Show simple item record

The heritage interpretation: a prerequisite for the use of the archaeological heritage in the socio-economic development of the community

dc.contributor.advisorBulatović, Dragan
dc.contributor.otherBabić, Staša
dc.contributor.otherĐukić, Vesna
dc.contributor.otherRadić, Nenad
dc.creatorŽivanović, Katarina D.
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-05T12:55:12Z
dc.date.available2016-01-05T12:55:12Z
dc.date.available2020-07-03T10:00:52Z
dc.date.issued2014-07-09
dc.identifier.urihttp://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/handle/123456789/3362
dc.identifier.urihttp://eteze.bg.ac.rs/application/showtheses?thesesId=1849
dc.identifier.urihttps://fedorabg.bg.ac.rs/fedora/get/o:9512/bdef:Content/download
dc.identifier.urihttp://vbs.rs/scripts/cobiss?command=DISPLAY&base=70036&RID=46438927
dc.description.abstractPoslednjih decenija arheologija se nezaustavljivo menja. Ona prelazi put od spomenika, objekta i nalazišta do predela, urbane celine i istorijskog okruženje. Nove teme zauzimaju mesto tipologijama i analogijama, modelima i društvenoj evoluciji, a među njima značajno se ističu interpretacija konteksta i komuniciranje arheoloških vrednosti. Višestruki dualizam, između teorije i prakse, procesne i postprocesne arheologije, tehničke i integralne konzervacije, zaštite i turizma su glavne karakteristike arheologije u svetu, ali i u Srbiji. Međutim, i pored toga što je u Srbiji zainteresovanost šire javnosti za nasleđe usaglašena sa zainteresovanošću svetske publike, savremena prezentacija arheološkog nasleđa kod nas u mnogome zaostaje za svetskom praksom, a naročito je slabo razvijen odnos arheologa sa različitim zajednicama. U Srbiji i dalje je dominantan koncept po kojem je dovoljno “pustiti predmete da sami govore”, dok se značaj nasleđa sagledava gotovo isključivo kroz prizmu arheološke vrednosti. Na taj način zanemaruju se šira naučna, kulturna, obrazovna, ekonomska, turistička, ekološka, simbolička i duhovna vrednost. Zato i ne čudi što je interpretacija nasleđa u Srbiji u potpunosti nerazvijena i što se termin interpretacija isključivo vezuje za istraživački proces. Upravo ove promene i problem inspirisali su istraživanje koje se bavi interpretacijom arheoloških nalazišta i njenim doprinosom razvoju zajednica. U radu se interpretacija sagledava kao deo arheološkog, ali i muzeološkog procesa tokom kojeg se stvaraju značenja materijalnih i nematerijalnih ostataka prošlosti koja doprinose razumevanju i boljem korišćenju nasleđa. Sagledavanje interpretacije, ne kao tehnike, modela ili discipline, već prvenstveno kao principa nastalo je razumevanjem savremenih teoretskih okvira i prihvatanjem nove definicije nasleđa, odnosno pravljenjem jasne distingcije između rezultata arheoloških iskopavanja i nasleđa. 4 Osnovno istraživačko pitanje koje je postavljeno odnosi se na ulogu koju interpretacija igra u korišćenju potencijala arheološkog materijala za razvoj zajednice. Polazna tačka istraživanja bila je hipoteza da se muzealizacijom arheološkog nalazišta povećava efekat interpretacije, stvara dodatna vrednost nasleđa i osnažuje uticaj za razvoj zajednice, pri čemu se arheološko nalazište sagledava kao muzejski predmet, a muzej kao fenomen kako ga prepoznaje Šola u knjizi Prema totalnom muzeju. To zapravo znači da se interpretacijom ne samo arheološkog konteksta u kojem je materijal pronađen i primarnog u kojem je on stvaran i korišćen, već i onog savremenog koji se kontinuirano menja pod uticajem prirodnih i društvenih faktora, povećava njegov potencijal za razumevanje i korišćenje od strane zajednice. Nepoznavanje interprtativnog procesa nasleđa; nedostatak istraživanja publike, nepostojanje stejkholderskog pristupa, nerazvijena interresorna, intersekorska i interdisciplinarna saradnja su osnovni razlozi nedovoljno uspešne komunikacije između stručne i lokalne zajednice – definisano je kao pomoćna hipoteza. Za potrebe rada kao reprezentativna studija slučaja odabrano je arheološko nalazište Gamzigrad-Romulijana. Ovo nalazište izabrano je jer je na njemu moguće testirati hipotezu i pomoćnu hipotezu na osnovu analize trenutnog stanja nalazišta i stalne postavke u muzeju u Zaječaru, ali i razviti interpretativni plan kao neophodnu alatku u procesu korišćenja nasleđa za održivi razvoj koji bi kao model mogao biti primenjiv i na ostalim arheološkim nalazištima. Rad zaključuje kako da bi se osigurao razvoj integrativne interpretacije kao preduslova razvoja i korišćenja nasleđa neophodno je postaviti platformu koja će individualne, intuitivne, sporadične akcije pretvoriti u opšte, planirane, koordinirane i kontrolisane aktivnosti. Ta platforma bio bi ekomuzej, muzej bez zidova, sa predmetima in situ, usresređen na akcije i reagovanja. Razumevajući Gamzigrad-Romulijanu kao ekomuzej bilo bi moguće izdvojiti osnovne principe poput: inkluzivnosti i participativnosti, sveobuhvatnosti, utemeljenosti, interdisciplinarnosti i kritičnosti koji bi trasirali put interpretaciji i omugućili dobijanje odgovora na pitanja zašto i sa kim, a ne samo kako i za koga.sr
dc.description.abstractDuring last two decades archeology has been changing dramatically. It faced the shift from focusing on monuments, sites and objects towards landscapes, urban districts and historical surroundings. New topics took the place of traditional typologies and analogies, models and social evolutions. Among most significant and influential in these changes are ideas about interpretation of contexts and communication of archaeological values. Dualism between theory and practice, process and post-process archeology, technical and integrative conservation, protection and tourism are among the main characteristics of contemporary archaeology around the world, as well as in Serbia. Despite of the fact that the interest in archeology of general public in Serbia is similar to the interest of public around the world, contemporary presentation of archeological heritage in Serbia is far behind the world’s best practices. Particularly problematic is the underdeveloped relationship between expert archaeologists and diverse (local) communities. In Serbia, the still prevailing concept is the one of “letting the objects speak for themselves”, while the significance of heritage is viewed and understood almost exclusively through the prism of archaeological values. Understanding and using archeological remains in this way ignores broader scientific, cultural, educational, economic, touristic, ecological, symbolical and spiritual values. In this context, it is not surprising that interpretation of heritage in Serbia is underdeveloped and the understanding of interpretation limited to research process. Exactly these changes and problems were the inspiration for the research dedicated to interpretation of archaeological sites and its contribution to communities’ development. In the research, interpretation is understood as a part of archaeological and museological process of creation of meanings of tangible and intangible remains of the past which contribute to understanding and better use of heritage. In the context of 7 following research, the use of contemporary theoretical frameworks and acceptance of new definition of heritage - which makes distinction between results of archaeological excavations and heritage - lead to understanding of interpretation not as a technique, model or discipline, but primarily as a principle. The main research question is related to the role that interpretation plays in the use of potentials of archaeological material and sites for community development. The starting point was the hypothesis that the musealization of archaeological site increases the effects of interpretation, creates an added value of heritage and empowers communities’ development. Within this hypothesis archaeological site is understood as museum object, while museum is understood through the concept of the total museum (as defined by Sola, Towards the total museum). This means that in order to increase the potential for understanding and use of heritage by communities, one needs to interpret not only the archaeological context (in which artifacts were discovered) and primary context (in which material was originally used), but also the contemporary context which artifacts and sites are continually developing and changing under the influence of natural and social factors. The secondary hypothesis is that the lack of knowledge related to interpretative process, the lack of audience research, the lack of stakeholder approach, underdeveloped intersectoral and interdisciplinary cooperation are the main reasons for unsuccessful communication between expert and local communities. Archaeological site Gamzigrad-Romuliana was selected as a representative case study for testing the hypothesis. The case has been studied by thoroughly analyzing contemporary condition of the interpretation on the site itself, in the main display of Zajecar Museum and through other media and actors that have been interpreting the site up to the present. Based on the case study analyses and theoretical framework, the interpretive plan of the site has been developed as a necessary tool in the process of using heritage for sustainable development. This plan would serve as a model applicable on other archaeological sites. The research concludes that in order to ensure the development of integrative interpretation as a precondition for heritage development and use, it is necessary to create a platform which will turn individual, intuitive, sporadic actions into general, planned, coordinated and controlled activities. This platform, in our view, would be 8 ecomueum, museum without walls with in situ objects, focused on actions and reactions. Understanding Gamzigrad-Romuliana as an ecomuseum would allow the coordinated work based on the principles of inclusiveness and participation, holistic approach, authenticity, interdisciplinarity and critical attitude, which would trace the way for proper interpretation and lead the process of defining not only how and for whom, but also why and with whom, and we create and interpret heritageen
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.languagesr
dc.publisherУниверзитет у Београду, Филозофски факултетsr
dc.rightsopenAccessen
dc.sourceУниверзитет у Београдуsr
dc.subjectInterpretacija nasleđasr
dc.subjectHeritage interpretationen
dc.subjectnova muzeologijasr
dc.subjectarheologija za javnostsr
dc.subjectarheologija zajednicesr
dc.subjectmenadžment nasleđasr
dc.subjectintepretativni plansr
dc.subjectGamzigrad – Romulijanasr
dc.subjectekomuzejsr
dc.subjectzajednica povezana nasleđemsr
dc.subjectnew museologyen
dc.subjectpublic archaeologyen
dc.subjectcommunity archaeologyen
dc.subjectheritage managementen
dc.subjectinterpretative planen
dc.subjectecomuseumen
dc.subjectheritage communityen
dc.subjectGamzigrad – Romulianen
dc.titleInterpretacija kulturnog nasleđa kao preduslov za korišćenje arheološke baštine u društveno-ekonomskom razvoju zajednicesr
dc.titleThe heritage interpretation: a prerequisite for the use of the archaeological heritage in the socio-economic development of the communityen
dc.typedoctoralThesis
dc.rights.licenseBY-NC-ND
dcterms.abstractБулатовић, Драган; Ђукић, Весна; Бабић, Сташа; Радић, Ненад; Живановић, Катарина Д.; Интерпретација културног наслеђа као предуслов за коришћење археолошке баштине у друштвено-економском развоју заједнице; Интерпретација културног наслеђа као предуслов за коришћење археолошке баштине у друштвено-економском развоју заједнице;
dc.identifier.fulltexthttp://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/bitstream/id/26877/Disertacija.pdf


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record