地理学视角下非物质文化遗产的跨地方实践

doi:10.11821/dlxb202202015

地理学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 77 ›› Issue (2): 492-504.doi: 10.11821/dlxb202202015

• 城乡发展与文化地理 • 上一篇

地理学视角下非物质文化遗产的跨地方实践

魏雷¹(), 朱竑²^,³()

1.广州大学管理学院,广州 510060
2.广州大学地理科学与遥感学院,广州 510060
3.南方海洋科学与工程广东省实验室（珠海）,珠海 519080

收稿日期:2020-08-13 修回日期:2021-08-17 出版日期:2022-02-25 发布日期:2022-04-25
通讯作者: 朱竑(1968-), 男, 甘肃临夏人, 教授, 博士生导师, 研究方向为社会文化地理。E-mail: zhuhong@gzhu.edu.cn
作者简介:魏雷(1985-), 女, 甘肃白银人, 讲师, 硕士生导师, 研究方向为社会文化地理和旅游地理。E-mail: lyweilei@gzhu.edu.cn
基金资助:
国家社会科学基金项目(21BGL259);广东省自然科学基金项目(2020A1515011381);国家自然科学基金项目(41971184);国家自然科学基金项目(41601135);国家自然科学基金项目(18YJCZH271)

The translocal practices of intangible cultural heritage in the perspective of geography

WEI Lei¹(), ZHU Hong²^,³()

1. School of Management, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China
2. School of Geography and Remote Sensing, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China
3. Southern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory (Zhuhai), Zhuhai 519080, Guangdong, China

Received:2020-08-13 Revised:2021-08-17 Published:2022-02-25 Online:2022-04-25
Supported by:
National Social Science Foundation of China(21BGL259);Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province(2020A1515011381);National Natural Science Foundation of China(41971184);National Natural Science Foundation of China(41601135);National Natural Science Foundation of China(18YJCZH271)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

非物质文化遗产不仅是来源于过去的特定区域的传统实践,更是生成于全球化体系中面向未来的现代文化政治和文化经济过程。因此,本文尝试以跨地方性理论为切入点,架构非遗的形成、运作和认同的社会—空间过程,在此基础上使用跨地方聚合的思想重新概念化非遗实践,将其解读为多元主体权力关系中介下,由跨地方异质性要素聚合而成的不稳定的开放系统,以区别于固有对非遗实践“稳定”“以人为中心”和“边界化”的认知。通过分析云南鹤庆银器锻制技艺和摩梭纺织技艺两个案例来呈现非遗实践作为跨地方聚合的过程及特性,以及非遗传承和保护由此所面对的机遇和挑战,呼吁在重视非遗服务于乡村振兴等发展战略的潜力时,要进一步认识非遗实践的跨地方性对本土社区的影响,反思遗产原真性和文化价值与当前非遗实践的关系,强调在非遗全球化生产和消费中保持其与本土认同和本土生计之间的关联。

关键词: 跨地方聚合, 本土发展, 非物质文化遗产, 机遇与挑战

Abstract:

Intangible cultural heritage (ICH) encompasses not only local traditional practice derived from the past, but also future-oriented modern cultural political and economic processes generated due to globalization. Therefore, this paper uses translocal theory as an entry point to move beyond the paradigm of localities in analyzing the socio-spatial processes of intangible cultural heritage, with a specific focus on the processes of formation, operation, and identity. Accordingly, this paper reconceptualizes the practice of ICH. Different from the prevailing rigid, intrinsically stable, and human-centered approach, this paper adopts the idea of translocal assemblage to consider ICH practices as rhizomatic networks. The network binds heterogeneous elements together by power mediation to form temporarily stabilized systems. The translocal assemblage of ICH practices firstly connects human and non-human components as well as tangible and intangible components in different localities. Second, due to the openness of the deep structure, a translocal assemblage is a complex, multifarious, non-linear, and unstable whole with exteriority. Lastly, the structural linkages woven by power relations improve the current flat understanding of the world and emphasize the need to distinguish the intensity and criticality of different connections. Case studies of Heqing silver-forging technology and Mosuo textile technology use the three aspects above to identify when and where heterogeneous elements are linked and influence local development. This paper further argues that for better safeguarding of ICH as well as promotion of local development by heritage practices, attention should be given to elements and processes beyond the local, including their interrelation mechanisms with the local place. In valuing the potential of intangible cultural heritage to support development strategies such as rural revitalization, the article calls for consideration of the impact of trans-localism on heritage authenticity and cultural values together with the enhanced linkages between intangible cultural heritage and local identities and livelihoods in the light of global production and consumption of heritages.

Key words: translocal assemblage, local development, intangible cultural heritage, opportunities and challenges

魏雷, 朱竑. 地理学视角下非物质文化遗产的跨地方实践[J]. 地理学报, 2022, 77(2): 492-504.

WEI Lei, ZHU Hong. The translocal practices of intangible cultural heritage in the perspective of geography[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2022, 77(2): 492-504.

图/表 6

表1

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

参考文献 55

[1]	UNESCO. Basic Texts of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2016 Edition). Paris: UNESCO, 2016: 1-19.
[2]	Johnson N C. Heritage and geography//Waterton E, Watson S. The Palgrave Handbook of Contemporary Heritage Research. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015: 159-173.
[3]	Zhou Shangyi, Zhang Jing. The impact of place on the monopoly profit of a geographical indication product: A case of Dongting Biluochun tea in Suzhou. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2015, 35(11): 1357-1363. doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2015.011.1357
	[ 周尚意, 张晶. 地方性对地理标识性产品垄断利润形成的影响: 以苏州洞庭碧螺春为例. 地理科学, 2015, 35(11): 1357-1363.]
[4]	Dai Juncheng, Li Lu. Intangible cultural heritage tourism and place construction. Tourism Tribune, 2019, 34(5): 3-5.
	[ 戴俊骋, 李露. 非物质文化遗产旅游和地方建构. 旅游学刊, 2019, 34(5): 3-5.]
[5]	Wu Kang. The spatial diffusion of opera culture and the evolution of cultural region: Taking Huai Opera, the intangible cultural heritage as a case study. Geographical Research, 2009, 28(5): 1427-1438.
	[ 吴康. 戏曲文化的空间扩散及其文化区演变: 以国家非物质文化遗产淮剧为例. 地理研究, 2009, 28(5): 1427-1438.]
[6]	Wang Shujia, Sun Jiuxia. Construction and empirical research on the evaluation system of sustainable development of Chinese traditional villages. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2021, 76(4): 921-938. doi: 10.11821/dlxb202104010
	[ 王淑佳, 孙九霞. 中国传统村落可持续发展评价体系构建与实证. 地理学报, 2021, 76(4): 921-938.]
[7]	Zhu He, Liu Jiaming, Sang Ziwen, et al. Characteristic and contribution factors of different types of ethnic cultural resources: A case study of Gesar cultural and ecological protection experiment area. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2017, 72(6): 1118-1132.
	[ 朱鹤, 刘家明, 桑子文, 等. 民族文化资源的类型特征及成因分析: 以格萨尔(果洛)文化生态保护实验区为例. 地理学报, 2017, 72(6): 1118-1132.]
[8]	Cheng Qian, Ling Supei. Geographical distribution and affecting factors of the intangible cultural heritage in China. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2013, 33(10): 1166-1172.
	[ 程乾, 凌素培. 中国非物质文化遗产的空间分布特征及影响因素分析. 地理科学, 2013, 33(10): 1166-1172.]
[9]	Wang Xin, Wei Jie, Hu Chuandong. The spatial distribution of world heritages in China. Geographical Research, 2010, 29(11): 2080-2088.
	[ 王昕, 韦杰, 胡传东. 中国世界遗产的空间分布特征. 地理研究, 2010, 29(11): 2080-2088.]
[10]	Graham B J, Howard P. The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing, 2008: 1-15.
[11]	Kirshenblatt-Gimblett B. Intangible heritage as metacultural production. Museum International, 2014, 66(1-4): 163-174. doi: 10.1111/muse.12070
[12]	Kurin R. Safeguarding intangible cultural heritage in the 2003 UNESCO Convention: A critical appraisal. Museum International, 2004, 56(1/2): 66-77. doi: 10.1111/j.1350-0775.2004.00459.x
[13]	Vecco M. A definition of cultural heritage: From the tangible to the intangible. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2010, 11(3): 321-324. doi: 10.1016/j.culher.2010.01.006
[14]	Petronela T. The importance of the intangible cultural heritage in the economy. Procedia Economics and Finance, 2016, 39: 731-736. doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30271-4
[15]	Tao Wei, Cai Haohui, Gao Yuxin, et al. The transmission and practice of intangible cultural heritage in the perspective of geographies of the body. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2020, 75(10): 2256-2268.
	[ 陶伟, 蔡浩辉, 高雨欣, 等. 身体地理学视角下非物质文化遗产的传承与实践. 地理学报, 2020, 75(10): 2256-2268.]
[16]	Skounti A. The authentic illusion: Humanity's intangible cultural heritage, the Moroccan experience//Smith L, Akagawa N. Intangible Heritage. London and New York: Routledge, 2008: 74-92.
[17]	Schmitt T M. The UNESCO concept of safeguarding intangible cultural heritage: Its background and marrakchi roots. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 2008, 14(2): 95-111. doi: 10.1080/13527250701844019
[18]	Webster N A. Rural-to-rural translocal practices: Thai women entrepreneurs in the Swedish countryside. Journal of Rural Studies, 2017, 56: 219-228. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.09.016
[19]	Smith L. Use of Heritage. London and New York: Routledge, 2006.
[20]	Hafstein V. Making Intangible Heritage: El Condor Pasa and Other Stories from UNESCO. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2018: 153-168.
[21]	Rabbiosi C. The frictional geography of cultural heritage. Grounding the Faro Convention into urban experience in Forlì, Italy. Social & Cultural Geography, 2019: 1-18. DOI: 10.1080/14649365. 2019.1698760. doi: 10.1080/14649365. 2019.1698760
[22]	Li Xiaocen, Yuan Kaizheng, Ye Xingsheng, et al. Investigation of the "Chamdo artisans group" in the making of Tibetan bronze buddha statues. China Tibetology, 2010(3): 68-75.
	[ 李晓岑, 袁凯铮, 叶星生, 等. 西藏铜佛像制作“昌都工匠群”的考察. 中国藏学, 2010(3): 68-75.]
[23]	Ballacchino K. Unity makes intangible heritage: Italy and network nomination//Bendix R F, Eggert A, Peselman A. Heritage Regimes and the State. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttinge, 2012: 121-140.
[24]	Keitumetse S O. Sustainable development and cultural heritage management in Botswana: Towards sustainable communities. Sustainable Development, 2011, 19(1): 49-59. doi: 10.1002/sd.419
[25]	Jakob D, Thomas N J. Firing up craft capital: The renaissance of craft and craft policy in the United Kingdom. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 2017, 23(4): 495-511. doi: 10.1080/10286632.2015.1068765
[26]	Holtorf C, Högberg A. Contemporary heritage and the future//Waterton E, Watson S. The Palgrave Handbook of Contemporary Heritage Research. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2015: 509-523.
[27]	Kearney A. Intangible cultural heritage: Global awareness and local interest//Smith L, Akagawa N. Intangible Heritage. London and New York: Routledge, 2008: 209-225.
[28]	Tunbridge J E, Ashworth G J. Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past As a Resource in Conflict. Chichester: John Wiley, 1995: 20-69.
[29]	Sun Jiuxia, Xu Yongxia. Interpretation and reconstruction of intangible cultural heritage from the perspective of culture capitalization: A case study based on Naxi embroidery. Thinking, 2018, 44(3): 21-27.
	[ 孙九霞, 许泳霞. 文化资本化视角下“非遗”的表述与重构: 以丽江纳西刺绣为例. 思想战线, 2018, 44(3): 21-27.]
[30]	Alim H S. Hip Hop youth as cultural theorists of style, language, and globalization. Pragmatics, 2009, 19(1): 102-127.
[31]	Elafros A. Greek hip hop: Local and translocal authentication in the restricted field of production. Poetics, 2013, 41(1): 75-95. doi: 10.1016/j.poetic.2012.11.002
[32]	Sandercock L. Voices from the borderlands: A meditation on a metaphor. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 1995, 14(2): 77-88. doi: 10.1177/0739456X9501400201
[33]	Massey D. A global sense of place. Space Place & Gender, 1991, 38(2): 166-186.
[34]	Su X B. Multi-scalar regionalization, network connections and the development of Yunnan province, China. Regional Studies, 2014, 48(1): 91-104. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2013.799766
[35]	Kytölä S. Translocality//Georgakopoulou A, Spilioti T. The Routledge Handbook of Language and Digital Communication. Abingdon: Routledge, 2016: 371-388.
[36]	Greiner C, Sakdapolrak P. Translocality: Concepts, applications and emerging research perspectives. Geography Compass, 2013, 7(5): 373-384. doi: 10.1111/gec3.v7.5
[37]	Hedberg C, Carmo D, Miguel R. Translocal Ruralism: Mobility and Connectivity in European Rural Spaces. Netherlands: Springer, 2012: 1-9.
[38]	Freitag U, Von Oppen A. Translocality: The Study of Globalising Processes from a Southern Perspective. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010: 1-23.
[39]	Tenhunen S. Culture, conflict, and translocal communication: Mobile technology and politics in rural west Bengal, India. Ethnos, 2011, 76(3): 398-420. doi: 10.1080/00141844.2011.580356
[40]	Bromber K. Working with "translocality": Conceptual implications and analytical consequences//Wippel S. Regionalizing Oman: Political, Economic and Social Dynamics. Dodrecht: Springer, 2013: 63-72.
[41]	Porst L, Sakdapolrak P. How scale matters in translocality: Uses and potentials of scale in translocal research. Erdkunde, 2017, 71(2): 111-126. doi: 10.3112/erdkunde.2017.02.02
[42]	Mckay D. Reading remittance landscapes: Female migration and agricultural transition in the Philippines. Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography, 2005, 105(1): 89-99. doi: 10.1080/00167223.2005.10649529
[43]	Greiner C. Patterns of translocality: Migration, livelihoods and identities in Northwest Namibia. Sociologus, 2010, 60(2): 131-161. doi: 10.3790/soc.60.2.131
[44]	Oakes T, Schein L. Translocal China: Linkages, Identities and the Reimagining of Space. London and New York: Routledge, 2006: 1-35.
[45]	Yuan Zhenjie, Zhu Hong. Translocal dynamic and the local reconstruction: From "purgatory" to "heaven" in Shimenkan. Human Geography, 2013, 28(2): 53-60.
	[ 袁振杰, 朱竑. 跨地方对话与地方重构: 从“炼狱”到“天堂”的石门坎. 人文地理, 2013, 28(2): 53-60.]
[46]	Mcfarlane C. Learning the City: Knowledge and Translocal Assemblage. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2011.
[47]	Delanda M. A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. London: Continuum, 2006: 5-10.
[48]	Ho Chih-Chung. Being in the becoming of asembalages and encounters: The dialogue with thought of mean. The Journal of Regional and Social Development Research, 2017(8): 29-53.
	[ 何致中. 会遇其中: 会聚、相遇与中的对话. 区域与社会发展研究, 2017(8): 29-53.]
[49]	Dittmer J. Geopolitical assemblages and complexity. Progress in Human Geography, 2014, 38(3): 385-401. doi: 10.1177/0309132513501405
[50]	Mcfarlane C. Translocal assemblages: Space, power and social movements. Geoforum, 2009, 40(4): 561-567. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.05.003
[51]	Rao K. A new paradigm for the identification, nomination and inscription of properties on the World Heritage List. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 2010, 16(3): 161-172. doi: 10.1080/13527251003620594
[52]	Guo Wen, Zhu Hong. On the representation and non-representation dimensions of the production of social and cultural geographical knowledge. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2020, 40(7): 1039-1049. doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2020.07.001
	[ 郭文, 朱竑. 社会文化地理知识生产的表征与非表征维度. 地理科学, 2020, 40(7): 1039-1049.]
[53]	Santamaría A J L, Lecuona L M. Ecuadorian artisanal production and its future projection from the cultural and creative industries perspective (CCI). City, Culture and Society, 2017, 10: 26-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ccs.2017.05.002
[54]	Wanda G E. Intangible cultural heritage, ownership, copyrights, and tourism. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 2010, 4(4): 376-388. doi: 10.1108/17506181011081541
[55]	Storper M, Scott A J. Current debates in urban theory: A critical assessment. Urban Studies, 2016, 53(6): 1114-1136. doi: 10.1177/0042098016634002

形式	表现
旅游利用中的冲突	根据旅游观光产业的需要,在本土和异地重新生产出非遗景观和非遗的表演空间。非遗的内涵、价值和表现形式由政府、商业资本、游客和本土社区多利益主体协商而成,利益的分配也常常充满争议。
非遗的空间移置	不同主体在本土之外的地方创建非遗展示、生产和消费的文化空间,非遗作为经济和文化资源,与本土之间的关系变得松散。
生产过程多地方整合	非遗的生产越来越依靠来自不同地方的劳动力、资金、理念、技术、原材料和市场,本土只承担了非遗生产中的特定环节,常常处于价值链较低端。
实践者的迁移和再地化	本地移民会带着非遗的技能、知识和理念等迁移,并在迁入地再地化,生产出新的非遗空间,通过移民的非遗实践,迁入地和迁出地之间发生连结。
遗产价值的尺度转换	非遗的价值被本土之外不同尺度的机构重新书写和认定,价值赋予的过程是本土和区域、国家、全球互动的过程。
非遗空间的虚拟化	网上博物馆、电子数据库和电子商务等非遗数字化的呈现方式,使非遗空间超越了物质时空和地点,这给本土社区提供了机遇,但也带来了威胁。

地理学视角下非物质文化遗产的跨地方实践

The translocal practices of intangible cultural heritage in the perspective of geography

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 55

相关文章 1

Metrics

本文评价