Josie Appleton, Journalist and convener of the Manifesto Club
Ken Robinson, Independent Tourism Advisor and Chair of The National Visitor Attractions Forum
Historic buildings are in desperate need of conservation, but should the heritage sector prioritise tackling social issues and targeting new audiences, with so little cash to spare?
Is this a way to build communities and prosperity, or is it just social engineering?
Adebowale doesn’t see an ‘either/or’ situation. She outlines moral and economic arguments to make the case, such as the need to understand that everyone has equal access to our heritage.
Click to download a short statement from Maria Adebowale or press play below:
Appleton questions the obsession with targeting hard-to-reach visitors – you have to accept that some people just aren’t interested. The buildings come first, without them there’s nothing for those who want to see them. Let people choose to visit.
Roberts suggests that if not operating without a sense of social responsibility, we are not doing our jobs. If heritage isn’t pushed, why will people continue to support it? We need to remove barriers.
Click to download a short statement from Liz Roberts or press play below:
Robinson feels that while recognising that heritage projects have social impact, it doesn’t mean those managing them should be social engineers. Social awareness and social responsibility are two different things. Heritage is a social responsibility.
Questions from the audience included:
“I wasn’t interested in heritage as a child yet but my parents were patient with me and I am now, My foster children aren’t interested, should I not bother taking them to historical sites?”
Appleton says childhood is a time when you often do things you don’t want to do.
Click to download a short statement from Josie Appleton or press play below:
Adebowale’s response is that it would be stupid to force people to enter heritage sites against their will, arguing that removing barriers is the fundamental point.
Hannah Pool, The Guardian journalist and author (My Fathers’ Daughter)
The speakers each first gave their perspective on the issues regarding what heritage is about in an ever-changing society, and whether there is room for many voices, or will one national story express it.
Bragg feels immigration is regretfully heading the agenda and we need a way of helping people who are discriminated against to come forward. He suggests building a narrative around ideas of fairness, formalising them to support both people immigrants and residents alike.
Click to download a brief statement from Billy Bragg or press play below:
Murray felt the issue isn’t “whose story is important?” but how we tell, adapt it, or allow others to explore its significance. The National Trust’s new strategy has engagement at heart. The History Matters campaign has demonstrated how involved people wanted to be and heritage should be recognised as a source of social cohesion.
Click to download a brief statement from Simon Murray or press play below:
Pool reckons getting young people interested in diversity and culture is of great importance, but how do we do this? We need to analyse what culture means, and being value-based, you can’t describe others culture to them. And only by engaging diversities can heritage mean anything to us as a whole, and to young people.
Click to download a brief statement from Hannah Pool or press play below:
Thurley asserts that English Heritage makes decisions about what buildings get listed so are in a powerful position regarding whose history gets protected and deciding what ‘history is about.’ There has to be a single view endorsed by the state and the challenge is making this view representative and meaningful to future generations.
Click to download a brief statement from Simon Thurley or press play below:
Some questions to the panel included:
‘Is true diversity really about empowering individuals to make personal choices about their heritage?’
‘It’s about how people see their environment. So much is in the eye of the beholder – what does it mean to the individual? Much of our past is also in our present if we choose to see it,” responded Bragg.
‘Is it the case that people actually want what it is we’re ‘flogging’, or are hard-to reach groups that because they want to be?’
People shouldn’t be forced to tell their stories, but when they do want to, there shouldn’t be barriers to that.’ answered Murray.
The panel finishes with each member make a closing point.
The Big Debates are all about the big issues. Why engage new audiences? What’s in it for them? What’s in it for society? What’s in it for us?
Thursday’s debate will explore whose voices we’re listening to when we talk about heritage. Who dictates what’s acceptable and what’s not? Does this have an impact on society at large?
On Friday, the verbal scrap continues……. to decide whether heritage should have a social responsibility.
Can heritage and culture make a difference to people’s lives, particularly those who are most excluded?
Can inclusiveness be fostered, or is it something brought about by wider society?
Should limited resources be directed towards existing problems with our historic buildings, or is widening access a necessity to safeguard heritage for the future?
Appleton questions the obsession with targeting hard-to-reach visitors – you have to accept that some people just aren’t interested. The buildings come first, without them there’s nothing for those who want to see them. Let people choose to visit.
doesn’t mean those managing them should be social engineers. Social awareness and social responsibility are two different things. Heritage is a social responsibility.
