Memory work versus memory-work and its utility in heritage tourism

ABSTRACT

This paper advocates researching the diverse, unstructured, idiosyncratic personal and autobiographical memories of individuals – visitors, tourists, local residents and geographically dispersed patrons associated with heritage resources and heritage tourism attractions. ‘Memory-work’, conceptualized by Frigga Haug and her collaborators in the 1980s as a feminist constructionist method, is differentiated from ‘memory work’ (without hyphen) as defined in the scholarly literature from different disciplines in the past three decades. For the purposes of this paper, memory work is then conceptualized as a qualitative, interpretivist research approach focused on memories, which employs a range of methodologies and techniques to elicit and ‘process’ memories, and draws on memory theory for analysis. It is argued that memory work can provide useful insights for academic knowledge production and applied research in heritage tourism. A few examples of specific research techniques are presented to illustrate the diverse spectrum of how memory work can be carried out in practice. It will moreover be discussed how memory distortion and ‘false memories’ are to be treated, how memory work differs from other qualitative modes of enquiry, and what its benefits and limitations are.

KEYWORDS:

• Memory
• memory work
• heritage
• heritage tourism
• stakeholder
• visitor

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

ORCID

Sabine Marschall http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2761-5649