The Problems and Politics of Authenticity in Chinese Heritage Practices

Abstract

Despite obvious distortion and intentional biases, heritage has a history. When did a particular heritage story arise? Why did it arise at that time? What purposes does it serve? Using archival and ethnographic fieldwork, I examine the power interplay and conflicts between UNESCO’s Outstanding Universal Values, Chinese nationalistic discourses and practices of heritage, and local responses from a perspective of authenticity construction. The research is conducted through a careful examination of spatial and socio-cultural changes at two Chinese sites: Quanzhou World Heritage Sites in Fujian Province and the Taoxichuan Creative Park in Jingdezhen, Jiangxi Province. By dissecting the construction of discursive authenticity, affectionate authenticity, and living authenticity, I argue that authenticity and the consequent heritage conservation practices are inevitably political because there is always a failure of mapping the living cultural practices onto the authorized heritage discourses/doctrines. In contrast to a binary thinking in the prevalent heritage studies adopt, the contemporary Chinese heritage practices show us there is less of a clear demarcation between the majority and the minority, the ruler and the ruled, the elite and the common folk, etc. Thus, by thinking across scales and looking beyond the legibility project of the state, this dissertation analyzes how the socio-cultural and political agents have empowered themselves to muddle through the contemporary Chinese heritagization process and the power geometry of it. A porous discursive mechanism of authenticity is the tie and the means for weaving the power web.

The following questions are addressed in this dissertation to reveal the underlying power structure behind contemporary China’s use of heritage and history: How does UNESCO intersect with different levels of the Chinese government to affect the narratives and spatial and socio-cultural character of the heritage site? What kinds of spatial interventions are imposed on the heritage site and how do the spatial changes inform socio-cultural changes on the heritage site? How are different levels of governments, local social groups, and conservation experts engaged in the formation of heritage narratives and spatial practices? What different roles do they play in the knowledge production of heritage?