Search results

Mass-market production of souvenirs, their disposability and their mixed up, interpretive styling may detach the tourist from the actual experience. Conversely, it is the personal relationship that is formed between the tourist and the souvenir that makes the object authentic. The personalization of souvenirs, through 3D printing, offers opportunities for a different approach to manufacturing that influences notions of authenticity. In this way, it is possible to escape the serial reproduction of culture, engage tourists in the creation of meaning, and (re)frame the connections among them, their visited places, and their souvenirs. This chapter considers how the personalization of souvenirs through 3D printing technologies challenges and redefines existing notions of authenticity in touristic consumption.

Graffiti, both ancient and contemporary, could be argued to be significant and therefore worthy of protection. Attaching value is, however, subjective with no specific method being solely utilised for evaluating these items. The purpose of this paper to help those who are attempting to evaluate the merit of graffiti to do so, by determining “cultural significance”, which is a widely adopted concept for attaching value to the historic built environment. The current Scottish system utilised to assess “cultural significance” is the Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP) which shares many common features with other determinants of cultural significance in different countries. The SHEP document, as with other systems, could however be criticised for being insufficiently sensitive to enable the evaluation of historic graffiti due, in part, to the subjective nature of determination of aesthetic value.

A review of literature is followed by consideration of case studies taken from a variety of historical and geographical contexts. The majority of examples of graffiti included in this paper have been selected for their relative high profile, previous academic study, and breadth of geographic spread. This selection will hopefully enable a relatively comprehensive, rational assessment to be undertaken. That being said, one example has been integrated to reflect commonly occurring graffiti that is typical to all of the built environment.

The determination of aesthetic value is particularly problematic for the evaluator and the use of additional art‐based mechanisms such as “significant form”, “self expression” and “meaning” may aid this process. Regrettably, these determinants are also in themselves subjective, enhancing complexity of evaluation. Almost all graffiti could be said to have artistic merit, using the aforementioned determinants. However, whether it is “good” art is an all together different question. The evaluation of “good” art and graffiti would have traditionally been evaluated by experts. Today, determination of graffiti should be evaluated and value attached by broader society, community groups, and experts alike.

This research will assist those responsible for historic building conservation with the evaluation of whether graffiti is worthy of conservation.