With several panel discussions, there’s too much to say here. That said, here’s something to be thinking about.
- Should heritage be re-defined to move beyond the traditional stately home and castle?
With such a diverse range of people living in England, does the definition need extending?
Music? Memory? Graffiti?
Does heritage extend to language itself?
Just click on ‘Join the debate’ to have your say!!
Although the first things that spring to mind when the word ‘Heritage’ is mentioned are castles, stately homes, etc, this is only part of the story. Heritage is in fact a very personal thing and no one person or organisation can define what it is. Those of us who are involved in helping to preserve and enhance access to heritage must be prepared to put aside our own understanding of what it means and listen to those who were are hoping to engage. In doing so we will help a much broader audience to access and enjoy England’s rich and diverse heritage.
you make a good point, tracy. but i think heritage is still associated in most people’s minds with old buildings and monuments. our perceptions might be broader as we spend our working lives thinking about the subject.
For me, heritage includes stone circles, henges, industrial archaeology, the Birmingham back-to-backs, interesting urban architecture (but not sixties and seventies monstrosities!), the landscape in general (as an archaeological palimpsest), natural history, as well as culture. So actually castles and stately homes aren’t really the first thing that springs to mind when heritage is mentioned to me, though I do enjoy visiting them.
Some great points from all three of you. Thanks for sharing those perspectives.