The Invisible Hand of Europe

Another possible weakness of the interpretive approach might be discerned in constructing cases and building arguments which are not representative of the subject in general. On what evidence, one could ask, are these observations being formulated? To what extent do the examples provided in the book relate to the larger phenomena and actually offer some valid explanation? How can merely one’s own feeling or experience be considered a valid basis for interpretation? Again, this study is not meant to provide ultimate answers, but much more than this, to problematize certain subjects by referring to some ideas of greater universality and link them with concrete applications. It may therefore be difficult to verify the results of such findings, but the choice of approach was one which was made consciously. An essay, in opposition to a rigid academic work, may be seen as an attempt to share the author’s comments on the subject in a freer and more popular way than the classical structure that a scientific work demands. I may only hope this book will be inspiring and shed some light on what may otherwise remain hidden.

In my opinion, heritage deserves to be analysed and interpreted from many angles and perspectives. While trying to avoid factual mistakes or irrelevant arguments should be a general rule in every circumstance, with this book I would like to take the liberty afforded to an essayist for a number of reasons.

First of all, I believe interdisciplinarity is particularly suitable for the research of heritage, especially when the domain is so anthropocentric as it seems to be in its Europeanized version. Social anthropology, museum studies, memory studies or sociology would be some of the disciplines that are suitable for heritage analyses. However, as often transpires with interdisciplinarity, there is a challenge as to which angle one should choose to approach the issue from.

The method I apply in this work is indeed interpretive, but its choice should not be seen as negating some of the usual academic expectations. Acknowledging the traditional approaches to heritage and the discipline’s own rich heritage (!), I would like to invite the readers to engage in a hopefully intersubjective interpretation of one diverse phenomenon, namely the Europeanization of heritage in museums. Many of the issues and aspects of heritage have been discussed in the academic literature on the subject and it has not been my intention to repeat, rehash or contest these previous standpoints. To do so for even one aspects of the Europeanization of heritage examined here, diversity, would be an academic monograph in itself and most certainly not my intention. Rather, with the form of this book I would like to relate directly to several aspects and qualities of heritage in the process of the Europeanization of heritage which I regard as the most significant.

Intertextuality is perhaps the most preeminent in this regard as I see much of heritage as a way of categorizing, narrating and transmitting lives in their diversity as well as the direct experiences of people in a way in which that they may be rendered intersubjective. This “translation” of the subjective into the intersubjective, from memories to social memory, takes place with the use of different cultural texts. It also employs communication strategies and specific categorizations which allow a highly complex and hybrid domain to be presented. Furthermore, not only the uniqueness of heritage but the dynamics of postmodernity as well may seem to encourage the inclusion of images, metaphors and other quotations in this work. The ubiquitous recurrence of them all, in all thinkable forms of presence (often fragmented and usually incomplete), could be considered a valid part of postmodern experience, but it also comprises a considerable part of heritage interpretation. When visitors come to museums, they do not refer to the content offered by collections having left their backgrounds, habits and emotions behind. Why would heritage analysis be invalid when it is as subjective as that of visitors to museums? One could say, because there are different expectations from academics, who try to understand and explain processes which are greater than individual participation. Yet this is precisely what this book offers. It does so, however, by adopting another of the unique characteristics of heritage: interpretation.

My own background as a heritage interpreter, in the university environment, museums and other heritage institutions, enables me to offer a unique insight into this issue. I have been privileged to work with experts, curators and authors as well as with various audiences and collections which all have provided me with a healthy sense of the complexity of heritage. To make the book accessible to readers in both camps, I have made the conscious decision to reduce the number of footnotes and bibliographical positions, realizing that readers interested in pursuing certain matters further will easily find the data they need. The idea of the book as a whole is to provide an overview of the aforementioned complexity and, much like a good museum guide, I then leave the reader to explore the collection on their own, giving them freedom of interpretation and, hopefully, having stimulated their curiosity to explore things further. Equally, I do not intend to supplant the need to visit these heritage institutions themselves by delving into the details to be found in their guidebooks and on museum websites. Instead, I present some selected fragments of the numerous activities conducted by museums in order to present how they might be connected with elements of the European program. Regardless of the arguably subjective selection of museums and values, it is believed that they are, like the European Union, united in their diversity and by values which are commonly seen as fundamental for European civilization.

It should, by now, be clear that some apparently arbitrary decisions had to be made in order to limit the scope of the analysis. Whenever possible, I try to provide the reasons behind the choices I have made. There is always a risk, however, that the selection of museums and/values is neither comprehensive nor complete. In fact, it is not a risk – it is a certainty. Nevertheless, I believe it may be helpful to any who are interested in both museums and Europe. Given the heterogeneity, complexity and the dynamics of both of the terms, it might be useful to examine a framework for its analysis and interpretation. Such a framework will be presented in this book and it is hoped that it can be effectively used by other researchers and museum visitors.