Tourism is a growing industry,
especially in the area of the 'archaeological experience'. Tourists
are looking for the opportunity to experience archaeology first hand,
a wish that is fulfilled with rides such as Disneyland's Indiana
Jones Adventure Ride. Alongside their experience tourists are
demanding an opportunity to bring some part of the experience home so
they can preserve the memory. In response the industry is now mass
producing archaeological souvenirs such as an authentic pottery,
carving, or statue.
How is it though, that this mass
produced souvenir is authentic? It was not actually made in the
ancient or historic past. It is simply a piece of modern day culture
made to look like something from the past. People are satisfied with
it though, and take it home after their vacation to show family and
friends that they have participated in an archaeological experience.
The question of authenticity in
archaeology is also present for replicas. In 1987 a prehistoric
menhir was discovered in Germany. In 1989 a replica was erected near
where the original was found. The original itself had been
transported to the State Museum of Wurttemberg in Stuttgart. To make
matters even more interesting, the original is in the cellar of the
museum, while a second replica is on display. The material of the
copies is not the same as the original, and knocking on a copy will
result in a hollow sound. i
Even though they are copies, locals and tourists alike treat them as
the originals and believe them to embody the same aura and value as
the original. This is a phenomena that takes place at sites all
around the world. Needless to say, in both the case of the souvenirs
and the replicas, they are viewed as being authentic.
How then, is this authenticity created
and maintained? Cornelius Holtorf insists that in the case of the
souvenirs it has to do with what individuals “believe themselves to
have bought, not what they have actually bought”.ii
Individuals, though they know otherwise, choose to believe that they
have bought an ancient relic, not a modern day mass produced object.
This belief solidifies the objects aura as 'authentic' and not
'created' for as long as the individual holds that belief. In the
case of the German menhir, it functions the same way. The individual
chooses to accept the object as the real original and treats it as
such. They allow it to hold the same value. In this way one can argue
that authenticity is decided on an individual basis.
Another example worth looking into is
that of the replica of Stonehenge III in Maryland, Washington.
Constructed our of concrete under the discretion of Sam Hill, it was intended as a memorial to “thirteen young me who had lost their loves during World War I”.iii This replica contains less than half of number or bluestones that the original does, the Heel Stone is in the wrong spot, and the alignment in off. Yet, even though it is so inaccurate, it is flocked to by pagan worshippers who use it for celebrations and rituals. One individual who attended a celebration there commented that to be “at Stonehenge as it was in its days of glory, for a total eclipse of the sun, as an experience for which we had waited a hundred life times”.iv To these worshippers, even though the replica is vastly inaccurate, it is just as real as the original. They are more than happy to use it for their rituals and celebrations. They have even pointed out that “at least in one respect the replica is superior to and more authentic than the original”.v They are referring to how this replica, unlike the original, is not fenced in and they have year round access to it like people did to the original in the past.
Constructed our of concrete under the discretion of Sam Hill, it was intended as a memorial to “thirteen young me who had lost their loves during World War I”.iii This replica contains less than half of number or bluestones that the original does, the Heel Stone is in the wrong spot, and the alignment in off. Yet, even though it is so inaccurate, it is flocked to by pagan worshippers who use it for celebrations and rituals. One individual who attended a celebration there commented that to be “at Stonehenge as it was in its days of glory, for a total eclipse of the sun, as an experience for which we had waited a hundred life times”.iv To these worshippers, even though the replica is vastly inaccurate, it is just as real as the original. They are more than happy to use it for their rituals and celebrations. They have even pointed out that “at least in one respect the replica is superior to and more authentic than the original”.v They are referring to how this replica, unlike the original, is not fenced in and they have year round access to it like people did to the original in the past.
All three example lead to the same
conclusion. Authenticity is not something that is inherent in an
object. It is something that has to be created and applied to it, it
will only hold for as long as people find it believable.
Authenticity, like beauty, is the eye of the beholder.
i
Holtorf, Cornelius (2005). From
Stonehenge to Las Vegas: Archaeology as Popular Culture.
Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. pp. 119-121.
iiiHoltorf, Cornelius (2005). From Stonehenge to Las Vegas: Archaeology as Popular Culture. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. pp. 122.
ivDalley, Kirsten and Artemisia (2006). Creating Circles and Ceremonies. USA: Book-mart Press. pp. 115.
vHoltorf, Cornelius (2005). From Stonehenge to Las Vegas: Archaeology as Popular Culture. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. pp. 122.
No comments:
Post a Comment