Archive for January, 2010

Could UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible cultural heritage be harmful ?

Most people have heard of UNESCO’s list of World heritage sites – a list aiming at the protection and preservation of physical buildings, monuments and natural sites considered of interest to mankind all over the world – but, few have heard of the relatively new convention from the same organization on the protection of Intangible cultural heritage, or “living heritage”. The convention dates back to 2003, but entered into force in 2006. The reasoning behind the convention is that in an increasingly globalized world with uniformization policies, environmental degradation, and quick social transformations, intangible cultural heritage (such as: social practices, rituals, festive events, oral traditions, traditional performances/ craftmanship, knowledge about nature, etc. that provide people with a sense of identity and continuity) has become more vulnerable and fragile. These are traditions that are generally passed on from generation to generation, with only the human mind as the depository. The traditions are considered valuable, because they bring human beings closer together, ensure sustainable development, and serve as a source for cultural diversity and human creativity.

Sweden has not yet ratified the convention, although work is underway to do so. Some Swedish traditions and practices up for discussion to become world heritage are: the dancing around the maypole on Midsummer’s Eve, the Lucia celebration, and the special practice of tending to raindeer of the indigenous Same people in northern Sweden.

Although I think the intentions of the convention are very good, I can’t help but to wonder if some suggested measures may not be harmful to the very traditions they are set out to protect. Intangible cultural heritage is by its very nature dynamic – constantly developing and merging with other traditions as new generations take ownership of the heritage. The moment you try to define it by identifying and preserving specific practices, you may at the same time run the risk of killing or stomping the tradition. To a certain degree UNESCO recognizes this risk, and stresses that Intangible cultural heritage is traditional and living at the same time, and the convention states that it is constantly recreated by communities or groups in response to their history and environment. Yet, some of the safeguarding measures listed in the convention include: identification, and promotion / enhancement particularly through formal and non-formal education – all of which rest on the notion of “authenticity”, which in turn suggests something “static”. However, living heritage is everything but static, which becomes the dilemma.

I can see how the measures of the convention could be more effective for certain types of intangible cultural heritage, such as where the cultural practices are connected to the natural environment. In those cases, it’s straightforward. If there are no forests, plains, or pastures certain traditional ways of living simply cannot be practised. In such cases it is great that we now have a stronger international convention upon which we can argue protection of these spaces.  But what about “dancing around the maypole”? Should a tradition like that be defined and “taught” in a formal manner? How would the tradition be affected by that? And what about the delicate interplay between traditions and commercial interest? The latter can water down a tradition terribly rendering it phony, but it can also reinforce and maintain a tradition. For example, around this time in Sweden, there is a wonderful tradition of eating a very calorie-rich and delicious pastry, called “semla”. It should be devoured on or in close proximity to Mardi Gras, i.e. Shrove Tuesday.

The filling is comprised of almond paste and whipped cream, which would be considered the “authentic” filling, but in later years a lot of variations to this filling have popped up, ex. vanilla cream instead of the traditional almond paste, and even variations on the size and hence, the amount of whipped cream used. My initial reaction to these later versions of the bun was that they were not quite “real” semlor, but at the same time, perhaps without these alternatives fewer people, for reasons of health and taste, would eat them? What consequences would that have on the tradition some years down the road? And furthermore, at what point do the new elements of the tradition become accepted as part of the “old” tradition? Since traditions constantly evolve it is quite likely that such a point would be reached eventually.

Whether we like it or not, semlor with vanilla cream instead of almond paste is a result of creativity. Some creative developments we embrace, others we don’t, but that has to do with personal taste. As long as the creative developments have value for some people, they are, in a sense, innovative. Human creativity is not only a result of cultural diversity and traditions, but also constantly forms the traditions and the diversity, thus creating a circle where traditions and human creativity constantly inspire and nurture each other.

If people believe that rituals and traditions can be controlled through, for example, external sanctioning of certain developments and changes, but not of others, then the intangible cultural heritage may be headed down a slippery slope to a slow but sure death. Fragile as cultural traditions may be, they are ultimately best nurtured in the human mind and spirit, and not with authorities.

Sandra Ljung

I got a text from my good friend Peter Haas, the Executive Director of AIDG about the situation in Haiti. It is a critical piece that describes how things in very short order can get worse.

After 9-11 how much money did you have in your pocket? Could you have lived off of that for a week? What if you lived in LA and it was destroyed? The port gone, no airport, no electricity, no cellphones, no ATMs, no gas, banks closed, dozens of people you know are dead, over a million people making their way into the streets of your home town. How would you feel? How long until you would grow desperate? This is the current life in Haiti, in the big cities and the small towns, unaffected by the earth quake structurally but destroyed spiritually. Bit by bit, they are unraveling at a staggering rate. Without aid distribution points, without soldiers, and with supplies going to Port Au Prince and internally displaced people coming from Port Au Prince every day – this is life in Cap Haitien, Haiti’s second largest city.

Click here for the piece: Haiti