|
"Making an Edgier Interpretation of the Gold Rushes and Eureka Stockade"
Interpretation provides meaning and understanding for the visitor, but whose meaning and whose understanding? While there is a growing body of research on methods for effective interpretation, the process by which the message is formulated and chosen is poorly understood. Indeed, in heritage tourism there is often little appreciation for the role of historians as historical interpreters with differing opinions and perspectives. In other words, it is not always possible (and desirable) to base visitor interpretation on objective facts and reject any conflicting views.
My research focuses on new interpretations of history and the contributions of these to visitor interpretation at heritage sites and attractions. I am particularly interested in heritage tourism associated with the Gold Rushes. In the last decade or so historians have significantly reinterpreted the Gold Rushes, particularly concentrating on women, indigenous people, Chinese and other migrant groups and the lesser “poor man's diggings” goldfields. As historian David Goodman has put it, his colleagues are rewriting an “edgier history” of the Gold Rushes. If historians' views are changing, how then is visitor interpretation changing?
|
