Interpreting living urban-industrial heritage: The Jewellery Quarter, Birmingham

Authors

  • Mert Nezih Rifaioğlu image/svg+xml İskenderun Technical University

    Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mert Nezih Rifaioğlu received his Ph.D. degree at Middle East Technical University, Department of Architecture, Graduate Programme in Restoration. He is currently working as an academic staff at İskenderun Technical University, Faculty of Architecture, Department of Architecture. His main academic and professional interest areas are conservation of cultural heritage, urban morphology, management, planning and interpretation of heritage sites, architectural design in historic environments. He has been involved in professional and academic works on interpretation and presentation of cultural heritage sites at both national and international levels. He has completed his ICCROM (Rome-Italy) post-doctoral fellowship, during which he undertook research on “Heritage Interpretation Strategies in Multi-Layered Cultural Heritage Sites" between November 2021 and September 2022. He is member of ICOMOS Turkey National Committee and selected expert member of CIVVIH-ICOMOS (Historic Cities, Towns and Villages) and ICIP-ICOMOS (Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites) international scientific committees.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47818/DRArch.2022.v3i3060

Keywords:

Interpretation theory, Jewellery Quarter, Birmingham, heritage interpretation

Abstract

In light of the studies related to the theory of interpretation of cultural heritage sites, the holistic interpretation approach of heritage areas has developed, and a new interpretation culture has emerged. It includes new approaches, local and regional interpretation strategies, new policies and comprehensive analysis and evaluations. The new interpretation culture is important not only to produce interpretation themes, but also to the transfer and sustainability of the values of heritage sites that need to be preserved to the society. In this context, studies are being brought up in order to find the most appropriate ways to understand and transfer living urban heritage sites; tangible and intangible values, existing or non-existent urban structures, ongoing or non-existent social and cultural practices, used or ongoing structures and all cultural and historical layers of areas.  Beyond the current interpretation studies carried out for the heritage sites, it is important to develop interpretation strategies including the historical importance of the areas for living urban heritage sites and therefore complex cultural heritage areas, the connections to the places, cultural and social relations networks, urban memory, and the spirit of the place. For this purpose, the study focuses primarily on the critical viewpoint of theoretical content of the interpretation of cultural heritage sites. In the light of theoretical and practical knowledge, the research then concentrates on key themes and discussions on heritage interpretation in the UK. Accordingly, the research discusses the interpretation strategies in the Jewellery Quarter, Birmingham which is the one of the most influential areas by means of historical urban-industrial heritage site.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  • Alfrey, J.and Putnam, T., 1992. The Industrial Heritage. Managing Resources and Uses, Routledge, London.
  • Birmingham’s Heritage Strategy 2014-2019, Protecting the Past, Informing the Present, Birmingham City Council.
  • Brooks, J.G., and Brooks, M., 1993. In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Copeland, T., 2006. “Constructing Pasts: Interpreting the Historic Environment”, Heritage Interpretation, Hems, A, Blockley, M.R. (eds.), Routegde, London.
  • Evans, M., 1991. "Historical interpretation at Sovereign Hill", in J. Rickard and P. Spearritt (eds) Packaging the Past? Public Histories, Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
  • Faro Convention of 2005. https://www.coe.int/en/web/culture-and-heritage/faro-convention
  • Goethe, C. M. 1960. "Nature Study in National Parks Interpretive Movement," Yosemite Nature Notes 39(7):156-158.
  • Haddleton, M. E., 1987. The Jewellery Quarter History and Guide, YBA Publications, Birmingham.
  • Hein, G. E., 1998. Learning in Museums. London: Routledge.
  • Hewison, R., 1989.” Heritage: an interpretation”, Heritage Interpretation: The natural and built environment, Uzzell, D.L., Belhaven Press, London
  • ICOMOS 1964. International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites, The Venice Charter.
  • ICOMOS 1990. ICOMOS Charter for Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage.
  • ICOMOS 1999. The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance.
  • ICOMOS 2008. Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites, Ename Charter.
  • Interpret Europe, 2019. European projects on heritage interpretation.
  • Jameson, J.H. 2020. “Cultural Heritage Interpretation”, Encyclopaedia of Global Archaeology, C. Smith (ed), Springer Nature, Switzerland.
  • Laenen, M. 1989. “Looking for the Future Through the Past”, Heritage Interpretation: The natural and built environment, Uzzell, D.L., Belhaven Press, London.
  • Lewison, R., 1989.” Heritage: an interpretation”, Heritage Interpretation: The natural and built environment, Uzzell, D.L., Belhaven Press, London.
  • Lewthwaite, J., 1988. “Living in Interesting Times: Archaeology as Society’s Mirror”, Extracting Meaning from the Past, Bintliff, J. (ed.), 86-98, Oxford: Oxbow Books.
  • Malcom-Davies, J., 2004. “Borrowed robes: The educational value of costumed interpretation at historic sites”, International Journal of Heritage Studies, vol. 10, issue 3.
  • Merriman, N., 2004. Public archaeology, New York: Routledge.
  • Phillips, A., 1989. “Interpreting the Countryside and the Natural Environment”, Heritage Interpretation: The natural and built environment, Uzzell, D.L., Belhaven Press, London.
  • Potter, B. P. Jr., 1997. “The Archaeological Site as an Interpretive Environment”, Preserving Archaeology to the Public: Digging for Truths, Jameson, J. H. (ed.), 35-43, Wanut Creek, California: Altamira Press.
  • Rifaioğlu, M.N., Şahin Güçhan, N., 2008. “Understanding and Preserving the Spirit of Place by an Integrated Methodology in Historic Urban Contexts”, 16th General Assembly and Scientific Symposium of ICOMOS, 29 September-4 October, Quebec City, Canada.
  • Robertshaw, A., 2006. “Live Interpretation”, Heritage Interpretation, Hems, A, Blockley, M.R. (eds.), Routegde, London.
  • Rumble P. 1989. “Interpreting the Built and Historic Environment”, Heritage Interpretation: The natural and built environment, Uzzell, D.L., Belhaven Press, London.
  • Runte, A., 1979. National Parks: The American Experience, University of Nebraska Press.
  • Tilden,F., 1957. Interpreting Our Heritage, University of North Carolina Press.
  • Uzzell, D.L., 1989. Heritage Interpretation: The natural and built environment, Belhaven Press, London.
  • Yıldırım Esen, S., 2007. Interpretation of Cultural Heritage Sites the Case: Boston National Historical Park in the U.S.A., Un-published Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University.
  • Zuckerman, J., Eley, G., 1979. The Birmingham Heritage, Croom Helm, London.

Downloads


Published

2022-12-21

How to Cite

Rifaioğlu, M. N. (2022). Interpreting living urban-industrial heritage: The Jewellery Quarter, Birmingham. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 3(3), 308–324. https://doi.org/10.47818/DRArch.2022.v3i3060

Issue


Section

Research Articles