Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T10:07:00.668Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Participatory is Participatory Heritage Management? The Politics of Safeguarding the Alevi Semah Ritual as Intangible Heritage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2014

Bahar Aykan
Bahar Aykan*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey. Email: aykanbahar@yahoo.com.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

This article addresses the shortcomings of UNESCO’s intangible heritage program in developing effective mechanisms for community participation in heritage management. Contrary to its original intentions, by prioritizing national perspectives and interests on heritage, UNESCO’s program inadvertently allows for strengthening the control of the state over the heritage of minorities and other marginalized groups. This article explores the complexities of state-led intangible heritage management, using the Semah ritual of Turkey’s Alevi religious groups as a case in point. I first detail how Alevi voices were silenced during Semah’s intangible heritage nomination process, despite those documents submitted by Turkey to UNESCO that claim Alevis’ active engagement and full support. Then I discuss in what ways the heritage making of Semah plays into the ongoing efforts of the Turkish government to integrate Alevis into dominant Sunni majority. I conclude by arguing that UNESCO’s intangible heritage program, though unintentionally, assists nondemocratic countries in their efforts to force marginalized groups to adopt the mainstream culture.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Cultural Property , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , November 2013 , pp. 381 - 405
Copyright
Copyright © International Cultural Property Society 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adanali, Ahmet Hadi. “The Presidency of Religious Affairs and the Principle of Secularism in Turkey.” The Muslim World 98 (2008): 228–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anico, Marta, and Peralta, Elsa. “Introduction.” In Heritage and Identity: Engagement and Demission in the Contemporary World, edited by Anico, Marta and Peralta, Elsa, 1–11. New York: Routledge, 2009.Google Scholar
Askew, Marc. “The Magic List of Global Status: UNESCO, World Heritage and the Agendas of States.” In Heritage and Globalisation, edited by Labadi, Sophia and Long, Colin, 19–44. New York: Routledge, 2010.Google Scholar
Aykan, Bahar. “Intangible Heritage’s Uncertain Political Outcomes: Nationalism and the Remaking of Marginalized Cultural Practices in Turkey.” PhD dissertation, CUNY Graduate Center, New York, 2012.Google Scholar
Aykan, Bahar. “UNESCO ve Kültürel Mirasın Milliyeti [UNESCO and Nationality of Cultural Heritage].” In Neye Yarar Hatıralar? Bellek ve Siyaset Çalışmaları, edited by Yelsalı Parmaksız, P. M., 303–37. Ankara: Phoenix, 2012.Google Scholar
Beazley, Olwen. “Politics and Power: The Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome) as World Heritage.” In Heritage and Globalisation, edited by Labadi, Sophia and Long, Colin, 45–65. New York: Routledge, 2010.Google Scholar
Blake, Janet. “UNESCO’s 2003 Convention on Intangible Cultural Heritage: The Implications of Community Involvement in ‘Safeguarding.’ ” In Intangible Heritage, edited by Smith, Laurajane and Akagawa, Natsuko, 45–73. New York: Routledge, 2009.Google Scholar
Bozkurt, Fuat. Semahlar [The Semahs]. Istanbul: Kapı, 2007.Google Scholar
Byrne, Denis. “A Critique of Unfeeling Heritage.” In Intangible Heritage, edited by Smith, Laurajane and Akagawa, Natsuko, 229–52. New York: Routledge, 2009.Google Scholar
Cınar, Menderes. “The Justice and Development Party and the Kemalist Establishment.” In Secular and Islamic Politics in Turkey, edited by Cizre, Ümit, 109–31. New York: Routledge, 2008.Google Scholar
De Cesari, Chiara. “World Heritage and Mosaic Universalism.” Journal of Social Archaeology 10, no. 3 (2010): 299–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dressler, Markus. “Public-Private Distinctions, the Alevi Question, and the Headscarf: Turkish Secularism Revisited.” In Comparative Secularisms in a Global Age, edited by Cady, Linell E. and Shakman Hurd, Elizabeth, 121–41. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engelhardt, Richard. “UNESCO Presentation: Regional Perspectives.” In Promotion of the “Proclamation of Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity,” Final Report of 2002 Regional Workshop for Cultural Personnel in Asia and the Pacific, Tokyo, Japan, 12–16 March, 2002, 29–31. Tokyo: UNESCO, 2002.Google Scholar
Erdemir, Aykan. “Tradition and Modernity: Alevis’ Ambiguous Terms and Turkey’s Ambivalent Subjects.” Middle Eastern Studies 41, no. 6 (2005): 937–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erman, Tahire, and Göker, Emrah. “Alevi Politics in Contemporary Turkey.” Middle Eastern Studies 36, no. 4 (2000): 99–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, Brian, Ashworth, G. J., and Tunbridge, J. E.. A Geography of Heritage: Power, Culture, and Economy. London: Hodder Arnold, 2000.Google Scholar
Institute of Strategic Thinking. Alevi Raporu [The Alevi report]. Ankara: Öncü, 2009.Google Scholar
Jongerden, Joost. “Violation of Human Rights and the Alevis in Turkey.” In Turkey’s Alevi Enigma: A Comprehensive Overview, edited by White, Paul J. and Jongerden, Joost, 71–89. Leiden: Brill, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenny, Mary Lorena. “Deeply Rooted in the Present: Making Heritage in Brazilian Quilombos.” In Intangible Heritage, edited by Smith, Laurajane and Akagawa, Natsuko, 151–68. New York: Routledge, 2009.Google Scholar
Lesser, Ian O. “Turkey: ‘Recessed’ Islamic Politics and Convergence with the West.” In The Muslim World after 9/11, edited by Rabasa, Angel, 175–205. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2004.Google Scholar
Lixinski, Lucas. “Selecting Heritage: The Interplay of Art, Politics and Identity.” European Journal of International Law 22, no. 1 (2011): 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, William. “Protecting the Tay Nguyen Gongs: Conflicting Rights in Vietnam’s Central Plateau.” In Cultural Diversity, Heritage and Human Rights, edited by Langfield, Michele, Logan, William, and Nic Craith, Máiréad, 189–207. New York: Routledge, 2010.Google Scholar
Logan, William, Langfield, Michele, and Nic Craith, Máiréad. “Intersecting Concepts and Practices.” In Cultural Diversity, Heritage and Human Rights, edited by Langfield, Michele, Logan, William, and Nic Craith, Máiréad, 3–20. New York: Routledge, 2010.Google Scholar
Lowenthal, David. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markoff, Irene. “Music, Saints, and Ritual: Samā and the Alevis of Turkey.” In Manifestations of Sainthood in Islam, edited by Martin Smith, Grace and Ernst, Carl W., 95–110. Istanbul: Isis Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Mountcastle, Amy. “Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage and the Inevitability of Loss: A Tibetan Example.” Studia ethnologica Croatica 22 (2010): 339–59.Google Scholar
Oran, Baskın. “The Minority Concept and Rights in Turkey: The Lausanne Peace Treaty and Current Issues.” In Human Rights in Turkey, edited by Kabasakal Arat, Z. F., 35–56. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Öktem, Kerem. “Being Muslim at the Margins: Alevis and the AKP.” Middle East Report 246. http://www.merip.org/mer/mer246/being-muslim-margins (2008; accessed 23 December 2011).Google Scholar
Ruggles, Fairchild D., and Silverman, Helaine. “From Tangible to Intangible.” In Intangible Heritage Embodied, edited by Fairchild Ruggles, D. and Silverman, Helaine, 1–14. London: Springer, 2009.Google Scholar
Sahin, Sehriban. “The Rise of Alevism as a Public Religion.” Current Sociology 53 (2005): 465–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shankland, David. The Alevis in Turkey: The Emergence of a Secular Islamic Tradition. New York: Routledge, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shankland, David. “Modes of Religiosity and the Legacy of Ernest Gellner.” In Ritual and Memory: Toward a Comparative Anthropology of Religion, edited by Whitehouse, Harvey and Laidlaw, James, 31–48. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press, 2004.Google Scholar
Shepherd, Robert. “UNESCO and the Politics of Cultural Heritage in Tibet.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 36, no. 2 (2006): 243–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverman, Helaine. “Contested Cultural Heritage: A Selective Historiography.” In Contested Cultural Heritage, edited by Silverman, Helaine, 1–50. New York: Springer, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverman, Helaine, and Fairchild Ruggles, D.. “Cultural Heritage and Human Rights.” In Cultural Heritage and Human Rights, edited by Silverman, Helaine and Fairchild Ruggles, D., 3–22. New York: Springer, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Laurajane. “Deference and Humility: The Social Values of the Country House.” In Valuing Historic Environments, edited by Gibson, Lisanne and Pendlebury, John, 33–50. Burlington: Ashgate, 2009.Google Scholar
Smith, Laurajane. “Empty Gestures? Heritage and the Politics of Recognition.” In Cultural Heritage and Human Rights, edited by Silverman, Helaine and Fairchild Ruggles, D., 159–71. New York: Springer, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Laurajane. Uses of Heritage. New York: Routledge, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tambar, Kabir. “The Aesthetics of Public Visibility: Alevi Semah and the Paradoxes of Pluralism in Turkey.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 52, no. 3 (2010): 652–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tunbridge, J. E., and Ashworth, G. J.. Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict. New York: Wiley, 1996.Google Scholar
UNESCO. Basic Texts: Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Paris: UNESCO, 2008.Google Scholar
UNESCO. “Semah Nomination Form,”1–15. http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/en/RL/00384 (2010; accessed 17 December 2012).Google Scholar
USCIRF Annual Report. “The Commission’s Watch List: Turkey.”http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?page=search&docid=4a4f27293c&skip=0&query=watch%20list&coi=TUR (2009; accessed 20 December 2011).Google Scholar
Van Bruinessen, Martin. “‘Aslını inkar eden haramzadedir!’ The Debate on the Ethnic Identity of the Kurdish Alevis.” Working Paper, Center for the Study of Asia & the Middle East, Deakin University, Malvern, Victoria (Australia): 1–26. http://www.let.uu.nl/~martin.vanbruinessen/personal/publications/Alevikurds.htm (1997; accessed 23 December 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Bruinessen, Martin.“Kurds, Turks and the Alevi Revival in Turkey.” Middle East Report 200 (1996): 7–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warhola, James W., and Bezci, Egemen B.. “Religion and State in Contemporary Turkey: Recent Developments in Laiklik.” Journal of Church and State 52, no. 3 (2010): 427–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yildirim, Mine. “The Right to Have Places of Worship—A Trapped Right.” International Institute for Religious Freedom. http://www.refworld.org/docid/4d6e4b0f2.html (28 March 2011; accessed 23 December 2011).Google Scholar
Zeidan, David. “The Alevi of Anatolia.” Middle East Review of International Affairs 3, no. 4. http://www.gloria-center.org/1999/12/zeidan-1999-12-05/ (1999; accessed 4 January 2013).Google Scholar
Zürcher, Erik J., and Van der Linden, H.. “Searching for the Fault-Line.” In The European Union, Turkey and Islam, 83–174. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University, 2004.Google Scholar