By an angel with the face and image of the woman that he killed to what looks like a very, very Christian heaven. From the fact that she’s wearing all white, to the fact that she is forgiving him, to the sun coming behind her, it is so explicitly Christian.
And the reason it stands out is because Riley very much did not think that that was what was going to happen. There’s a very, very long, drawn-out dialogue between Riley and Erin where they talk about what they think happens when you die; and Riley basically is like, “I don’t know; you
Trip balls for a couple minutes, and then you’re done.” “Dream to end all dreams; one last great dream as my mind empties the fuckin; missile silos, and then…I stop.” And it’s not until the moment that he gets this Christian, bringing-you-to-the-gates-of-heaven death that you realize how important that scene was.
All of this despite his refusal to carry out what was presented to him very reasonably as God’s plan. He is rewarded with a Christian afterlife not for his Christian beliefs, but for his very Christian actions; for choosing to behave like Jesus; to act like Jesus; to live the
Way that Jesus lived; to help people; to sacrifice yourself. He is rewarded with the Christian idea of heaven, which is just forgiveness and light and freedom. The fact that we don’t see what happens to the rest of the characters only serves to
Support that thesis; to support that idea that that’s not what matters. It was impactful when we saw it with Riley because Riley didn’t want it; Riley didn’t think he was going to get that; Riley didn’t believe that; a release that we didn’t know we wanted with Riley.
The rest of the characters, we don’t need to see the afterlife presented for the rest of the characters because it doesn’t matter. What matters is their choice, and their choice in the last moments of their life is to sing, “Nearer, My God, to Thee”.
And it is Riley’s mother, actually, after sacrificing herself to get the children out and to the boat to safety, she is the first one to start to sing. She is the one who, after everyone looks around and is like, “What happened,” and the sun
Is rising, and there’s nowhere to go, she is the one who starts to sing. “Nearer, my God, to thee. Nearer to thee.” And it reminds me of the moment when Mary is given a tour of hell, and she is so horrified
By what she sees that she encourages all of the sinners to pray so that they may be freed. Mary, who is, like, mostly known for being a virgin and being Jesus’s mom also did this other incredible thing.
The islanders choice to sing and to praise God in the face of the hell that they have created, in the face of the horrors that they have just committed, directly echoes the way that the sinners listen to Mary, and they pray.
Riley’s mother plays the part of Jesus’s mother, Mary, in saving the sinners. And she does this while being a sinner, which is not something that Mary did. Mary was immaculate; Mary was free from original sin; Mary wasn’t even born with Eve’s mistakes; it was a fluke of nature.
The character Riley, who doesn’t even believe in God, gets to play the role of Jesus and gets rewarded with a Christian death for his Jesus-like actions despite his belief, and Riley’s mother, who is quite far from the idea of Mary in the fact that she is a sinner
Herself, carrying out the story of Mary, encouraging these sinners to pray. And, while the biblical tale has the sinners being released from hell, we don’t get that; we don’t get to see if the people of Crockett Island are saved because it doesn’t matter.
It doesn’t matter; that’s not the point; it was never the point; the point is free will. “Free will.” I just said that. “I mean, you could shoot me right now; it’d just mean I’m five minutes behind–” *Gunshot* Part ten, part ten, part ten, part ten, um part ten
I’m so tired, but I’m so close to the end. “It’s supposed to be over.” Because the Christian redemption cycle is a cycle, it is cyclically cycling Solomon’s son’s sickly souls for sport. We all kind of know what the fuck is going down, right? We all know what’s gonna happen.
There’s only so much that one can change without sacrificing the integrity of the arc. Jesus dies; is dead for three days (we have a period of darkness, lack of faith, fear, and confusion amongst his followers); supernatural intervention (i.e the resurrection, redemption:
Jesus grants forgiveness to all of the sinners in hell and on Earth–except for Solomon, fuck Solomon; clean slates all around); and then you do it all again. Otherwise, what else are you doing with your time? You’re not writing 30-page, single-space essays on a series of movies and television shows
For two wildly distinct audiences just because you thought the title would be funny one time at 2 AM. Instead, you’re stuck. Because, if you know that God’s not dead, and everyone else around you knows that God is very much alive–your sunday school wine-mom brunch buddies, they’re believers; your tears-or-it-didn’t-happen
Summer youth group group chat; your homeschool co-op believes; even that group of strong conservative men that you hunt naked with in the woods twice a month while your wife thinks you’re golfing, they believe in Jesus–it’s too late; that only leaves you with one question left to ask. Well…? What would Jesus do?
Or, rather, what did Jesus do? Before he got snogged to death by Mr. Iscariot in that garden over there, what was he up to, really? How far were you from that grassy knoll, huh? Why were they so mad? What do you know about the Library of Alexandria?
Where were you on January 6, 2021, Mr. Christ? The answer is “busy,” actually. Super busy. Jesus had a packed schedule, and we know this because he had like 12 assistants keeping track of it for him. It’s all there in a checklist.
If you want to do the shit that Jesus did, just crack it open. Turning water into wine…no. Okay, not that one. Making blind men see? Skip. Walking around the Earth, spreading the word of God? That one I can do. Gain some followers? I can also do that. Help the sick; yes, totally.
Feed the hungry? Also that one. Love thy neighbor? Mmm…okay, so here’s the thing… Point is: there are a lot of things that people do to emulate Jesus’s life at that point in the cycle: to go forth and to spread his good word, to volunteer at hospitals, to do food drives, blah blah blah.
But there is one thing; there is one holy grail, elder wand, infinity stone act in all of Jesus’s canon that really just wipes everything else out of the holy water. And I get it, okay? I do; I really do.
Someone dies on a cross and comes back to life, that is probably gonna overshadow the eighth-grade clarinet solo that they had, as far as, like, “previously on” sections go. We’ve been talking about it for two hours; this is the big one; no matter how you twist
It, turn it, mangle it, this is the story of Jesus Christ, and it remains to be one of persecution and martyrdom; of hanging on to belief and truth like it’s a rope dangling from a helicopter in a windstorm of oppression; hanging on to that belief and faith like it
Is an onion root pulling you out of hell. Being willing to die in the name of God is top-tier iconic behavior. It’s not for everyone. And, perhaps, in the year of 33 AD, when sneezing too loudly could start a war, perhaps, it
Wasn’t too difficult to be killed in the name of God, right? But, now, in the year of our Lord 2022 (or 2014 for “God’s Not Dead”), in the United States of Goddamn America, not so many people running around with crosses and bags of nails, you know?
So, if you want to express your willingness to die for your faith, then you need someone to be willing to kill you over it. And, if Reverend Dave and the “God’s Not Dead” franchise have chosen the American education system as their big bad oppressor, then Beverly Keane has chosen literally everyone else.
“Sheriff, of course, I wouldn’t run you out of town; and it makes me sad that you would think that of me.” Bev Keane has decided that literally the entire world is her opposition at all times constantly.
She is a servant of God first and foremost; she is at the top of the spiritual food chain; first in line at the gates of heaven, and she does not care how many dogs she has to kill to stay there.
Whether she is calling out Father Paul for wearing the wrong color robe on his first day, baiting the sheriff into accusing her of some shit that she knows she did just to deny it, or shaming Erin for throwing out an empty bottle of Windex, Bev Keane creates
Persecution against herself for the sole purpose of appearing to overcome it. She wears blinders, and, like Josh and Grace, they walk past the damage that their actions are doing to the people around them in the name of the almighty martyrdom, the holy grail of Christian behavior.
Reverend Dave’s decision in the third GND film to sacrifice his church has the most profound effect on the deadlings in that film. It’s not just the characters who were explicitly Christian and sort of questioning or losing their faith like keaton, but the whole damn school; the whole town; the whole surrounding
Vicinity have suddenly become Christians. And they’re live streaming about it. “Call it a publicity stunt if you want, but we were there. I mean, this dude’s legit.” “There’s no doubt about it; we…we make these films, first and foremost, for the church
To encourage people in their faith, so they can stand up, and I think that’s one of the reasons why the first one was so successful.” But, in order for any of this to work, you need that villain; you need the monster that is Kevin Sorbo’s facial hair. “Nooooo!!”
But, due to the nature of the redemption arc, because Jesus was so perfect, placing your main character on the prophetic side of the redemption cycle, characters like Josh and Grace and Reverend Dave are then stripped of their agency within that cycle. Sure, they choose to fight…but that’s kind of it.
They don’t get to make a lot of other decisions throughout the course of their films. With the exception of the moment where Reverend Dave chooses to sacrifice his church (which arguably wasn’t really his choice because God told him to), all that the central Jesus-like
Characters in these films do is make the same choice over and over and over again, and so they remain stuck in that first half of the redemption cycle, the persecution, and can never really move beyond that. Because, while they may be functioning as the prophetic martyrs within the narrative,
They are not actually prophets; they cannot perform the supernatural acts required to complete that arc, not only because they’re human, but also because these films are made by Christians for Christians, and, therefore, you cannot have your characters performing actions that surpass the actions of Jesus Christ.
So they remain stagnant; they are awaiting an interruption from God that will allow them the opportunity to convince the surrounding characters that… “God’s not dead; he’s surely alive. He’s livin’…” It’s not Grace who loses her faith in the second film, it is supporting character Brooke,
Who is grieving the loss of her brother and is inspired by Grace’s steadfast belief, that finds Christianity. Keaton and Adam who, after Dave hears the voice of God, they are the ones who find God, who choose to give their life to God.
It is Radisson who chooses to believe in Jesus Christ as the savior. The deadlings are the only ones who make choices in these films because they behold their characters to these strict boxes of Jesus-role and deadling-role.
They do not get to make the choices that characters like Riley, who was a deadling then became Jesus, gets to make. They don’t make any choices because they’re locked into this cycle. One of my biggest gripes with the first GND film is that it is not Josh who finds Ratballs
In the street after he’s been hit by a car. Imagine how good that would have been! The…the emotional journey that those two have been on; the emotional payoff that that would have given us of these two characters who have been at odds with each other like
All of the brothers in “The Brothers Karamazov”, and like Riley and Father Paul who have been at odds with each other, and having these back and forths, and discussing the big things of nature; and then the one who was so adamant not to believe in God suddenly needs God,
And it is the character that he’s been bullying and treating like shit this whole movie who is the only one there with any even remote connection to the Lord; he’s the only one who can even possibly kind of take this man into his arms and say, “Do you accept Jesus
Christ?” and he’s the only one who can hear that confession and be like, “I verify; I vouch for him,” and…and give him that salvation in his dying moments. How good that would have been! It would have been so good! Because they have been fighting, they’ve been fighting this whole movie because Riddlestone
Has been treating Waterballs like garbage this whole movie; he has been tormenting him, and Josh has had to stay steadfast in his belief in God and just take it. And he finally wins that argument, and he’s like, “Thank God, I am done with this. I am done with dealing with this professor.
I get my grade, it’s over.” And, then, he’s walking to this Newsboys concert, and he sees this crowd of people in the street, and he goes to see what’s going on, and it’s Ratbomb; and it’s Rainbottom.
And he is on the floor just dying, sad; and Josh has to choose to not just do the Christian thing, which is save this this dying person, but the personal thing, and Josh gets down on his knees and looks this man in the eyes and forgives him. “I forgive you.”
But that’s not what happens. Because that would muddy the waters too much between personal forgiveness and godly forgiveness. It would mean that part of Radisson’s being saved was dependent on Josh choosing to be there and choosing to love thy enemy, which he can’t do because they’re not allowed to
Make these kind of choices. Instead, what happens is by, supernatural intervention, Pastor Dave just so happens to be walking by in that moment. Essentially, the supernatural proof element used in the first “God’s Not Dead” film is basically that God sent Dave to happen to be walking by just at the moment that Radisson
Would need him most to give him the chance to be saved at the last possible moment. “I believe it’s God’s mercy that brought me here right now.” And that is literally Dave’s job, by the way. We don’t get to see him or any of the other Christian characters make any other decisions
Or choices that change who they are in any sort of fundamental way. Like Bev, they all stay exactly the same the whole way through because Bev Keane…Bev Keane doesn’t give a shit about who she converts. In fact, she’d probably rather people stay out of the church, if she had her way.
Which is also a pretty accurate reflection of Catholicism. We’ve never been big on recruitment. We prefer to just sit and stew in our guilt until the free-market spiritual forgiveness scheme finally suffocates all of us with our last 10 Hail Mary’s. “It is almost as if he is preparing you for that.
You sit there, blessed among men, smirking when I say ‘God’s will’.” “I’m frustrated.” “I know.” Bev’s spirituality is so capitalistic that she literally cannot process the fact that she wasn’t chosen by God to become a vampire. She is practically twitching with rage throughout this entire scene that they’re trying to keep
Riley calm until the sun sets. She does not understand why, after all that she has done, after all that she has paid, she was not rewarded as she should be. Her constant pursuit of self-interest leads her to recruit workers underneath of her to
Help cover up Father Paul’s crimes: minimizing her labor, increasing her potential benefit, growing her spiritual capital. And she is just boiling over with the fact that Riley, who has not even taken the sacrament since he’s arrived on the island from prison, has just been gifted eternal life over her. She can’t deal.
She has become a victim of spiritual capitalism, exploited for her labors. So, when she steps into the leadership role at the end of the battle, when Father Paul begins to question what they’ve done, she thinks that she is justified in this because she was a servant first. It is the American dream.
She pulled herself up by her bootstraps. She deserves to be the leader. And the leader has the most power. And the leader can, therefore, export the most good in the eyes of God; and thus gain the most profit, i.e. favor of God, fast track to heaven. “It was always going this way.
You were always…you were always going to be the last, the hardest, test of my faith…you.” She wants to go from follower to profit; she wants to make the jump from religious zealot to saint; she wants to be seen as holy; she wants to reap the benefits of her faith that
The characters in GND already do. But all that’s required of them is faith. And, in the end, it is her inability to see past herself, her blind pursuit of self-interest, that leads her to let everything burn down. Which is the ultimate cause of her own destruction.
There is a bug flying around, and we’re just gonna be friends with it, just for the record, if it’s in the shot… “The polluted, the murderers, the fornicators, the sorcerers, idolaters, and all of the liars; their place will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.
Let it burn.” She chooses to do what is best for herself over and over and over again. She digs herself deeper and deeper into a hole that she will never get out of. And, despite her move into spiritual leadership, she dies in exactly the same place that she
Started, literally digging herself a hole to bury her face in the sand. *Sobbing* *Singing* She does not sing with the others; she does not pray; she does not speak to the Lord; she does not apologize; she does not ask for forgiveness. She just keeps digging.
She could not make the leap that Riley does; she could not experience the growth that characters like Keaton in GND do. She never gets a chirotic moment; she doesn’t get a come to Jesus moment because she doesn’t do anything to earn it.
She does not make any alternative narrative choices outside of her initial role. She does not exercise her free will. And the way that Christianity is presented in “Midnight Mass” requires action for reward. “…because, your whole life, I think you’ve needed to hear this. You aren’t a good person.” “Well…”
So, according to Jesus’s pals, there was this one time that he was walking in the desert, and he got tempted by satan himself to turn some stones into bread; but, for whatever reason, he’s like, “No, I’m not gonna do that.”
And, so, then the devil’s like, “Okay, jump off that cliff, but the angels will save you because you’re the son of God.” And Jesus is like, “No, um, I’m not gonna do that either.” And, so, the devil’s like, “Alright, rule the fucking world then.
You’re Jesus, son of God; you should be able to do that.” And Jesus is still like, “No, I’m also not going to do that?” A couple thousand years later, Fyodor Devil’s Advocate Dostoyevsky, he’s alone and grieving; struggling with his faith and the ever-changing Russian political climate of the time; he’s
Writing TBK, and he includes this parable that is supposedly written by Ivan, and it is called “The Grand Inquisitor.” And, in this story, Ivan basically writes fanfic about the Grand Inquisitor story, and he imagines that, in the 1600s, Jesus did come back.
In Ivan’s world, he comes back and immediately gets arrested; because, remember, we have all come to terms with the fact that humans cannot be trusted to decide what is good and what is bad; what is right, is what is wrong. We cannot be left alone to our own devices.
We learn this in Genesis; we learn this in Adam and Eve. We talked about it a couple sections ago; we’re no good with the decision-making. And, because of this, the church had to step in and feed the people, and govern them, and
Bring order to a chaotic society; and, so, the inquisitor is basically grilling Jesus about the fact that he said no to everything the devil asked him to do, and he’s like, “If you can turn stones into bread, why did you not feed our hungry people?
If you can bring life back, why are you not bringing people back to life? If you could rule everyone peacefully, why are you not doing that?” He points out that Christ’s decision not to use his magic powers to turn the stones into bread led to people suffering because they were starving.
“Because you’re right. There is…there’s so much suffering in the world, so much. And, then, there’s this higher power, this higher power who could erase all that pain; just wave his hand and make it all go away but doesn’t? No.”
By not being the all-powerful God that you are, and fixing things and healing people, you are allowing your people to suffer; and, for that, you must pay. Because they punish people on Earth for their crimes, and people get punished in hell for
Their crimes; so, if Jesus is going to come back into a world that is shaped by his existence, shaped by his church, then he is gonna also be held accountable for his crimes. The existence of God does not negate personal accountability. And why does a good God allow terrible things to happen?
Ivan tells this story mostly because he’s trying to push Alyosha’s buttons, because every conversation that he has with Alyosha leaves him spiraling. But he also tells this story because it is something that he uses to justify his belief that the church should actually be in charge.
He thinks that the church should be in charge of governing people and sending people to jail and all of that; he thinks that they should make the laws. Even if they are doing satan’s work. Because he thinks that people will listen better and follow laws if they believe that
They are being given by God, because, without God… “…then everything is permissible. And, not only permissible, but pointless. If Professor Radisson is right, then all of this, all of our…” Two things we need to talk about with Josh’s use of this quote in this scene. One: it’s not real.
It is in the book; it is a concept in the book; it is a very, very important concept in the book; but no one ever phrases it like that. “As Dostoyevsky famously pointed out…” This is not a direct quote. It’s also not a direct quote from Dostoyevsky himself.
I have a strong dislike for people who quote things that characters say as if the author is saying them. I just think that you’re missing a layer there if you are saying that this is something that the person said.
If you’re gonna do it, put a comma and the title of the book that it’s from, but don’t go around saying that, like, John Green said, “Okay, okay.” Like, yes, technically, but he didn’t just say that for fun one day. It’s in a book.
So, the concept is in the book; it’s a very, very important concept in the book that gets explored really thoroughly, but, when they’re saying “God”, it is more of a reference to the immortality of the soul, which is directly and intrinsically linked to the concept of
God, but what they’re talking about is the idea that you will live forever after you die; that your actions on Earth have consequences after your death. That is what they are talking about; not about God and whether or not God will tell you that something is permissible.
They’re talking about whether or not your actions on Earth have consequences after your death; they’re making the argument that, if your soul just ceases to exist at the moment of your death, then everything that you did on Earth before that doesn’t matter.
Which is why Ivan thinks that the church is important; because he thinks that people need to be kept in line while on Earth, despite the fact that he doesn’t believe there’s an immortal soul, and he doesn’t believe there’s anything after. That is what that quote is talking about.
That is why the church needs to be making laws and controlling people on Earth: to keep them in line while they are alive. Because, if they know that they’re not going anywhere after, then they will do whatever the fuck they want.
Someone needs to be keeping people in line, and someone needs to be making laws. That is why he thinks that the church should be in charge of laws. And that brings us to the second thing. Which is the use of the word “permissible.” It gets quoted like that a lot.
I will give it to the directors and the creators of the film that it is most often quoted like that; because that sounds a lot better, doesn’t it? “All things are permissible? Then everyone is allowed?” And Dmitri actually does kind of say it like that at one point.
I think he says, “…then men can do what they like,” which is a much more, like, titillating way to say it. But the word that is used, at least in my translation and, like, two of the other translations
That I checked, I got two ebooks and I have one physical copy, and the word is mostly “lawful” or “legal” or, like, a version of that, when they quoted that section. Which I think is a much better translation for what they are talking about…which is laws.
See, I told you that he did not read the book. Anyway, so the grand inquisitor is berating Jesus with questions and accusations and shit. “Instead of taking men’s freedom from them, thou didst make it greater than ever.
Didst thou forget that man prefers peace and even death to freedom of choice in the knowledge of good and evil? Nothing is more seductive for man than his freedom of conscience, but nothing is a greater cause of suffering.
And, behold, instead of giving a firm foundation for setting the conscience of man at rest forever, thoust didst choose all that is exceptional, vague, and enigmatic.” Thank you, drama school. Where Nietzsche saw the death of God as an opportunity for humanity to build a new, better
Moral system, many of the characters in “The Brothers Karamazov” see it as disastrous, if not downright evil. Ivan’s proclamation that everything is permissible, lawful, without a god is both utterly horrifying and completely seductive. There is a character in “The Brothers Karamazov” called Liza or Lise; I don’t know how it’s
Pronounced, if you haven’t caught on to the fact that I’m not big on pronunciation accuracy, then here you go: I’m not big on pronunciation accuracy; at least not with things in the public conscious; pronounce people’s names correctly; don’t be a dick.
In TBK, we meet Liza as a 14-year-old girl who is paralyzed and using a wheelchair. She is wide-eyed and innocent and suffering this terrible affliction until an encounter with Alyosha’s father figure, Elder Zosima, in which he performs some religious healing, and suddenly her condition is improving.
Elder Zosima is like a monk, by the way. And, after this, throughout the course of the novel, she becomes very tempted by Ivan’s ideas. Basically, Ivan’s idea that everything is lawful without a god spreads like wildfire and causes lots of problems, and Liza is one of these people who gets infected by it.
She starts acting out; she’s deliberately cruel to the people around her; she is slamming her hands in doors, causing herself pain; she is putting herself through physical and emotional suffering as penance for these dark thoughts and doubts and fantasies that she’s having. Which we’ve all been there.
Because she’s a kid, and she’s also about to be married off to someone who is very much not a kid. She gets a little bit older; I don’t think she’s 14 when they start talking about getting married, but still. She recounts all her dark fantasies to Alyosha; slams her finger in the door.
This is very common with the characters in TBK; they all think that suffering is a way to make penance with God. But it’s interesting because our Lisa in “Midnight Mass”–already established to be a sort of holy figure; completely devout, innocent, sweet victim of a horrible crime; suffering
A physical affliction in a wheelchair–regains the ability to walk through a similar encounter with a spiritual leader, and we get a similar outburst from our Lisa when she decides to pay Joe Collie a visit. This is her first time speaking to him since he shot her in the back.
And she rips him a new one. She talks about how angry she was; she talks about how she hoped that his place was dirty and disgusting; she hoped that he was miserable and alone because of what he’s done to her with one of the best lines in the entire show.
“You reached through time, Joe Collie! You reached through time, and you stole…” Which, again, why do I write anything? And she follows up this outburst and this outpouring of anger and frustration with an act of radical forgiveness.
She literally says, “If God can forgive you, and he says he can, then so can I.” And Joe Collie falls apart, and it is like getting hit in the chest with a baseball bat every single time you watch it. “And if I can forgive you, Joe Collie, then anyone can.” *Sobbing*
It’s soo good. It’s so good. It’s a moment of such, like, strength and…and growth as a character. It’s so good! It’s not really something that we get to see a lot of from Liza in “The Brother’s Karamazov” just because we don’t really get that much of Liza in “The Brother’s Karamazov.”
Apparently, there was gonna be a sequel, but… Anyway. Lisa does this, and it gives such strength and dimension to her character, and exemplifies her faith, and puts her on this pedestal, as well, of not only someone who is a devout
Believer, not just someone like Josh who goes to church every day, not just someone who holds on to her belief no matter what, but someone who struggles sometimes and who makes the choice to choose to behave and to act in a godly manner.
And it’s this moment, not the fact that she could walk again, not when Bev Keane killed his dog, it is this moment that triggers Joe Collie into attending his first AA meeting with Riley and Father Paul. God, this show is so fucking good.
Joe Collie, who has been drinking himself into oblivion and hating himself day in and day out ever since the accident, has started to attend these AA meetings; he is trying to get his life together; and he is really starting to do it until Father Paul fucking eats him.
We have Bev with this twisted idea of protecting the town and the community in the name of God killing Joe Collie’s dog at a public event, punishing him even further and causing more stress in the community, and then we have Lisa, equally devout–a character whose choice
To live by the word of God, to be the one who forgives–that creates a ripple effect of actual good in the community and also brings people to the church. For Bev, trying to exist like the characters in “God’s Not Dead”, like Josh and like Pastor
Dave, it is counterintuitive to what she wants, which is more praise from God…I guess. Because she doesn’t live in a world where blind faith is enough; she lives in a world where action is required for the rewards that she is seeking. She needs to make choices, but she won’t make choices.
Had Jonah the whale been allowed this kind of freedom in his narrative, Lisa’s freedom, then we could have had a similar moment of reckoning; we could have had that moment on the street in the pouring rain with Josh and Ratcakes; we could have had it; but we can’t
Because Josh making that kind of a choice would have distracted from the real focus of the story, which is blind faith. Put in “watch ‘God’s Not Dead’ and find out why Adam turns himself in.” Oh, we’re not doing that.
The emphasis on the “fight persecution” and “faith from the same perspective of the prophets” in “God’s Not Dead” limits its protagonists’ actions in both scope and scale, seemingly circumscribing the very thing that the narrative is working to save, which is freedom of will.
It feels like a contradiction; it feels like a cognitive dissonance; it feels like it should be tearing apart every neuron in their little brains every time the director calls action; it feels like hypocrisy at its finest. But we know from “The Grand Inquisitor” and from the Instagram stories of the disciples
That Big Man did not use his free will to turn the stones into bread, he did not use his free will to push satan off that cliff, and he did not run off and join the army under a false name to save China.
He used his free will to do one thing and one thing only: he used it to trust in God. That’s what he did. Because man does not live on bread alone; and, if you are living in the GND universe as a godling or a deadling, then that’s it; that’s your move.
So it’s gotta be a big one; it’s gotta make noise; it’s gotta be the Taylor Swift “Reputation” stadium tour, and it’s gotta have a ripple effect so massive that it almost feels supernatural. You get one shot per movie. You can only afford to have the Newsboys on set for so long.
“I want everyone to go to their contacts and click on everybody you know and text them three simple words:’God’s Not Dead.’ And there’s 10,000 of you out there; and everyone knows about a hundred people? That’s a million messages right there.
A million times we’re gonna tell Jesus that we love him in the next three minutes.” “Midnight Mass” places the emphasis on the “sacrifice” and “forgiveness” portions of the cycle, so its characters have a full range of experiences. They can bounce back and forth between godling and deadling, faith and not faith, like me
At a party when I didn’t take my meds. You can take Riley from deadling atheist to Jesus in a rowboat and back again; you can take him, put him up against the prophet-esque Father Paul, who is exhibiting nothing but
Jesus-like kindness, and you can set that up of “Jesus and apostle”, and you can flip it upside down, turn it inside out, wring it out over the narrative like blood dripping from a rag you can’t get clean. Father Paul dies, then comes back, starts performing miracles, dies again, comes back
Again, starts fucking shit up, and he is still not the Jesus. It all comes back to that moment when Father Paul looked Riley in the eyes and lied to him about how he knew Lisa could walk again. He had free will in that moment, and that’s what he did with it.
There is so much free will in this series dripping all over the place that, divine intervention be damned, these characters will not do what they are supposed to do; they do not stay in their assigned roles. So, later, when Father Paul chooses to lie to Riley again about Joe Collie visiting his
Sister, because he doesn’t know, when he chooses to continue playing God, it is that choice that brings Riley back to the rec center when he gets eaten by Dobby. Which is the only reason that he is able to tell Erin what is happening and send these
Notes to his family, so that, later, when they all become bat food, they understand what’s going on, and they choose to fight it, and it’s the ultimate undoing for Father Paul, and it’s all because he’s a dirty liar. That was a lot. Um, none of that was in the script.
This comes from, um, right, okay. “There’s so much free will dripping all over the place that divine int…these characters will not do what they’re supposed to…they won’t stay in their assigned roles…to lie again about Joe…” It’s only because Father Paul used his freshest free will to lie that he gets taken out of
The position of Jesus Christ. Riley gets placed in it, is given the opportunity to make that sacrificial choice, and it opens up the floor for everyone else to make the same kind of sacrificial choice and save the world. Part eleven: who do you say I am? This is the last one.
Final episode of “Midnight Mass” contains the second of my three favorite moments. It’s dark; shit is on fire; most of the island have either become bat food or become the batman; and Bev Keane has appointed herself judge and jury; standing outside of Saint
Patrick’s church, deciding who shall continue to live as an eternal blood-sucking soldier journeying to the mainland to spread their glorious gifts onto the unsuspecting world; and who shall be jet fuel. She’s about two seconds from having one of her minions strip some poor dude for parts when Mildred steps in.
Remember when I said that Father Paul walked out of the church to find Bev Keane being a menace? This is…this is Bev Keane being a menace. And mildred is like, “Bev, maybe don’t,” and Father Paul tells her to bring him to the church because all are welcome. All have to be…
“All have to be welcome, or this isn’t really a god’s house!” Father Paul, who we have seen lose himself in the madness of being an immortal demon creature, has had this world-shattering experience. His faith has been challenged; shaken to its very core; run through a blender with a copy
Of the Necronomicon and the first installment of the “Maximum Rise” series, only to be dumped out onto a blood-soaked altar and set on fire. Just put that clip of you saying, “Burning offering? For me?” And, then, just go right into…
This man’s church is a war zone; his friends hate him; he has created a monster that he cannot control with the help of another monster that he cannot control; all of this under what he believes to be the instruction of a god that he has dedicated his entire life and existence to.
“That’s the thing about priesthood: it’s never supposed to be about me; it’s supposed to be about God!” By all accounts, Father Paul should be feeling so abandoned by God; so utterly betrayed by heavenly father that lucifer himself should have shown up to give him a pep talk.
The devil should have brought him on with a salary no man could match. And Christians aren’t allowed to lend money to other Christians, so God couldn’t have done shit. I mean, he probably could have hired him legally, but when was the last time a Christian organization had books that were clean? *Cheers*
Father Paul should be so lost, angry, and dejected, that, if God has not been killed for him, he should be murdering God with his bare hands as we speak. And, perhaps, maybe he is harboring a deep, Radisson-like hatred for the God that is dragging
Him by the collar down a blood-soaked road to a freshly minted hell of his own design, but we don’t know that, and we’ll never know that because he doesn’t say anything like that, and he doesn’t do anything like that.
You know what he does do when confronted with the consequences of the choices that he made? That is exactly what he sees. His choices. Not God’s; not the angel’s; not Bev’s. His decisions. Because, God or no God… “There’s nothing in the scripture, or in the world for that matter, that suggests God negates
Personal accountability.” He finally finds himself standing in Riley’s shoes, staring out from a curb at the mess that he has created, and he does not look away. He does not wander aimlessly without faith. He retreats into it.
He recommits himself to the God that saved him; the God that made him; the God that inspired that priest; the man who offers to start an AA chapter just so that one guy doesn’t have to go to the mainland twice a week; who brings daily mass to the elderly who cannot go to
Church anymore; who once scoured an island looking for a very specific-looking mouse just so he could keep one kid’s faith alive. The God that created that man who says things like, “I am of no use to people in a state of grace,”; that is the God that Father Paul commits himself to.
That is the God that he chooses not just to believe in, but to act like. And, when he walks into that church that he has just declared to be God’s house, and he sees Sarah dumping kerosene everywhere, he just says “Good.”
Because he knows; and he sees in that moment that the best way for that building to be God’s house is to burn to the ground. “He said, ‘this building is not my church’.” It is a powerful moment in both of these films when our godly hero chooses to sacrifice their
Place of worship because it is a sacrifice. And sacrifice is what makes the story of Jesus Christ different from traditional hagiography. This act of free will, of martyring oneself, is the most potent act with the most profound effect on the people around them.
So, it begs the question: does it matter that the only reason Reverend Dave sacrificed his church was because God told him to? We’ve already made the claim that Riley doesn’t need to believe that Jesus Christ himself
Walked the Earth and gave his life in order to free humanity from their sins in the eyes of an all-forgiving all-powerful god. He just needs to do the right thing. He just needs to recognize evil. It doesn’t matter why Riley recognized the evil, be it by its biblical definition or…or
By the harm that it’s causing. It matters that he put a stop to it. “I don’t think that Reverend Hill rolled over. I think that he saw people suffering, and he made a sacrifice for them. Surely, their parallels to Christianity are not lost on you.”
It doesn’t matter if Reverend Dave only put down his sword because Daddy told him to; and it doesn’t matter who was there to offer Professor Sorbo his salvation in the eyes of God. It just matters that he got it.
“The God that you don’t believe in has given you another chance; another chance to change your final answer.” To sing, recite, or teach a text is never a neutral act.” If we are looking for a traditional monomyth in the “God’s Not Dead” films, we are not going to find it.
That’s not what they’re for. They are made by Christians, for Christians. They are acts of praise. They are retellings of the Christian redemption cycle with characters fulfilling the role of Jesus, without actually being Jesus. Which makes them a lot less like protagonists and a lot more like saints.
And, if they are saints, then these films are just visual hagiography; hagiography being the retelling of the lives and achievements of saints, culminating in a chirotic moment where that saint’s badassness is officially acknowledged by God himself to the world.
The chirotic moment is the moment when the Lord comes and says, “I choose you.” Holland says, “In hagiography there is no room for interpretation of events prior to the chirotic moment, because everything leads up to that and is painted in the light of that.
There is no moment where the protagonist could have gone a different route or made a different moral choice. Time is not linear anymore; it is all the same. In narratives, before a climatic moment, everything is up to many interpretations.”
The GND movies go down one way and one way only; they ask one question (“Who do you say I am?”), and they answer it: God is good always, and always God is good. They are straightforward; they are palatable. Pureflix is the Dhar Mann of feature length video content.
Does that mean that they are harmless? No. They are offensive; they are full of stereotypes and misinformation, and I do not even want to know where their money comes from or where it goes. They are problematic in the most basic sense of the word.
There are so many well-researched and well-articulated articles and videos about that fact, and, yet, they still made four of them. They’re doing it for somebody, somewhere out there. That is why I wanted to give these films a fair shake.
“The biggest thing is that…that God has a specific purpose and a plan for your life; and, uh, and he is real, and there is hope in him.” “So, April…” What’s interesting about the film’s use of that phrase, “If there is no immortality of
The soul, then all things are lawful,” or, “If there is no God, all things are permissible,” is that they use it to support the film’s idea that the bible gives us answers. It gives us guidance that belief in Jesus Christ can give us the freedom and liberation
From pain and suffering that we all so secretly, deeply desire. But, in context, in “The Brothers Karamazov”, that statement actually brings about a lot more questions than it does answers. When Dmitri poses that specific question, “All things are lawful, then?
Men can do what they like?” he’s proposing it to a journalist right before his trial for the murder of his father, which he did not commit. And the journalist responds by saying that clever men already do what they like.
Ivan is concerned that a world where no one believes in God or is governed by a belief in God will fall into complete chaos and injustice, when it’s already happened. Dmitri is found guilty. Dmitri gets sent to jail for something that he didn’t do. A murderer walks.
It’s already happened; the death of God has already occurred in their world. You cannot unring that bell. “God is dead. We have killed him. We have free will.” That monstrous world that Ivan describes–that selfish, evil, lawless land where cannibalism
Runs amok–that is the world that “Midnight Mass” presents to us as a direct product of the belief in God as a moral authority. In “The Brothers Karamazov”, the belief in God brings nothing but questions; in “God’s Not Dead”, it gives us answers; and, in “Midnight Mass”, it gives us justification.
If Dostoyevsky was putting Eastern Orthodoxy on trial to see if it prevails, then Michael Flanagan is nailing Catholicism to the cross to see if it will rise again. They are rewarded for their actions; they are rewarded for how they choose to love.
In the final moments of “Midnight Mass”, the people of Crockett Island stand amongst their burning homes–the wreckage of their God’s work. *Singing* And they begin to sing. They liberate themselves from their belief in a transcendent God that would require such monstrous acts of them through a return to their most basic principles.
As the sun rises on Crockett Island, Ali and Sheriff Hassan begin to pray; Erin lies like Jesus on the cross beneath the angel; Father Paul and Mildred hold Sarah’s body on a bridge that she loved as a child; and Lisa and Riley’s brother are sat on a tiny rowboat in the middle
Of the water, watching everything that they have ever known and everyone that they have ever loved turn to ash. And Lisa looks at him and says… “I can’t feel my legs.” Suffering has returned; liberation is over, even for the innocent. “Weeping may last through the night, but joy cometh in the morning.”
“Midnight Mass” was never about resurrection; it was never about bringing God back from the dead; it’s about standing in your darkest possible moment, when you have become the devil, and answering the question. It’s about keeping God alive whoever you say that he is. Alright. That’s it. We’re done. We’re done. We’re done.
God save the queen. I can’t believe I’m done…I’m so happy to be done filming this. This has been the hardest thing that I’ve done in a really long time. Like, between the fact that I started the script in September and just the sheer amount
Of research that was required, and there was always something else that needed to be looked into and explored, and the script didn’t make any sense for so long; it still doesn’t; editing is gonna be a fucking nightmare, but… And, then, the tech issues…
And I film all this on my phone; I have to keep everything on a hard drive because I don’t have space on my computer to even run Final Cut. Like, this is…this has been such a monster. So, thank you for watching all of it. I appreciate it. I would like to do more.
I’m planning to do more. I hope they don’t take this long. I’m trying to get better at other social media, so I do post some stuff about this on my Instagram; but, like, my Instagram’s, like, mostly my family and my friends, so it feels really weird to post anything, like, advertisey?
So, don’t expect, like, influencer-level content if you follow there. But, if you do, I do sometimes post about like the process of these and…and how they’re coming along, so there’s that. Um, you can follow my tiktok…that’s mostly gay shit. And, um…yeah. That’s about it. I appreciate your help.
Not that you did anything, but…you know. I apologize to chairs, so… I can hear my neighbors; okay. I…it’s 2:02 AM, I can hear my neighbors talking, so I think they’re probably about to come complain about how loud I’m talking so… Bye. That’s a wrap! I keep on waking up, walking alone in the street… I keep on hearing the voices; they’re trying to scream… A child in a blanket of lead, on the river I wade through Searching reflections for all of the answers I thought I knew
I wanna burn down the farm Set fire to the wood that built me so strong For a world that I cannot Survive I want to watch it all fall Swallow the ashes I make of the stall In the hopes that they might Make me feel alive
Family of monsters can live as long as their youngest So, cut down the fountain of youth and tie it to her wrist A child in a cave, on the edge of the river I’m hiding Traded her matches for all of the time she’s spent biding
I wanna burn down the farm Set fire to the wood that built me so strong For a world that I cannot Survive I want to watch it all fall Swallow the ashes I make of the stall In the hopes that they might Make me feel alive
Call the fire department Tell them there’s been an arson Forget the village buckets There’s not a damn thing left Call the fire department Tell them there’s been an arson Forget the village buckets There’s not a damn thing left
I wanna burn down the farm Set fire to the wood that built me so strong For a world that I did not Did not survive I want to watch it all fall Swallow the ashes I make of the stall In the hopes that they might Bring me back to life
Hello and welcome to Interprepedia! My name is Rosa. I’m an interpreter. In this video I’ll be sharing a free practice exam for the state court interpreter certification. Practice exercises prepared by the NCSC for the Judicial Council of California. They can be used to prepare for the court interpreting exam
Or to study to improve your skills. Find the link to the practice material in the description box. Before you review them please watch for a moment. This mock exam covers three modes of interpretation: Sight translation, consecutive, and simultaneous interpretation. However, there are two caveats.
The practice exam is a PDF document. It doesn’t include any recordings. If you want the “real test” experience follow this video I’ll read the oral portions for you. The practice exam is only in English. To make it language-specific, you’ll need to translate some parts.
I’ll read the oral portions of the exam in English. This will allow for more colleagues to benefit from it. 60% of the actual oral exam requires you to interpret EN> L2 You’ll still be able to practice and test your skills. Read the instructions in the practice material. pg. 1 – pg. 27
If you want to mimic the real test experience with this video stop reading on pg. 27. Review the rest after this video. Recommended setup: Computer Open this video in one tab. Open the PDF in a second tab. These are the tools you’ll need: Device to play video and open PDF file. A bigger screen is best for the sight translation texts. You’ll need something to record yourself: A phone, tablet, computer, voice recorder, etc. This is crucial to review your performance. You’ll need headphones, at least for the simultaneous part. You’ll need note-taking tools. You’ll need bilingual dictionaries for terminology.
Let me explain how we’ll do this. We’ll start with two sight translations. You’ll need to open the PDF on a separate tab. I’ll tell you the page number where you need to be. I’ll keep track of time. To mimic the real exam You’ll have 6 minutes to complete each sight translation.
Then, we’ll start the consecutive interpretation. I’ll read the questions and answers. No need to worry about pausing. You’ll have enough time to render your interpretation. If you need repetition, use the timestamps to skip back/forward Allow yourself only two repetitions. The last part will be the simultaneous interpretation.
It’s always an opening/closing argument by an attorney at 120 wpm Each exercise has a script with scoring units in bold letters. You can use it as a reference to get an objective score. They also give you valuable instructions to evaluate yourself, how to create glossaries and more.
Please, read the instructions from pg. 1 to pg. 27. If you’re ready to do the mock exam right now, keep watching. If you are not ready yet, stop watching before we start. You’re welcome back anytime 🙂 Use the timestamps to skip segments. Let’s get started! Good luck! You did it!
Congratulations on putting in time and effort to improve and test your skills! If you’re preparing for a certification test, I wish you the very best As always, thank you so much for watching! ¡Adiós!
Welcome to TFP, The Theatrefolk Podcast. I am Lindsay Price, resident playwright for Theatrefolk. Hello, I hope you’re well. Thanks for listening. Welcome to Episode 87! Yes, dork central, that would be me. So, you can catch the links for this episode at theatrefolk.com/episode87.
Last week, we talked about character interpretation from the director’s perspective and how two directors from my play, Cobweb Dreams, saw their particular productions. You know, same script, same set, same costumes, same blocking, and then completely different productions. So, this week, we are going to talk to the students from that production.
I have two sets of students, each who prepared the same character — one for the high school production of Cobweb Dreams and then one for the middle school production — and I really wanted to get their point of view on character interpretation, especially since they were
Able to see, you know, basically, right in front of them, another actor preparing the exact same role. So, how does that affect their preparation and were they intimidated or exhilarated, right? So, let’s talk to our first set. Excerpt: Oh! Do you smell that? Ugh! What? It’s the worst thing I have ever smelled!
Quick! Plug your ears! Hold your breath! Why is everybody yelling? Bottom… you have changed! Cha-cha-changed! What is on your head? Can we get up yet? Not yet! Still stinky! Hee haw! You’re all just making asses of yourself. Lindsay: Hi! All right.
So, I am here and I am in Owensboro and this is actually a very cool situation because we’re sitting in a theatre and it’s empty and it’s quiet. The stage is empty and I’m sitting here with two actors. I’m sitting here first with Tucker. Hello! Tucker: Hello! Lindsay: And with Cory. Hello!
Cory: Hello! Lindsay: And, Tucker, what are we here to talk about? Tucker: Cobweb Dreams. Lindsay: Cobweb Dreams! That’s right. It’s tonight, right? It’s this afternoon. We have the middle school production doing their first performance and then tonight with Cory we have the high school performance, right? Cory: Yes, we do.
Lindsay: Are you guys excited? Cory: Oh, yes. Tucker: Very. Lindsay: Very? You guys can finally get to get it in front of an audience. Are you ready, Tucker? Tucker: Yeah! As ready as I’ll ever be! Lindsay: Yeah? That’s good. How about you, Cory? Cory: Yes, very much ready. Lindsay: Good.
So, what’s really interesting is that, so, Tucker is in the middle school production of Cobweb Dreams and Cory is in the high school production and they’re playing the exact same roles. Cory, what role do you play? Cory: Bottom. Lindsay: Yes.
So, Cobweb Dreams is a sort of a version of A Midsummer Night’s Dream and some of the same characters are the same. Just like that. So, did you want this part, Cory? Cory: Oh, yes, very. It’s a comedic role. Love to make people laugh. When I read the script, wanted Bottom.
Lindsay: How about you, Tucker? Tucker: Same. Lindsay: Yeah? You really wanted this part? Tucker: Yeah, I did. Lindsay: Tell me why. Tucker: I like making people laugh and being laughed at. So, that’s pretty much it. Lindsay: Now, is this part easy for you or difficult?
Tucker: Well, it’s something that I know how to do, but there’s different difficulties because it’s a different character. Lindsay: What’s something that’s difficult? Tucker: The lines confuse me sometimes. Lindsay: Yeah? Tucker: I just cut people off a lot in the show. Lindsay: Right. So, it’s hard to get the timing right. Tucker: Yeah.
Lindsay: How about you, Cory? Is this an easy part or difficult? Cory: It’s a difficult. I believe that the mindset of the character you have to play is very difficult to understand. You have to get that arrogant feel. Lindsay: So, because you guys are playing two different productions, exact same part,
What’s really interesting to me is how there’s a lot of similarities — same script, you guys are working on the same set, you have essentially the same costume — and yet, time and time again, the characters, two people who are playing the same character do them differently.
So, Tucker, what do you think that you do that’s different than Cory? Tucker: I feel like, since our group’s younger, we react differently. Lindsay: Yeah. Tucker: To different things. Like, I don’t see Tatanya the way his Bottom does. Lindsay: Yeah. How do you see Tatanya?
Tucker: I see it as there’s a girl who likes me, why not join on in the fun? Lindsay: It’s a fun experience for this character. Tucker: Yeah. Lindsay: What about you, Cory? How does Bottom interact with Tatanya? Cory: I believe that he’s so into himself that he doesn’t realize that the person in
Love with him isn’t even human. He’s just like, “Okay. This gorgeous girl is hitting on me. I’m just going to go along with it. Why not?” Lindsay: Right. Then, you guys, when you were doing your rehearsals, did you guys talk about the role together? Tucker: Yes. Cory: Yes.
Lindsay: What was that like, Tucker? Tucker: Well, we talked about our back story a lot. Lindsay: Oh, tell me what your back story was. Tucker: Well, I’m related to Snout in the show and I don’t believe he is. Lindsay: Oh, cool. Okay. We’ll do one then the other. Tucker: All right.
Lindsay: So, you’re related to Snout in what way? Tucker: Yeah. We’re brothers and Quince is like his best friend and they needed somebody else in the show that they were doing. Lindsay: Hey, is Snout the one who jumps into your arms at the end? Tucker: Yeah. Lindsay: Yeah! Okay. That’s really good.
I like that, building that relationship. Tucker: Yeah, they needed somebody else and I was like, “Nah,” and they were like, “Come on,” so I did it. And then, it turns out I’m obsessed with it so why not do it everywhere I go?
And just perform and perform and perform it even though I’m not that good. Lindsay: Do you think this character knows that he’s not that good? Tucker: No. He thinks he’s the best thing in the world. Lindsay: Yeah? Tucker: Yeah. Lindsay: Cool. And then, what was your back story, Cory?
Cory: It was I actually am related to Snout. However, I put it as more of adeeper sad kind of like our mother left us after which so Snout kind of raised mee and all that with my father and I put it as he doesn’t really
See the world through anyone else’s eyes except Snout. So, he’s really arrogant, he’s like Snout. Lindsay: Really? Why is back story important? Cory: It helps character development so much. It tells you were you’re from, how you develop, how you perform out there. Lindsay: Yeah.
Do you have a lot of experience, Tucker, doing all this kind of back story and character development for your stuff? Tucker: Well, I usually wrote, like, a page. But, for this one, I had somebody who was that but they were behind me and helped me which was Cory.
So, I ended up writing two, three pages because he helped me, like, he helped me get through. So, I was confused on a lot of stuff and he’s older so he would have understood. Lindsay: So, you have someone who’s older who’s playing the same part as you and he’s
Sort of like, if there’s anything that you didn’t understand in the script, then he sort of explained it. Tucker: Yup. Lindsay: What’s something that you didn’t understand? Tucker: The song because I’m singing and he told me the song.
That didn’t really work out for me because I’m a younger kid so I ended up singing a different song. But that helped me out a lot. Lindsay: Yeah, just to have someone who kind of throws you, lets you know. Tucker: Yeah.
Lindsay: Did you ever feel any pressure, Tucker, to act the way Cory does? Tucker: I wanted to be as good as Cory, but I wanted to be different because I’m not Cory. I’m not going to be Cory.
But I wanted to be with him but be myself and be different, but still be as good as Cory. Lindsay: Did you feel any pressure, like, just sort of that you know you had to mentor kind of another person who’s playing your same character?
Cory: Yeah, when I saw the middle school perform and he was up there, I kind of felt, like, responsible to help him develop and help me develop in the same way. Lindsay: How did it help you? Cory: He taught me the differences between, like, his reactions are totally different from my reactions.
So, I kind of combined them together to make a completely new reaction that both parties helped create. Lindsay: Yeah, and have you ever done this before where there’s another person, like, right there all the time, playing the same part? Cory: Nope, never done this before.
Lindsay: So, how has that helped you as an actor? Cory: It lets me see two different sides of the same character — two different roles of the exact same character — because, when I see the show today, I’m going to be looking at his part.
He’s doing it completely different from me, but that’s okay because he’s doing it his own way which is what I respect. I love that people can go, “I’m going to do it this way, but I’m going to do it this way, and it can be even better. It could be amazing.”
Lindsay: Well, this is a perfect example of character interpretation, right? That there’s no one way to play a part, there’s no one way to interpret a theatrical experience. How has this helped your acting, do you think, Tucker? Tucker: Well, I felt like I had more help this time.
Like, not that I needed help but Cory was there to help me. Like, I wouldn’t have understood half the stuff in the show if it wasn’t for Cory because Cory knew how to explain things to me when other people didn’t really understand our
Role because they weren’t the ones practicing the lines every night. So, he helped me, like, back story a lot. He helped me through that, like, because it’s not the easiest thing for me to do. Lindsay: No, and also, I mean, how long have you been acting? Tucker: A while.
Lindsay: Yeah, but is this one of the few parts where it’s been this involved? Tucker: Yeah. Lindsay: Yeah. So, how are you going to tackle your next role, do you think, based on this experience? Tucker: I don’t know.
Like, I’m going to find somebody who can help me out, too, who will actually, like, they know it as well because, like, I saw that when Cory helped me, it helped me grow so much and another person could do the exact same thing because I want the help.
I want the criticism because all criticism does is help you. It helps you more and more. Lindsay: What about you, Cory? What will you take from this to the next thing that you do? Cory: I believe the next thing I do is, when I get the character and when I get the script,
I’ll actually have someone perform the other character so I can take their interpretation and mold it into my own interpretation to get two different sides of the story. Lindsay: Well, it’s so funny because sometimes you see something you just never thought of, you know? And that can really help you grow.
Just what you guys are saying, it can help you grow as an actor. So, you’re excited for the show. What’s the thing you’re looking forward to the most, Tucker? Tucker: I don’t know. Doing my final monologue. Lindsay: Doing your final monologue Tucker: It’s really fun. Lindsay: Yeah?
I think that moment that you guys have, well, I just love it when Snout just runs down and he leaps into your arms. Tucker: And I catch him, yeah. Lindsay: Are you looking forward to the audience? Tucker: Yeah, yeah. Lindsay: Responding to what you have to do? Tucker: Yeah, definitely.
Lindsay: How about you, Cory? Cory: My favorite part about performing is the audience reaction because I take what they give me and I go, “Okay. I’m doing something really good here.” I just love when they give me a laugh. That’s my favorite part of doing this. Lindsay: Awesome. Cool!
Thank you so much for talking to me. Tucker: Thank you. Cory: Thank you. Lindsay: Ah, great! Awesome. Okay. So, now we’re going to talk to two different actors — again, one high school student and one middle school student — and this brings in a different aspect of character interpretation
— the same character played by two different genders. So, how does gender affect interpretation from the actor’s point of view, okay? Let’s do it. Excerpt: Ow! My wings! Get off of me! You get off! Do you mind? I don’t like being flattened. What are you doing here? What are you doing here?
Why are you hiding in the bushes? Who’s hiding? It’s a free forest! It’s not like we were spying you. What? Spying? Who said anything about spying? How long have you been there? We were visiting our friend! You have no business here! None of you have business here. Ugh!
It isn’t nice to sneak up on a fairy, Moth. Lindsay: Okay. So, now I’m here with John Thomas. Hello! And Lucy, say hi, Lucy. Lucy: Hello. Lindsay: And both of you also play the same character in Cobweb Dreams. Lucy, what is your character? Lucy: Thicket. Lindsay: Thicket.
Thicket is sort of the best friend-ish, brother-ish character to the main character, Cobweb, right? Right. Now, the thing is that, in the middle school version — Lucy, which you are in — Thicket is played by you and you are a…? Lucy: Girl. Lindsay: Girl, yes.
And John Thomas in the high school version, you’re a guy, right? And so, what part were you looking for when you auditioned for the play? John: I was actually looking at Puck. I really thought he was very playful and mischievous. It was a different character than I was just playing.
And then, Miss Greer put on the board on the auditions the names of flower fairies and water fairies and all that, and then she starred certain ones that she wanted to turn into a guy and I was just thinking, “Huh.
That’s going to be interesting to see how they’re going to turn it into a guy.” I didn’t think I was going to be the one to change it. But it’s been really interesting. Lindsay: It’s interesting for me, too, because, you know, for me, I saw Thicket as a girl,
But I really like Thicket as a boy. Like, what do you think of the character as a guy, John Thomas? John: I just think he’s more like a brother to her. If you have a girl play it, it would be more like the best friend, you know. Willow’s kind of like the mommy.
But Thicket is kind of like the brother and he’s also kind of an authority figure to her in the end whenever he just tells her, “You know, you belong with us. I don’t know why you can’t see it.” Lindsay: Now, Lucy, how do you see the character?
Lucy: Well, I see it really playful that she doesn’t really want to get in trouble with Tatanya but, at the same time, she wants to have fun and she wants to go with Cobweb. And, every time Cobweb gets in trouble she’s worried that Cobweb will rat her out, really.
Lindsay: Do you know what’s really interesting though? When I saw taking pictures yesterday of you, Lucy, every time, like, Cobweb was threatened or every time the flower fairies came around, you made a fist and it’s like you were going to get up and you were going to beat somebody up. Is that conscious?
Did you make a choice to be angry and make that really tense fist? Lucy: The first time that happened, like, I was up in her face and I was like, “Wait. Hey, how did I get here?” and then, the other times I thought, “Oh, well, I thought that was fun.
Might as well go with it.” Lindsay: Yeah, it’s a really interesting image which I think the high school, John Thomas, your Thicket’s not like that at all. How do you see that? John: He is a lot like Willow.
The way that I looked into the back story is that Willow and Thicket were brother and sister. Lindsay: Right. John: And they both do kind of worry about Cobweb and they’re really concerned about Cobweb, but it’s also like she has to make her own decisions and she has to fail at times,
Just like everyone. Lindsay: Right. Yeah, everybody has to. Lucy, did you do some background work on your character? Lucy: I did! Lindsay: So, what’s your back story? Lucy: Well, Thicket is Willow’s twin sister but they’re like fraternal twins — they’re
Nothing alike — and Cobweb, they just kind of ran into Cobweb one day when Cobweb was about to get beat up by a flower fairy and Willow and Thicket kind of jump in and save her. Lindsay: Yeah. There’s a moment at the end where, in the middle school version, it’s you and Willow
And you’re sort of Willow’s revealing to Thicket for the first time that she’d really missed Cobweb and you guys hold hands when you walk away. What’s that moment like for you? Lucy: Well, it’s kind of big for us.
I mean, Willow has always been, you know, like, “Oh, I’m worried about her,” but, you know, she’s offended in that and then, in that scene, she’s more, “She’s my best friend. I’m going to die without her. I really need her there.”
Lindsay: Did it make sense for you to hold hands when you walked off? You hold hands in other areas, too, don’t you? Lucy: Uh-huh. Lindsay: Yeah. John Thomas, you and Willow don’t do that, do you? John: No. Lindsay: Why? John: I think Thicket really gets annoyed with Willow because she’s always worried and
She’s always trying to control Cobweb and he really just, as he says, she has to make her own decisions and he gets annoyed with her because he has a bunch of stuff to say. Thicket is younger than Willow and I think he’s a lot wiser even though he is younger
And he has so much that he wants to say and he wants to take care of everyone but Willow isn’t letting him so he just gets annoyed with her sometimes. Lindsay: I love how we have, like, so it’s the exact same show, essentially, but, you
Know, people are able to make completely different interpretations of their character. Lucy, what was it like to see your character played by another person? Lucy: Well, I always saw Thicket in one way. Like, the boyish fairy, very happy, very playful, and then, when I saw John Thomas, I was like,
“Oh, Thicket can be another way,” and I was amazed by that. Lindsay: Yeah? Did you ever feel any pressure to play it his way? Lucy: Not really, no. Lindsay: That’s good. That’s good. And what was it like to see the different interpretation of Thicket?
John: It was interesting to see how the show was written for a girl. I really thought it was cool and, you know, I had known Lucy just through seeing her perform at the middle school and so I really was happy for her to get the role and it was just, you
Know, just looking at her, it’s just like, “Wow!” I really love how we can interpret things differently and it still can be such a good show. Lindsay: Yeah. It’s like it’s very open, isn’t it? I love that. So, are you guys looking forward to the show?
So, tonight we have the high school and this afternoon the middle school. What are you looking forward to, Lucy? Lucy: Performing for my mom. She’s been really excited about this. She’s helped me run my lines. She’s made my costume. She’s with me all steps. Lindsay: Cool. How about you?
John: I’m just really excited to premier something. You know, we’re the first group to do this in the United States and it’s just really cool when, you know, twenty years down the road, I can look back and say, “This is what I did.”
Lindsay: Well, and also your names are going to be, when it gets officially published, you’re going to have your names in the published work which is also very cool. This is a very unique experience that we have the same show as middle school and high school.
And, also — you must have — did you have a conversation together about your character? Lucy: Yeah. Lindsay: And how do you think that this experience is going to help you the next role that you do? Lucy, what do you think?
Lucy: Well, next role I do, I’ll know not just to see one way. I’ll know to look at it from different points of views, you know, see them as something else. Lindsay: Cool. How about you? John: I’ve learned that you can’t just look at a script and get your character that way.
You have to research and you have to, I mean, it’s little stuff like looking into the name like where does the name come from. So, I’ve learned that I can’t just not do back story. I have to know who this character is. Lindsay: Awesome. John: It just makes the experience so much cooler.
Lindsay: Awesome. Okay. Break a leg, buys. Thank you! John: All right. Thank you. Thank you, guys! Okay. So, don’t forget, you can find the links for this episode at theatrefolk.com/episode87. Before we go, let’s do some THEATREFOLK NEWS. It’s a play feature! It’s a play feature! It’s time to feature a play!
So, our play of the week this week is Postcards from Shakespeare by Allison Williams. Allison has a number of plays with us — Drop Dead, Juliet!, Hamlette, Mmmbeth, The Scarlet Heart — and we are thrilled to have another in our catalog. So, here’s the deal.
Shakespeare has writer’s block and he doesn’t know how to fix it so he turns to the only person who can get him out of this jam, Queen Elizabeth I. Of course! Who else would you turn to, right? Okay. Here is a short moment from the play:
WILLIAM: The words just aren’t coming out…it used to be so easy! Bang out fifty-odd pages, rush it to the theatre, collect the money. Four histories, two comedies and a really long poem in the last four years! But now, I am a block, a stone, a worse than senseless thing.
Please, Elizabeth, no-one understands me like you do. What shall I do? ELIZABETH: How dreadful for you! Sometimes I don’t know what to say, either! But then I just yell, “Chop off his head!” or “I’m not getting married!” and that covers most situations. If I yell it in French, I look clever, too.
“Couper la tête! Je ne vais pas épouser!” I don’t think that will work for you, though. You’re already married. And you can’t chop off people’s heads. Well, you can, but you may not. Where would we be if everyone just chopped off someone’s head when they felt like it? Spain.
And then we’d all have to take three hours’ nap every afternoon, just when the weather’s getting nice. Willy—William—your plays make me—what’s that feeling when no-one’s attacking you with guns or asking you to marry some repellent little toad from Norway? Happy! They make me happy. Not too many things do that any more.
They say a change is as good as a rest, Willy dear, so let’s have a change of scene. See what I did there? “Scene?” I’m sure I could be a writer, too, if I wasn’t so busy crushing the Welsh. Enclosed is a purse of ducats. Well, not enclosed, attached.
Well, handed to you by the messenger with this letter. You know what I mean. Take a little trip on me, Willy, and see if that gives you some fresh ideas. Don’t think of it as giving up—it’s like a strategic retreat. Like the Spanish! “Invincible armada,” my Aunt Fanny.
So, Shakespeare takes a whirlwind tour around the world in thirty minutes looking for inspiration. Venice, Egypt, there’s something rotten in the state of Denmark. Go to theatrefolk.com. Search for Postcards from Shakespeare. Read the sample pages. Laugh your butt off. Buy a copy. Do it now.
Finally, where, oh, where can you find this podcast? We post new episodes every Wednesday at theatrefolk.com and on our Facebook page and Twitter. You can find us on YouTube.com/Theatrefolk. You can find us on the Stitcher app and you can subscribe to TFP on iTunes. Go there, search on the word “Theatrefolk.”
That’s where you’ll find us. And that’s where we’re going to end. Take care, my friends. Take care.
