Search results

China has been going through a “museum boom” paralleling the domestic tourism boom since 2000; such growth changed the cultural landscape; museums became a vital characteristic of some Chinese cities for both residents and tourists. Encouraged by this growth, the more ambitious “All-for-one Museum (全域博物馆)” was proposed. The physical boundary between museums and living spaces is infinite ambiguity, challenging the idea of museums as “heterotopias.” This study aims to explore the musealization of urban spaces in the context of anthropology and museology, scrutinizing the cultural-political intentions and meanings of these developments, and seeks to ignite further investigation into the reconstruction of historical imaginaries for tourists and urban populations across related disciplines.

This paper examines two cases in Chinese metropolises, Beijing and Shanghai, to illustrate this development of musealization, that is, how the cities actively leverage museological values and methods to connect with their past. In the Beijing case, the authors explore how the local government is leading the effort to musealize the city; in the Shanghai case, they will see how tourists, especially dweller-tourists, navigate through a curated past story in the city and connect their own experience, memory and identity with the place.

The all-for-one museum creates a museal layer projected onto the bigger urban space, even though the authenticity of the “past” is challenged by the modernization development of the city. The authors also find out that for some tourists (especially dweller-tourists), an existential sense of authenticity plays a more significant role as they not only seek to sightsee the past of the city but also to take part in its creation.

This paper discusses two kinds of musealization in cosmopolitan cities of Beijing and Shanghai: top-down and bottom-up. It approaches questions about the musealization of urban spaces from the perspectives of anthropology and museology, and discusses musealization in the specific historical context of China’s modernization process.

This chapter seeks to elucidate specific behavioral patterns that occur when people travel and consume luxury items using concepts drawn from sociocultural and economic theories. These concepts are Walter Benjamin's “aura,” Karl Marx's “commodity fetishism,” and Arnold Van Gennep's “liminality.” These concepts are deployed within the spheres of tourism and luxury in order to analyze how tourists on a shopping spree search for forms of authenticity, how this type of travel is similar in many respects to a religious quest, and, finally, how the design of luxury outlets in European capitals convey religious overtones.

This chapter examines the commercial handicrafts market from Bali, Indonesia to the United States. Using ethnographic examples gathered from research among handicrafts producers, fair trade activists and handicrafts distributors I explore the influence of intermediaries (buyers, distributors, designers) in determining the cultural and economic value of ethnic handicrafts sold in the international marketplace. Over the past two decades, the village of Tegallalang has diversified its crafts industry to specialize in the mass-production of non-Balinese “ethnic art” (e.g., Native American dreamcatchers, Moroccan furniture, and African masks). While Balinese view the global handicrafts market as an opportunity to pursue cosmopolitan, modern, and middle-class identities, this chapter discusses how non-Balinese intermediaries regularly engage in forms of cultural capital that assert their dominance over handicrafts producers in the global South. The work of a Balinese fair trade organization is also examined in this chapter, and their efforts to redirect consumer attention away from the ethnocentric categories of authenticity and tradition and instead focus on workers’ rights and fair compensation.

This chapter assesses how luxury travel imaginaries were modified in the aftermath of the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic. Drawing on long-term fieldwork among travel influencers, the chapter presents their response strategies to the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on an analysis of evidence from participant observation in tourist sites, network visualisations, in-depth interviews and platform profiles, I trace the transformations luxury travel imaginaries have undergone since the beginning of 2020. Before this global crisis, travel influencers became new puissant players in the highly globalised tourism industry as they regularly received assignments from tourism boards and hotels. Although brand sponsorship was considered a substantial source of revenue for travel influencers, their collaborations in travel destinations and the monetisation of travel content on YouTube were further assets to secure a livelihood. The coronavirus outbreak, however, turned their life-worlds upside down. This ethnographic investigation identified three main responses of travel influencers to the current long-term crisis of tourism: (1) diversification of content creation and orientation towards other influencer genres, (2) support for local tourism organisations and online promotion of staycations and (3), finally, travel to tourist sites for circulating online content on safe travel standards. Digital platforms became a major arena where the future of tourism has been re-negotiated in the wake of the COVID-19 outbreak. The in-depth investigation suggests that travel influencers were in a position to create new powerful representations of luxury as safe travel since they acquired the skills to establish stable storyworlds for their travel experiences, which attracted the attention of large platform audiences.

Fieldwork is one of the hallmarks of anthropology. Almost all students of anthropology have geographical and cultural specializations, ranging from a small group to a nation. Their interest areas are often identified or marked by real or putative boundaries; and it is within these boundaries that anthropologists have “founded” their own villages and tribes — “my village”, “my tribe.”