In the UK, we have a wealth of heritage sites – from the old stones of Stonehenge to the halls of Edinburgh Castle, they provide an unparalleled experience of our history. They are replete with legends, occult mysteries and architectural marvels that have captivated human hearts. But in an age of globalised tourism, the question is: just how commercial can we get? In the process of designing heritage sites to appeal to tourist dollars, are we jeopardising the sense of uniqueness that makes them unique?
Let’s dive into this controversy and the tradeoff between maintaining the sculptural integrity of these monuments and making money to sustain them.
The Draw of Heritage Tourism
In the UK, heritage tourism is hugely influential, with millions of people visiting places every year. Such visitors generate enormous amounts of income for local economies, bringing not only benefits to the attractions but also to surrounding communities through spending on accommodations, food and retail. There’s no doubt that tourism dollars are very much needed to maintain these historic sites, given that public funding for heritage conservation has been severely reduced over the years.
The Tower of London, Westminster Abbey and Windsor Castle are hot spots for foreign visitors. Passes, gift shops, tours and cafes all help to generate revenue for both the conservation of these buildings and the conservation behind the scenes, from research, restoration and education. In the absence of these resources, many heritage sites would have little or no way to keep their buildings, much less offer enthralling experiences for the public.
But as the sites come to depend on tourism revenue, the distinction between historic value and commercial appeal begins to thin. Heritage managers and preservationists struggle to find a middle ground between a demand for income and a desire to preserve the integrity of these cultural monuments.
When Commercialisation Compromises Authenticity
To others, however, commodification had brought heritage sites too close to theme parks. Sites trying to get more visitors often throw in elements that are quite out of keeping with the past. Touristic interpretations, or costumed actors staging dramatic re-enactments, or over-emphasissed “experiences” meant to amuse instead of educate, make the original history feel less important than the tourist’s experience.
Take, for example, Warwick Castle. This fortress is now a tourist attraction and, while it is still an excellent example of medieval architecture, most visitors pass through rooms of waxworks, jousting games and “haunted” lairs designed to attract visitors, rather than honour the atmosphere of its past. They certainly attract visitors, but some say the castle’s medieval character is compromised by elements that place entertainment over learning at the forefront.
Equally, the tendency toward ‘experiences’ was sometimes interpreted as undermining the sacredness of the sites themselves. At sites such as Bath’s Roman Baths, audio-tours featuring invented history are aimed at putting visitors into the world of antiquity. Although this might be an enjoyable technique, some say it sabotages the unbridled historic force of just standing in the room and reduces it to a story for modern amusement rather than a real chance to learn about the past.
Finding the Right Balance between the Visitor Experience and Historic Dignity
Of course, not all commercialisation is bad. Many heritage sites have devised new approaches to bring a visitor experience closer to its past. For example, well-curated gift shops can offer books, copies and locally produced goods that are beneficial to the site and local economy without diluting history. Cafés within heritage buildings, when maintained in an aesthetic way and removed from the heart of the building, deliver services without subverting the historical feel of the property.
One of the museums with an unnerving compromise is the British Museum. It also houses a stifling gift shop and a smouldering cafe, both of which are intentionally set apart from the museum’s objects so that people can simply engage with them. In the same way, the National Trust’s immersive interpretation policy is deliberately subtle, relying on interpretive boards and guides for teaching rather than re-enactments or fantasy spectacles.
Some heritage venues, such as Fountains Abbey in North Yorkshire, have gone less dramatic, focussing instead on the ponderous and meditative nature of the ruins. Interpretive signage is sparse and one is asked to just wander around in silence, enjoying the site’s majesty and awe-filledness without interference.
The Pressure to Modernise and “Holiday”
As the battle for tourist dollars intensifies, heritage sites are under pressure to deliver more than history. When there are other entertainment choices, from theme parks to online experiences, heritage managers sometimes feel they must reshape their product in order to remain relevant and attract the next generation. Such modernising pressure can be the catalyst for decisions that favour quick gratification for visitors to a place rather than the maintenance of history over the long-term.
Other sites have embraced tech installations and touch screens, but these may begin to obscure the architecture itself. One can’t be too careful about using technology to accentuate it, or letting the narrative of the building speak for itself. As the digital or interactive objects become the focus, they end up stripping the historic form of its purpose to a surface that serves as the entertainment.
Keep Authenticity In The Face of Commercialisation
Where does all this leave us? My take on it is one of accessibility, education, and authenticity. The heritage sites should be able to make money but not ruin their history. A first step is to set more defined guidelines on what commercial and immersive activities are appropriate for which types of sites. For example, a medieval citadel might be more receptive to re-enactments than a monastery or abbey.
Then, too, it’s worth investing in high-quality, empirical interpretation. Instead of blatant entertainment or invented narratives, heritage sites can focus on informed, entertaining stories that honour their audience’s intelligence and curiosity. This might include more in-depth tours conducted by knowledgeable experts, more direct exposure to primary source materials, or even digital content that visitors can download and view remotely so they can get an even better experience without encroaching on the exhibit.
After all, visitors deserve a chance to just “be” here. And the very fact of being in an ancient castle or cathedral is, for most of us, a kind of drama enough in its own right. The space for contemplation and reflection in silence can help to maintain the sanctity and character of these places, letting the buildings and history speak for themselves.
A Delicate Balance
The commodification of Britain’s historic sites offers both hope and risk. It takes tourist dollars to maintain and preserve these structures, but it doesn’t need them at the expense of the historical integrity of the sites. By giving heritage sites too much of a sense of entertainment, they become disposable. It’s a difficult trade-off to find how UK heritage architects are able to sustain these sites without destroying their integrity, but we need to do it if we want to leave these monuments to future generations as authentic historical artefacts, not commodity copies of themselves.
Finally, we want visitors to be able to interact authentically with the past, in ways that are instructive as well as empathetic to the past. In doing so, we can make sure the UK’s heritage places remain places of wonder, exploration and emotional identification with our common past for generations to come.
