Beyond tradition (provisional title) Antonio A. Arantes The

Beyond tradition (provisional title)
Antonio A. Arantes
The institutional safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage (ICH), such as established
by UNESCO’s Convention of 2003 and some national legal instruments, may
effectively contribute to the continuity and sustainable change of cultural elements
valued by cultural communities as particularly strong expressions of their identities.
When involving traditional populations, the implementation of measures such as the
formalization of ICH candidatures, inclusion in lists, development of action plans and
promotional campaigns, raise some interrelated issues that I intend to focus in my paper.
I shall argue that, belonging to a political culture that is based on the agency of national
states’ bureaucracies, institutional safeguarding – as a public policy - is often culturally
and politically foreign to the targeted communities’ world views. Furthermore, it results
from multileveled intercultural negotiations in specific arenas, involving local, national,
multilateral agencies, often in asymmetrical positions vis-à-vis one another. I believe,
furthermore, that this is not a neutral practice, in the sense that if it is effective – as
expected – it brings practical and symbolic benefits and adds a new value – here called
heritage value – to selected aspects of tradition. On the basis of current social lives,
these processes – presently referred to by the neologism “patrimonialization” - create a
second level of cultural realities consisting of representations/reinterpretations of
tradition.
A relatively unknown aspect of the matter is how this process affects ICH holder
communities and their worldviews. I shall discuss this theme in relation to transmission
and dissemination of safeguarded traditions. In tightening the articulation of local lives
with wider social contexts, either through documentation, marketing or promotional
activities, safeguarding may disclose information, know-how and beliefs that are often
the object of local cultural interdictions and regulations. In the wider context of market
and media, the cultural bearers’ control of the degree of publicity that they deem
appropriate for specific aspects of their own social practices and cosmology tend to
become less effective.
These issues raise theoretical as well as practical problems, and ask for a more refined
interpretation of how safeguarding affects the traditions that it aims at preserving. My
paper will address these interrelated issues on the basis of empirical references provided
by field research in Brazil.
Antonio A. Arantes B.A., M.Sc. (Sao Paulo University, Brazil) PhD (University of Cambridge/Kings College) Social anthropologist and cultural heritage consultant, is professor at UNICAMP – State University of Campinas and director of Andrade e Arantes Consultancy. Is Past‐President of the Brazilian Anthropological Association (ABA) and the Latin American Anthropological Association (ALA). He developed significant professional experience in policymaking and management of public institutions as President of the Sao Paulo State Council for Historic Preservation (CONDEPHAAT) and of the Brazilian National Institute for Historic and Artistic Heritage (IPHAN). Under his presidency in IPHAN the Department of Immaterial Heritage and the National Program for Immaterial Cultural Heritage were implemented. Relevant contributions to the study of cultural heritage in the context of contemporary social experience include academic research activities, several technical reports and publications, besides the development of intangible cultural heritage inventory methodologies for the Brazilian Ministry of Culture and for ARPAC, the Socio‐cultural Research Institute of Mozambique, under UNESCO’s auspices. English language publications on cultural heritage include: 2011(a) Inventorying intangible cultural heritage under the 2003 UNESCO Convention. ICH Courier, v.9. ISSN 2234‐2117 Available at www.ichcap.org 2011(b) Landscapes of history: contemporary challenges to the conservation of historicity in heritage sites. Historic environment. ICOMOS/Australia: v.23, n.1. ISSN 0726‐6715. Available at http://australia.icomos.org/publications/historic‐environment 2009(a) Documenting and disseminating traditional knowledge and cultural expressions in Brazil. Report prepared for WIPO ‐ World Intellectual Property Organization. Vol.1 (147 p.); Survey; vol.2 (406 p.): Legislation, institutional guidelines and instruments. São Paulo. Available at http://www.wipo.int/tk/en/culturalheritage/surveys.html 2009(b) Heritage as culture. In: KONO, T. (Org.). Intangible cultural heritage and intellectual property: communities, cultural diversity and sustainable development. Antwerp: Intersentia. ISBN 978‐90‐5095‐758‐8. 2008 African‐Brazilian cultural references in national heritage: questions of cultural politics. Vibrant: Virtual Brazilian Anthropology. Associação Brasileira de Antropologia. Brasília, DF. v. 5, n. 1. ISSN 1809‐4341. Available at http//www.vibrant.org.br 2007(a) A place for intangible cultural heritage in our common future. In: Workshop for youth participation in safeguarding intangible cultural heritage and community development. ACCU ‐ Asia/Pacific Cultural Center for UNESCO. Available at http://www.accu.or.jp/ich 2007(b) Diversity, heritage and cultural politics. Theory Culture & Society: annual review, London, v. 24, n. 7‐8. ISSN 0263‐2764 2007(c) Cultural diversity and the politics of difference in safeguarding intangible cultural heritage. In: BLAKE, J., (Org.) Safeguarding intangible cultural heritage: challenges and approaches: a collection of essays. Pentre Moel, United Kingdom: Institute of Art and Law. ISBN 1‐903987‐10‐5