Transcript A MISSING LINK: THE ROLE OF SEMIOTICS IN MULTIAGENT

New Cultural Tourists in a SEE City: The Case of Split
Inga Tomić-Koludrović
& Mirko Petrić
Department of Sociology
University of Zadar
Cultural Transitions in SEE
The Creative City: Crossing Visions
& New Realities in the Region
Interuniversity Centre (IUC)
Dubrovnik, 10. 5. 2006
topics
general
--------------------------------------Creative Cities
Tourism
South Eastern Europe
topics
specific
--------------------------------------new type of tourists
an example
/empirical research/
policy aspects
tourism / SEE
---------------------------
tourism = fragmented
series of niches
growth = as fast as niches are growing
(e.g. gastronomical, religious, architectural)
Greg Richards, 2003
Intl. Seminar on Cultural Tourism in the Balkan Countries
Corfu, Greece, 19-20 September 2003
tourism / SEE
---------------------------
cultural tourism  fastest growth
in recent years
“total experience”
(not only physical products anymore,
 now includes experience, intangible qualities,
atmosphere)
Greg Richards, 2003
tourism /SEE
--------------------------the Balkans = crossroads
East / West
Christianity / Islam
54 UNESCO-protected
World heritage sites
“high culture” + “ atmosphere”
popular culture, nature, landscapes
Elka Bakalova
Intl. Seminar on Cultural Tourism in the Balkan Countries
Corfu, Greece, 19-20 September 2003
tourism / cities
--------------------------the increasing importance of culture
& cultural attractions
in contemporary societies
cities, regions and cultures
 aware of themselves as attractions
development of tourism = decisive
in this process
MacCannell, 1976
tourism / culture
-------------------------- the process of creation, exchange and
promotion of attractions
MacCannell, 1976
but today
“culture”  no longer the goal of tourism,
tourism itself = culture
Urry, 1990
cultural tourism
-------------------------- movement of people in search of
cultural attractions,
with the intention of gathering
new information and experiences
to satisfy their own needs
Richards 1999
cultural attractions
--------------------------complement to “mass tourism”
1960s / 1970s
 primary motivation
1990s onwards
but secondary motivation = also
“cultural tourism”
cultural tourists
characteristics
---------------------------
- active search for diversity
- authenticity of cultural experience
- concern for existential authenticity
& self-betterment
- sincere interaction with the destination & local
population
cultural tourists
characteristics
---------------------------
- possibly idealized expectations of a place and
people living there
- interested in “true" experiences
- rejection of simulacra and representations
Smith 2003
post-tourists
--------------------------- enjoy simulated experiences
- no difference between tourism,
entertainment & lifestyle
- no truly authentic experience
Smith 2003
post-tourists
---------------------------
- playful attitude : the commodification of
tourist experience
- ironic distance : experiences and situations
- no difference between reality and phantasy
Smith 2003
cultural tourists ?
--------------------------------= interested in and experencing “culture”
(a different kind)
- but what SEE region has to offer =/= best
suited to such interests
however, the elements of post-tourist attitude
= present /even if tourists do not fit the description
in its entirety/
cultural tourists ?
-------------------------------------- SEE = a place for
a new kind of cultural tourists
 neither “cultural tourists” in the traditional sense
of the word
 nor “post tourists”
new tourism
-------------------------------------new “cultural tourists” can be viewed as a subspecies
of the “new tourists”
- or referred to perhaps even without
the adjective “cultural”
- culture = taken for granted as part of
their interest, but not necessarily
primary motivation
/could be e.g. “to visit a friend who is
on scholarship” somewhere /
definition of “culture”
-------------------------------------- different from traditional “cultural tourists”
- interested in “culture”,
in a wider sense of the word
/beyond cultural monuments and art festivals/
“culture of everyday life”
“culture as lived experience”
Williams 1961
definitions of “culture”
a move in the field of “cultural tourism”
-------------------------------------- from “ideal” & “documentary”
definitions of culture
/high art and science/
/culture as monuments, crafts, i.e.
as documented in artefacts/

towards its “social definition”
/social behavior, the community/
definitions of “tourists”
ambivalences
-------------------------------------- not only the “cultural” part
of the definition = problematic
- but also the “tourist” part

the “new cultural tourists”
/in the “cultural” aspect of their activities/
do not perceive themselves
as “tourists”
the new cultural tourists
-------------------------------------- feel more like participants in the
everyday life of a place
/ “city” not “destination”/
- view what is on offer in cultural terms
like locals do
/ if “interesting”, let’s visit/
the new cultural tourists
--------------------------------------
- frequently don’t even know what
they’re interested in
/before they find something compatible
with their interests/
the new cultural tourists
-------------------------------------- life = lived as “experiences”
& “episodes”
/terms re: image formation in
branding theory/
 in the place where you live & elsewhere
/no fundamental difference in terms of
the structure of experiencing/
/but in terms of the place you find yourself at/
the new cultural tourists
--------------------------------------interested in public spaces
(where everyday life takes place)
- experience outside the enclaves of
usual tourist comfort & luxury
- want to walk into an interesting &
unpredictable space
(physically and intellectually)
the new cultural tourists
-------------------------------------- want to be absorbed into the urban structure
- consume what is on offer and interesting
to the local population
- want to be a part of the authentic “scene”
of a city
(no “folklore”)
mass tourism /hard/
-------------------------------------- planned in advance
- high season; once a year
- environmentally damaging
- “superiority” in relation to the locals
soft tourism
-------------------------------------- individual
- driven by personal interest
- spontaneuos
- environmentally conscious
- friendly relation to the locals
soft tourism
-------------------------------------- gaining in importance because of:
(a) change of work habits
no separation between work and free time
more numerous but shorter vacations
(b) growth of individualism and activism
driven by rising educational levels
(c) ozone holes danger
less sunbathing, more city tourism
the new cultural tourists?
------------------------------------------------cultural? post? soft?
- all of this, but also more than this,
and not exactly this
- all the elements are there, but in
an “impure” mix
AMBIVALENCE
the postmodern cultural tourists ?
---------------------------------------------------------ambivalence = fundamental trait
of postmodernity
Bauman
- hence: the best description
would probably be:
“the postmodern cultural tourists”
/but the problem = the connotations of the word
“postmodernism”/
Peristyle, Diocletian’s Palace, Split
street survey
--------------------------------------------------July, August, September (2005)
historic core of the city of Split
an average visitor to Split
=
younger, better educated, professionals,
managers, students, without children
an average visitor to Croatia = older, less educated, on
holiday with children
(TOMAS 2004)
age
60
50
40
18-30
31-50
iznad 51
30
20
10
0
godine
age
60
50
40
30
Hrvatska %
20
Split %
10
0
do 29
30-49
50 i više
profession
25
poljoprivrednik
radnik
službenik
manager
stručnjak
slob.prof.
obrtnik
drugo
20
15
10
5
0
%
level of education
45
40
35
30
osnovna
srednja
viša i visoka
magisterij
25
20
15
10
5
0
1st Qtr
80
70
60
50
samo odrasli
s djecom
40
30
20
10
0
Split
Hrvatska
learned about Split through:
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
tur. agencija
reklame novine
reklame tv
web.site
preko prijatelja
iz vodiča
1st
Qtr
reasons for coming
(1-5 scale)
recreation, fun, recharging batteries, Diocletian’s Palace
palača
250
kulutrni
događaji
priroda (plaže,
more)
način života
200
150
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
rekreacija i
zabava
punjenje
baterija
samoupoznava
nje
but once in Split
(regardless of primary motivation)
they have seen or want to see Diocletian’s Palace
100
palača
90
katedrala
80
70
restorani
60
plaža
50
otok
40
muzeji
30
20
klubovi
10
zaleđe
0
1st Qtr
kazalište
koncerti
interes for culture and age
interes for Diocletian’s Palace and age
dob
%
98,0
96,0
94,0
92,0
90,0
18-30
31-50
iznad 51
interes for Diocletian’s Palace and income
m je s e čna prim anja
%
eu
U
50
ad
iz
n
40
00
-5
00
0
00
E
U
E
00
0
30
00
-4
00
0
00
-3
20
do
2
00
0
E
E
U
U
100,0
98,0
96,0
94,0
92,0
90,0
88,0
86,0
84,0
Interest in theater (elite culture) and age
dob
%
20
10
0
18-30
31-50
iznad 51
interes in theater (elite culture)
and income
m je s e čna prim anja
%
30
25
20
15
10
5
eu
U
50
ad
iz
n
40
00
-5
00
0
00
E
U
E
00
0
30
00
-4
00
0
00
-3
20
do
2
00
0
E
E
U
U
0
expectations: historical monuments = met, fun and
culture =/= met
most important attractions
(1) Diocletian’s Palace, cultural monuments
(2) restaurants with authentic local
cuisine and everyday life of the city
-------------------------------------------------------less important attractions
beaches; the islands
-------------------------------------------------------least important attractions
museums and summer festivals
cluster analysis – types of tourists
3 tourist types
--------------------------------------------------------(1) Culture / contemplation
motivation : culture and wish to find out
about themselves
(2) Experiential / authenticity-driven
motivation : cultural monuments in an authentic location
(Diocletian’s Palace), the way people live
(3) Fun / recreation
motivation: enjoying nature, having fun, recharging
batteries
Creative Cities
---------------------------
Why cities?

important in a globalized world
or rather : glocalized
R. Robertson: Globalization discourse in Europe
cities = meeting places
global & local
Creative Cities
--------------------------Why cities?

important in a globalized world
or rather : glocalized
R. Robertson: Globalization discourse in Europe
cities = meeting places
global & local
Cities
--------------------------
more efficient planning, swifter
reactions to trends
unobstructed by national-level intermediaries

easier prey to corporate interests
a sceptical view: SEE
double neo-colonization
transnational capital
+ (national) “metropolitan” domination
resistance mechanisms = weak
Cities
--------------------------= places where interests & identity of
the local community
find expression
& local community
= the only “salvation potential”
in the globalized world
Ulrich Beck
Die Kinder der Freiheit, 1997
Beck
--------------------------neoliberalism, communitarianism
=/=
appropriate responses to the challenge of
globalization
BUT
“civic republicanism” of global proportions
with
complementary local urban and political
community structures
Beck
--------------------------cities = becoming evermore important
(in relation to national centers of power)
much of what was taken for granted
about cities has become unclear
(redefined functions, new arrangements)
what makes a city a city
should be rethought
Beck
--------------------------the words city & civic
(= related, for a reason)
strong civil society
strengthens
local identity politics
Beck
---------------------------
local politicians should strive to reaffirm
the identity of their cities
in competition with other cities
a new dramaturgy = in the making
policy concerns
--------------------------central issue:
how to preserve
authenticity, local specificities,
urban scene?
/which are also spaces interesting
to tourists/
policy concerns
--------------------------urban culture = concern for
the quality of life
spaces for the locals and tourists
should not be separated
Van Berg (2002)
a “harmonious city development” is in order
not segregation of city spaces (creation
of tourist enclaves)
policy concerns
--------------------------tourist want to be absorbed by
the culture of a city / its urban structure
Boston = a positive example
/tourists share the same space
with the locals/
Baltimore = a negative example
tourist enclaves
policy concerns
--------------------------tourists want space as “practised” place
they have themselves become part of
a destination’s atmosphere
the city = made together by the tourists
and the local population
policy concerns
--------------------------especially given the interest of the turists
in the city and engagement for the city
its specificity, preservation, and development
of its resources
= more important to react to this input
even than to use the tourists as a channel for
placement of creative industries products
/economic aspects, development of
a “scene” in the more restricted sense of the word/
policy concerns
--------------------------opportunity – for urban policy and cultural policy
/related/
for mobilization of resources
- in this case: positive connection of
global & local
already at work
- need : for both policy-makers and citizens
to become aware of it