In recent years, the intersection of cultural heritage and political power has emerged as a crucial field of inquiry in anthropology, with new research shedding light on the intricate dynamics that define this relationship. A groundbreaking study by scholars Zhou X. and Huang J., published in the International Journal of Anthropology and Ethnology, dissects the phenomenon they term “heritagization” — the process through which cultural politics shape, and are shaped by, the curation and management of cultural heritage within China’s rapidly evolving sociopolitical landscape. This article reveals how cultural heritage is increasingly mobilized as a political resource, entangled in negotiations over identity, power, and modernization.
At the core of Zhou and Huang’s analysis is an understanding that heritagization transcends the mere preservation of artifacts or traditions. Instead, it acts as an active cultural-political practice, wherein heritage becomes a site of contestation and redefinition. Through ethnographic fieldwork and archival research, the authors argue that heritagization reflects state priorities, social anxiety, and global cultural flows, directing attention to the strategic deployment of heritage assets in national and local policy agendas. This sophisticated anthropological approach challenges simplistic narratives of heritage as static or purely celebratory.
To fully appreciate the concept of heritagization, one must consider its function in the broader political framework. In China, cultural heritage is systematically curated and exhibited as a symbol of national pride, historical continuity, and social cohesion. However, Zhou and Huang emphasize that this process entails selective memory—certain narratives are amplified while others are suppressed. This selective historicity serves both to legitimate current regimes and to align public sentiment with state-defined visions of progress, thus highlighting the inherently political nature of heritage itself.
The researchers place special emphasis on the tension between commodification and cultural authenticity. As part of China’s massive tourism expansion and international cultural diplomacy efforts, sites of heritage undergo significant transformations. These alterations often prioritize spectacle and marketability, leading to debates about the “authenticity” of cultural displays. Zhou and Huang document how such processes involve complex negotiations among government bodies, local communities, and commercial interests, underlining the multilayered interactions prompted by heritagization.
Importantly, the study explores the roles of diverse actors in the heritagization process. While the Chinese state occupies a central position, local communities, academics, and even international organizations contribute to the framing and contestation of heritage meanings. Zhou and Huang highlight moments where grassroots perspectives resist or reinterpret official heritage narratives, creating spaces of cultural agency. This plurality questions monolithic interpretations and insists on the importance of understanding heritage as a dynamic and dialogic field.
The political economy of heritage also emerges as a critical theme. The authors present detailed analysis of funding mechanisms, regulatory frameworks, and institutional hierarchies that shape how cultural heritage is maintained and promoted. These systemic structures reveal the embeddedness of heritage within market logics and bureaucratic imperatives, exposing contradictions between conservation goals and economic development pressures. Such insights are valuable for policymakers aiming to balance competing objectives in heritage management.
Zhou and Huang further delve into the global dimensions of heritagization. China’s engagement with international heritage regimes, including UNESCO designations and heritage diplomacy, situates the country within global cultural circuits. This internationalization influences domestic heritage policies, raising questions about sovereignty, cultural translation, and authenticity on a transnational scale. The authors’ careful ethnographic details demonstrate how global standards are appropriated and adapted, sometimes engendering conflicts and negotiations beyond national borders.
Their methodological rigor is notable for its multidisciplinary approach, integrating anthropological theory, political analysis, and cultural studies. Fieldwork in diverse Chinese locales uncovers localized particularities that nuance broader political trends. By weaving ethnographic narratives with policy critiques, Zhou and Huang provide a textured understanding of how everyday actors experience and contribute to the heritagization process, thereby enriching theoretical debates with grounded empirical evidence.
One of the study’s most compelling contributions lies in its exploration of symbolism and identity politics. The authors illustrate how cultural heritage sites function as symbolic battlegrounds where meanings of ethnicity, history, and belonging are contested and reconfigured. In multiethnic regions, heritage initiatives often navigate sensitive issues of minority identity and state integration, revealing the complex interplay between cultural recognition and political control. This dimension sheds crucial light on ongoing debates about nationalism and diversity.
The article also addresses technological interventions in heritagization, highlighting the growing role of digital media, virtual reality, and big data in heritage practices. Zhou and Huang show how technological tools mediate access, interpretation, and narration of heritage, creating new forms of engagement and control. These digital transformations have the potential to democratize heritage knowledge but also to reinforce authoritative narratives through curated content and algorithmic gatekeeping.
Environmental factors intersect with cultural heritage concerns in fascinating ways. The authors discuss how urban redevelopment, environmental degradation, and climate change impact heritage sites, necessitating innovative conservation strategies. The integration of ecological considerations into heritagization reveals a more holistic understanding of heritage, extending beyond cultural objects to include landscapes and ecosystems. These insights advance contemporary heritage debates by foregrounding sustainability alongside cultural preservation.
Critically, Zhou and Huang interrogate the role of education and media in shaping public perceptions of cultural heritage. Educational curricula, museum exhibitions, and media representations all participate in constructing heritage imaginaries. Their analysis exposes how these channels are utilized to foster particular historical consciousness and collective memory, elucidating the mechanisms through which heritagization operates at the societal level. This educational dimension underscores the performativity of heritage in social life.
The research has significant implications for cultural policy and heritage activism. By revealing the contested nature of heritage politics, the authors advocate for more inclusive and participatory heritage governance models. They argue that recognizing diverse voice and experiences in heritage management can enhance social justice and empower marginalized communities. This normative stance aligns with global calls for democratizing heritage practices and balancing preservation with innovation.
In conclusion, the concept of heritagization as articulated by Zhou and Huang offers a vital theoretical and practical framework for understanding the entanglement of culture and politics in heritage processes. Their anthropological research opens new avenues for analyzing how heritage is both a resource and a site of struggle, shaped by competing aspirations and power relations. This study not only advances academic scholarship but also provides valuable insights for policymakers, heritage professionals, and civil society actors engaged in cultural preservation in contemporary China and beyond.
The full text of Zhou and Huang’s pioneering article is accessible via the DOI link, presenting a comprehensive exploration of the political and cultural dimensions of heritage making in China. Its findings resonate with global challenges confronting heritage sites and communities worldwide, framing heritagization as a critical concept in understanding the evolving cultural politics of the 21st century.
Subject of Research: The anthropological study of cultural heritage in China and its role in political dynamics and identity formation.
Article Title: The heritagization of cultural politics: anthropological research on Chinese cultural heritage.
Article References:
Zhou, X., Huang, J. The heritagization of cultural politics: anthropological research on Chinese cultural heritage. Int. j. anthropol. ethnol. 8, 12 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41257-024-00113-7
Image Credits: AI Generated
