[Commlist] Call for papers Bringing monuments to life: staging, spaces and audiences

*CALL FOR PAPERS*

*INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE*

*BRINGING MONUMENTS TO LIFE: STAGING, SPACES AND AUDIENCES*

June 13-14, 2024 – Vannes – France

Monuments are often emblematic of a territory for the local population. 
While their primary function is a tourist destination, monuments can act 
as markers of a territory's identity and memory, inviting individuals to 
connect them to a set of shared values (Riegl, 1984 [1903]). One value 
is our ability to be moved by the marks of the passage of time on the 
stones of monuments. Situated in their larger historical context by 
cultural and scientific projects, monuments are sometimes exploited for 
their attractive value and scientific projects, and are sometimes 
exploited for their capacity to attract and welcome heritage buildings. 
They remain spaces (Foucault, (2009 [1966]) that question their external 
environment, their territory and our relationship with the world.

Monuments are thus the focus of a wide range of staged activities (Flon, 
2012; Gellereau, 2005), designed to enhance their appeal to the public, 
such as interactive devices for visitors, live shows, historical 
re-enactments, digital mediation, video mapping (projected onto facades 
in summer or during public holidays), events, temporary exhibitions, 
immersive scenography (Ballarini and Delestage, 2023), etc. The staging 
of the monuments is designed to elicit particular emotions and 
experiences, which does not always avoid a form of heritage 
spectacularization.

Nevertheless, if this staging is based on cultural mediation devices, 
something that came to the fore in the 1980s (Davallon, 1999; Jacobi, 
2012), that staging must interact with the logics of the conservation, 
the protection and the enhancement of these heritage sites (Davallon, 2006).

By seeking to bring monuments to life, heritage professionals seek to 
make visible and audible what is no longer there, and prolong the 
history of these places. Some of the staging is in continuity with the 
historical and thematic universe of the sites in question, while others 
are counter to their original purpose, or represent ruptures or even 
interferences with the past. In all these cases, these mediations affect 
the perception of the monument and update its cultural and social 
identity. So how do these staged events work? How do they bring heritage 
sites to life? Which methods are used to achieve this? How do they 
question the interwoven spaces? How do they affect, or could affect, the 
public's perception of monuments? From a scientific and 
socio-professional perspective, this symposium aims to understand how 
the relationship between heritage sites and their audiences is being 
redefined, and the social and political logic of culture at work in the 
mediation of monuments as built heritage.

Our aim is to explore what brings heritage monuments to life in/through 
their staging, their interior/exterior spaces, but also in their 
symbolic and imaginary spaces, and their audiences through their 
appropriations, representations, uses and practices of the monument or 
heritage site. This conference will provide an opportunity to renew and 
extend these questions along a number of different lines, which are not 
intended to be exhaustive, but to provide food for thought:

*Area 1: Staging*

What do monument staging consist of? This area will focus on the 
analysis of staging as a semiotic device with technical (audiovisual, 
digital, plastic), linguistic (circulation of knowledge) and symbolic 
(creation of values) dimensions (Jeanneret, 2005). More specifically, we 
might analyze the storytelling at work in the staging of the monument, 
combining historical and fictional frameworks. How is historical 
knowledge mobilized and selected in the staging, and what are their 
sources? How do they relate to the heritage object? Some case studies 
may focus on the contribution of digital technology to heritage staging 
(Deramond, Fraysse and de Bideran, 2022), the evaluation of immersive, 
participatory or experiential approaches to digital mediation devices, 
and their impact (Gentes and Jutant, 2012). It may also be a question of 
identifying the injunctions to innovate that are imperative for heritage 
institutions and their consequences (Appiotti and Sandri, 2020). The 
proposals could also focus on the design of the staging, and who are the 
actors who are responsible for them? Which collaborations are at work 
between the various players, who belong to the fields of digital 
technology, heritage (historians and curators), culture, tourism or the 
arts?

*Area 2: Spaces*

Monuments and heritage sites constitute unique and complex spaces with a 
strong symbolic charge, satisfying our need for secrets (Bachelard, 2010 
[1957]). Most of the time, they have a distinct history and status, 
housing, for example, a history museum, a performing arts center, a 
contemporary art center or a performance venue. Physical traces of a 
bygone era, for most of them their use value has changed (Riegl, 
op.cit.). For historians, heritage objects, particularly when they are 
monuments, form part of a long history, and a history that is also that 
of its territory (urban or rural, industrial or agricultural, tourist or 
non-tourist), linked to local memories (Nora, 1997).

Our aim here is to understand how the staging of the monument questions 
the notion of space linked to the monument. How do the superimposed 
spaces of the monument cohabit: geo-historical, socio-cultural, tourist, 
built, imaginary? What are the spatial dimensions of the monument 
conjured up by these stagings: the context of the building, the 
architecture, the link with the surrounding landscape and/or the gardens 
(which in themselves stage natural heritage), the relationship between 
the interior and the exterior spaces, the place of the devices in the 
monument and the relationship to space proposed by the devices? More 
broadly, which specific issues have provoked debate?

*Area 3: Audiences*

Last but not least, staging shapes the way audiences appropriate the 
monument and their reception of heritage. Audiences for monuments 
indiscriminately referred to as "visitors" are in fact very diverse, and 
can include local tourists and/or foreigners. While it's easy to imagine 
that these audiences all express the fact that they all share a modern 
artistic desire that readily recognizes the beauty, and that beauty is 
superior to novelty (Riegl, op.cit.), reception studies demonstrate a 
diversity of appropriations, practices and even uses of certain 
mediation devices. Local people, "historical subjects concerned by their 
heritage" (Amirou, 2000), will not perceive the site and its staging in 
the same way as outsiders, raising crucial questions of heritage and 
space. The staging of heritage activates a "memory of connivance", in 
which the narrative of history is constructed by the imagination of the 
public (Chappé, 2010). What are audiences' lived experiences (successful 
and/or unsuccessful) (Vergopoulos, Jutant, forthcoming)? How do they 
absorb, avoid and/or adjust to the staging? How do audiences participate 
in the monument's patrimonialization on the basis of its staging? What 
representations do they create and transmit as a result of these 
experiences?

*Key words*: mediation, monument, heritage, public, staging

This symposium is part of the Dispositifs Expériences en Culture et 
Patrimoine in Culture and Heritage (DEXCUPAT), which brings together a 
multidisciplinary team that examines the mediation, devices and 
experiences of audiences in cultural and heritage institutions. It will 
take place at the Université Catholique de l'Ouest (Vannes) on June 13 
and June 14, 2024.

**

*How to submit*

Proposals may come from one of the following disciplines: history/art 
history, information and communication sciences, sociology, computer 
science, art/design, geography (non-exhaustive, contributions from other 
disciplines will be accepted for evaluation on the basis of their 
relevance to the issues addressed). Papers from an international 
perspective are welcome.

Paper proposals are due by* February 23, 2024*. The paper should 
include: last name/first name, e-mail address, current status, 
institutional affiliations of the author, short biography (5 lines), 
title and keywords. The paper proposal should not exceed 2000 characters 
and should present the disciplinary and theoretical framework and be 
based on results linked to a field study and include as well a short 
indicative bibliography. Evaluation feedback will be sent no later than 
March 11, 2024, with, if appropriate, proposals for collaboration to be 
discussed.

A multi-disciplinary approach is sought, and depending on the papers 
selected, thematic journal issues are planned.

Proposals should be sent to: *(fairevivrelemonument /at/ uco.fr)*

Registration fees: 60€ researchers / 30€ PhD students. These fees 
include access to all conference sessions, breaks and lunches.

**

*Organizing committee:*

Manuelle Aquilina (MCF Histoire, UCO-BS)

Caroline Creton (MCF SIC, UCO Nantes)

Julie Pasquer-Jeanne (MCF SIC, UCO-BS)

Olivier Hû (MCF Informatique, Université d’Angers)

*Scientific committee:*

Sébastien Appiotti (MCF SIC, CELSA - Sorbonne Université)

Mickaël Augeron (MCF Histoire Université de La Rochelle)

Cristina Badulescu (MCF SIC, Université de Poitiers)

Marie Ballarini (MCF SIC, Université Paris Dauphine)

Laurent Bourdeau (PR Géographie Université Laval, Québec)

Gaëlle Crenn, (MCF SIC Université Lorraine)

Jean Davallon (Professeur émérite SIC, Avignon Université)

Philippe Duhamel (PU - Géographie - Université Angers)

Diane Dufort (MCF SIC, UCO Nantes)

Jessica De Bideran (MCF SIC, Université Bordeaux Montaigne Mica)

Patrick Fraysse (PU – SIC - Université Toulouse III)

Viviana Gobbato (Docteure en muséologie et chercheuse associée au Cerlis 
- Université de Paris/Université Sorbonne Nouvelle)

Camille Jutant (Université Lyon II)

Patrick Kernevez (MCF Histoire, Université Bretagne Occidentale)

Jean-René Ladurée (MCF Histoire, UCO Laval)

Nicolas Navarro (MCF SIC Université de Liège, Belgique)

Nicolas Meynen (MCF Histoire de l’art, Université Toulouse II)

Benoist Pierre (PU Histoire, Université Tours, CNRS)

Lise Renaud (MCF SIC, Université Avignon)

Thomas Renard (MCF Histoire de l’art, Université de Nantes)

Johan Vincent (MCF Histoire, Université d’Angers)

*Bibliography*

Appiotti Sébastien, Sandri Éva (2020), « ”Innovez ! Participez !” 
Interroger la relation entre musée et numérique au travers des 
injonctions adressées aux professionnels », in Musées et mondes 
numériques, Culture et Musées n°35, pp.25-48

Amirou Rachid (2000), Imaginaire du tourisme culturel, Paris, Presses 
universitaires de France.

Ballarini, Marie et Delestage Charles-Alexandre (à paraître), « 
Dissonance des objectifs dans la chaîne de production des œuvres 
patrimoniales en réalité virtuelle : trouver le compromis entre 
transmission des savoirs et expériences émotionnelles », Réseaux.

Bachelard Gaston (2010 [1957]), La poétique de l’espace, PUF, Quadrige 
Grands textes, Paris. Chappé François (2010), Histoire, mémoire, 
patrimoine - Du discours idéologique à l'éthique humaniste, PUR, coll. 
Arts et Sociétés.

Davallon Jean, (2006), Le don du patrimoine. Une approche 
communicationnelle de la patrimonialisation, Éditions Lavoisier, Paris.

Davallon Jean (1999), L’exposition à l’œuvre, Stratégies de communicaton 
et médiation symbolique, Éditions L’Harmattan communication, Paris. 6

Deramond Julie ; Fraysse Patrick ; de Bideran Jessica (2022), 
Scénographies numériques du patrimoine : Expérimentations, recherches et 
médiations, Avignon : Éditions Universitaires d’Avignon (collection « 
En-Jeux »), Avignon.

Flon Émilie (2012), Les mises en scène du patrimoine, savoir, fiction et 
médiation, Éditions Hermès-Lavoisier, Paris. Foucault Michel (2009 
[1966]), Les Hétérotopies - Le Corps Utopique, Éditions Lignes, Paris.

Gentes Annie, Jutant Camille, (2012), « Nouveaux médias au musée : le 
visiteur équipé », Culture & Musées, 2012, no 19, p. 67-91.

Gellereau Michèle (2005), Les mises en scène de la visite guidée. 
Communication et Médiation, Éditions L’Harmattan, Paris.

Georgescu Paquin Alexandra (2014), Actualiser le patrimoine par 
l’architecture contemporaine Collection « Nouveaux Patrimoines » Presses 
de l’Université du Québec, 282 p.

Jacobi Daniel (2012), « Les équipements patrimoniaux sensibles entre 
mémoire de témoins et objets de collectionneurs » TEMUSE 14-45. 
Valoriser la mémoire des témoins et des collectionneurs d'objets des 
deux Guerres mondiales. Médiation, communication et interprétation 
muséales en Nord-Pas de Calais et Flandre occidentale, France.

Jeanneret Yves (2005), « Dispositif » in : La « société de l’information 
» : glossaire critique. Commission française pour l’Unesco, La 
Documentation française, 164 p., Paris.

Nora Pierre (dir.) (1997), « Entre mémoire et histoire. La problématique 
des lieux », Les lieux de mémoire, tome 1 : La République, Gallimard, 
coll. « Quarto », p 23-43, Paris.

Riegl Aloïs, (1984 [1903]), Le culte moderne des monuments. Son essence 
et sa genèse [Traduit de l'allemand par Daniel Wieczorek, Éditions Du 
Seuil, Espacements, Paris.

Vergopoulos Hécate, Jutant Camille (dir.) (à paraître), Le ratage : 
quand l’expérience culturelle est contrariée, Culture et musées n°44.


---------------
The COMMLIST
---------------
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier. Please use it responsibly and wisely.
--
To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit http://commlist.org/
--
Before sending a posting request, please always read the guidelines at http://commlist.org/
--
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ commlist.org)
URL: http://nicocarpentier.net
---------------