Between maintaining and sustaining heritage in landscape: The examples of Estonian mires and village swings
Kuupäev
2015-05-12
Autorid
Ajakirja pealkiri
Ajakirja ISSN
Köite pealkiri
Kirjastaja
Abstrakt
Doktoritöö keskmes on maastik ja pärand kui protsessid. Teeside üldosas on pärandi kujunemist käsitletud mõistete säilimine ja säilitamine kaudu. Säilimist on määratletud kui iseeneslikku, holistilist kulgemist. Säilitamise korral on pärand objektina defineeritud ning säilitamine toimub läbi eesmärgipärase kaitsmise, tutvustamise vms tegevuse kaudu. Nende kahe kontseptsiooni valguses uuriti maastikus kahe näite, kiikede ja soode tähendusvälja muutumist viimase saja aasta jooksul. Üldosa jaguneb neljaks alaeesmärgiks, mis sisaldab kahe näite paigutumist säilimise ja säilitamise skaalale ning erinevate tegurite esitlusele, mis toetavad või takistavad minevikus tekkinu toimimist tänapäeval.
Doktoritöö tulemusena on koostatud mudel, mis aitab kaardistada pärandi majandamisviise: A) elamise-kontseptsioon (living-in), kus kohalik inimene on ise pärandi looja/tarbija; B) elamus-kontseptsioon (jumping-into), kus pärandit külalisena tarbitakse; C) vaatlus-kontseptsioon (looking-at), kus inimene on pigem passiivse pealtvaataja rollis.
Uurimuse käigus ilmnes, et külakiigekohad on ilmekaks elamise-kontseptsiooni näiteks. Kiikesid ja kiigekohti institutsionaalselt ei kaitsta; sageli on kiige ehituse taga kogukonna soov. Peamine kiigekohtade elushoidmist pärssiv tegur on hirm vastutuse ees, kui kellegagi kiikujatest peaks midagi halba juhtuma. Lahendusena on võimalik välja töötada turvalisemad külakiiged ning jagada vastutust kiikujate, kiigemeistrite ja maaomaniku vahel.
Loodud mudeli rakendamine soodes aitas välja tuua, et soid käsitletakse eelkõige vaatlus-kontseptsiooni ja vähem elamus-kontseptsiooni kaudu. Elamise-kontseptsioon on säilinud marjade korjamise kontekstis. Soo kui looduspärandi säilitamine väljendub looduskaitselise ja loodusharidusliku tegevuse kaudu. Võib väita, et soode näitel pärandkultuur ja looduskaitse pigem välistavad üksteist, soodustades eelkõige vaatluspõhist pärandi majandamist. Vahetuma kontakti saamiseks tuleks soodes võimaldada ka elamus-põhist kasutust. Loodud pärandi toimimise mudel aitas ühtlasi tõestada, et säilitamine aitab defineerida pärandiobjekti, seevastu säilimine aitab objekti tegevuslikult elus hoida.
The doctoral thesis focuses on landscape and heritage as processes. In the main part of the thesis the formation of heritage is discussed with the help of the concepts of sustenance and maintenance. Sustenance has been defined as an unregulated holistic process. As concerns maintenance, heritage is defined as its object and it occurs via aimed protection, introduction, and other activities. In the light of these two concepts, the transformations in the meanings of two examples, swings and mires, during the past hundred years were studied. The main aim of the thesis is divided into four subtopics that include positioning of the examples on the scale of sustenance and maintenance, as well as introducing different factors that support or impede today’s functioning of phenomena that were formed in the past. The thesis results in the construction of a model that helps to map the modes of heritage managements: (A) living-in, in the case of which the local inhabitant is the creator/consumer of the heritage; (B) jumping-into that involves heritage consumption as a guest; (C) looking-at, in the case of which mostly passive spectatorship occurs. In the course of the study it appeared that village swing sites constitute vivid examples of the conception of living-in. Swings and swing sites are not protected institutionally; often swings are built because of the wish of the community. The main factor inhibiting the survival of swing sites is the fear of ensuing responsibility in case an accident should happen to anyone using the swing. As a solution, safer village swings might be devised and the responsibility could be shared between the swingers, the swing builders, and the owner of the land. Applying the model in case of mires helped to show that mires tend to be interpreted more from the position of looking-at and less from the perspective of jumping-into. The conception of living-in has survived in the context of berry picking. Maintaining mires as natural heritage finds expression in activities related to nature protection and nature education. It can be claimed that the example of mires demonstrates that heritage culture and nature protection tend to exclude each other, first and foremost favouring heritage management based on the conception of looking-at. In order to gain a more immediate contact, using mires based on the conception of jumping-into should be facilitated. The model of heritage functioning that was created also helped to prove that maintaining helps to define heritage objects, while sustaining is conducive of the objects’ active survival.
The doctoral thesis focuses on landscape and heritage as processes. In the main part of the thesis the formation of heritage is discussed with the help of the concepts of sustenance and maintenance. Sustenance has been defined as an unregulated holistic process. As concerns maintenance, heritage is defined as its object and it occurs via aimed protection, introduction, and other activities. In the light of these two concepts, the transformations in the meanings of two examples, swings and mires, during the past hundred years were studied. The main aim of the thesis is divided into four subtopics that include positioning of the examples on the scale of sustenance and maintenance, as well as introducing different factors that support or impede today’s functioning of phenomena that were formed in the past. The thesis results in the construction of a model that helps to map the modes of heritage managements: (A) living-in, in the case of which the local inhabitant is the creator/consumer of the heritage; (B) jumping-into that involves heritage consumption as a guest; (C) looking-at, in the case of which mostly passive spectatorship occurs. In the course of the study it appeared that village swing sites constitute vivid examples of the conception of living-in. Swings and swing sites are not protected institutionally; often swings are built because of the wish of the community. The main factor inhibiting the survival of swing sites is the fear of ensuing responsibility in case an accident should happen to anyone using the swing. As a solution, safer village swings might be devised and the responsibility could be shared between the swingers, the swing builders, and the owner of the land. Applying the model in case of mires helped to show that mires tend to be interpreted more from the position of looking-at and less from the perspective of jumping-into. The conception of living-in has survived in the context of berry picking. Maintaining mires as natural heritage finds expression in activities related to nature protection and nature education. It can be claimed that the example of mires demonstrates that heritage culture and nature protection tend to exclude each other, first and foremost favouring heritage management based on the conception of looking-at. In order to gain a more immediate contact, using mires based on the conception of jumping-into should be facilitated. The model of heritage functioning that was created also helped to prove that maintaining helps to define heritage objects, while sustaining is conducive of the objects’ active survival.
Kirjeldus
Väitekirja elektrooniline versioon ei sisalda publikatsioone.
Märksõnad
kultuurmaastikud, kiiged, asukoht, talupojakultuur, kultuuripärand, sood, loodusmaastikud, soode kaitse, säilitamine, säästlik eluviis, sotsiaalsed aspektid, majanduslikud aspektid, juhtumiuuringud, cultural landscapes, swings, location, peasant culture, cultural heritage, mires, natural sceneries, wetland protection, conservation, sustainable living, social aspects, economic aspects, case studies