![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Despite an undoubted awareness of the intangible aspects of culture in heritage studies, scholars continue to base their understanding of intangible heritage according to rationalist theories of perception, which accept only a single mode of perception—that which is bound to the empirical, sensorial and terrestrial world. How are we to appropriately value and safeguard practices such as ‘shamanic voyages’ to the worlds of spirits, engage with the symbolic narratives of creation myths and recognise the significance of religious rituals and mystical experiences, if we do not consider the ways of knowing, being and doing of diverse cultural groups in the first place? A meaningful analysis of intangible dimensions in heritage needs to consider the role and ontological status of human imagination. By drawing on the theory of imagination proposed by Ibn ‘Arabi and discussed by Corbin, this paper enquires about the role of imagination in people’s perception of intangible heritage. With a view to redress the symbolic function in human perception, the paper concludes by proposing the use of ‘active imagination’ as a method in heritage management to understand how intangible experiences and values are associated with the physical aspects of heritage.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Dr. Çağrı İmamoğlu and the anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. I would like to express my deep gratitude to Professor Harun Batırbaygil for discussions on Ibn ‘Arabi’s theory of imagination. I also wish to acknowledge the constant support and encouragement of Professor İpek İmamoğlu and Dr. Falli Palaiologou during the development of this work.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. UNESCO, “International Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage.”
2. Bortolotto, “From objects to processes”; and Meskell et al. “Multilateralism and UNESCO World Heritage.”
3. Dewhurst, “Folklore and museum practice.”
4. da Silva, Archeology of Intangible Heritage.
5. Waterton and Watson, “Framing theory.”
6. Swensen et al., “Capturing the intangible and tangible aspects of heritage.”
7. Krause, “Our visual landscape.”
8. Kaufman, “Putting Intangible Heritage in its Place (s)”; and Swensen et al., “Capturing the intangible and tangible aspects of heritage.”
9. Pocock et al. “Assessing stories before sites.”
10. UNESCO, “Proposals concerning the desirability of a standard setting instrument on historic urban landscapes.”
11. Sadler, The Situationist City.
12. Stevens, The Ludic City.
13. Pallasmaa, The Eyes of the Skin.
14. Hochberg, Perception and Cognition at Century’s End.
15. Freud, The Unconscious.
16. Jung, Psychology of the Unconscious.
17. Jaffé, Memories, Dreams, Reflections.
18. Jung, “The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche.”
19. Chodorow, Jung on Active Imagination.
20. Eliade, Images and Symbols.
21. Jung, The Undiscovered Self.
22. Jung, The Archetypes and The Collective Unconscious.
23. Jung, Mysterium Coniunctionis; and von Franz, Psyche and Matte.
24. Jacobi, Complex/Archetype/Symbol in the Psychology of C. G. Jung.
25. Ibid., 51–52.
26. Ibid., 52.
27. Halligan, “The Creative Imagination of the Sufi Mystic, Ibn ‘Arabi.”
28. Corbin, Alone with the Alone.
29. Ibid.
30. Ibid.
31. See note 21 above.
32. Corbin, “Mundus imaginalis or, the imaginary and the imaginal.”
33. White, Time and Death: Heidegger’s Analysis of Finitude.
34. Corbin, Spiritual Body and Celestial Earth.
35. See note 28 above.
36. See note 34 above.
37. Corbin, “Mundus imaginalis or, the imaginary and the imaginal”; and Miller, The Transcendent Function.
38. Gibson, The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception
39. Wilson, Biophilia: The Human Bond with Other Species; and Jung, Mysterium Coniunctionis.
40. Kellert and Wilson, The Biophilia Hypothesis; and Jung, Mysterium Coniunctionis.
41. von Franz, Psyche and Matte; and Jung, “The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche.”
42. See note 32 above.
43. de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life.
44. Jung, Mysterium Coniunctionis.
45. Corbin, Alone with the Alone, 184.
46. Böhme, Forty Questions on the Soul.
47. Harrison et al., “Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services.”
48. Jung and Kerenyi, Essays on a Science of Mythology.
49. Poulios, “Is every heritage site a ‘living’ one? linking conservation to communities’ association with sites.”
50. Joy, “Sámi Shamanism, fishing magic and drum symbolism.”
51. Hillman, City and Soul.
52. Hillman, “The repression of beauty.”
53. Frascari, Monsters in Architecture.
54. Frascari, Marco Frascari’s Dream House, 54.
55. See note 53 above.
56. Chittick, The Sufi Path of Knowledge.
57. Böhme, “Atmosphere as the fundamental concept of a new aesthetics.”
58. Sloterdijk, Spheres. Volume I: Bubbles. Microspherology.
59. Harrison, Heritage: Critical Approaches.
60. Merleau-Ponty, Phénoménologie de La Perception.
61. Kearney, “Intangible heritage.”
62. See note 5 above.
63. Lowenthal, The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History.
64. Hooper-Greenhill, Museums and the Interpretation of Visual Culture; and Waterton and Watson, “Framing theory.”
65. Crouch, “Meaning, encounter and performativity.”
66. See note 38 above.
67. Alves, “Affordances of historic urban landscapes.”
68. Gibson, The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception; and Heft, Ecological psychology in context.
69. Heft, Ecological psychology in context.
70. Jung, The Archetypes and The Collective Unconscious; de Luca Comandini, “L’immaginazione attiva”; de Luca Comandini, “L’immaginazione attiva”; and von Franz, “Confrontation with the collective unconscious.”
71. Hofmeister, “The rediscovery of transition in spatial planning and environmental planning.”
72. Benjamin, The Arcades Project; McCracken, “The Completion of old work.”
73. Benjamin, W. (Citation2008) “The Work of art in the age of its technological reproducibility (first version).”
74. Benjamin, The Arcades Project.
75. Franck and Stevens, Loose Space.
76. Eoin and King, “How to develop intangible heritage.”
77. Ibid.
78. Ibid.
79. Öztürk, “Transformation of the ‘sacred’ image of a Byzantine Cappadocian settlement.”
80. Chirikure et al. “Unfulfilled promises?”
81. Heijnen, The Social Life of Dreams.
82. Virtanen, “Shamanism and indigenous youthhood in the Brazilian Amazon.”
83. Ott et al. “Intangible cultural heritage.”
84. Franck, “Imagining as a way of knowing.”
85. Leonard and Willis, Pedagogies of the Imagination.
86. AlSayyad, Consuming Tradition, Manufacturing Heritage.
87. Sterling, “Mundane myths.”
88. Böhme, “The art of the stage set as a paradigm for an aesthetics of atmospheres.”
89. Bille, “Assembling heritage.”
90. von Franz, Alchemical Active Imagination.
91. See note 12 above
92. Larsen, J. & Urry, J. (Citation2011)
93. Edensor, “Performing tourism, staging tourism.”
94. Belk, “Possessions and the Extended Self.”
95. Light, “Performing Transylvania.”
96. Tchoukaleyska, “Public places and empty spaces.”
97. Huber, “Topographies of the possible.”
98. Lefebvre, The Production of Space.
99. Smith, Counter-Tourism: A Pocketbook.
100. Huizinga, Homo Ludens.
101. Hickman and Sinha, “The Sabar ways of knowing.”
102. Lévy-Bruhl, La Mentalità Primitiva.
103. Kaplan and Kaplan, The Experience of Nature.
104. Lefebvre, Critique of Everyday Life.
105. See note 20 above.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Susana Alves
Susana Alves is a Brazilian Environmental Psychologist currently working as an assistant professor in the Department of Architecture at Çankaya Üniversitesi in Ankara, Turkey. Dr. Alves investigates people’s perceptions of natural landscapes, restorative experiences and health-promoting aspects of nature-related activities. Current research activities include the study of tangible and intangible aspects of cultural heritage and the application of Ibn ‘Arabi’s concept of imagination and Carl Jung’s active imagination method to heritage studies and heritage management. Dr. Alves supports a multi-method approach to research and the dissemination of research findings to different stakeholders. A main concern is to link research with design and to produce research findings relevant to sustainable environmental interventions. Dr. Alves has engaged in research and teaching activities in Psychology, Landscape Architecture, and Architecture departments in Brazil, U.S., UK and Turkey.