Heritage, identity and community engagement at Dunluce Castle, Northern Ireland

Expert Leadership and Hidden Inequalities in Community Projects

“…From experiences in Africa and Australia (Greer 2014;Breen et al 2015), a post processual theorizing has come into being which focuses on interpretation rather than just the object itself. This involves the acceptance of multiple narratives and new interpretations based on an emotive root to the past (Jackson et al 2014;Stepney and Popple 2008;Greer 2014).…”

“…This engages with the wider political questions concerning forms of community and the public life that we create. With heritage community engagement, there is a traditional view which emphases the objects, artefacts and lead role of the professionals in interpreting and conserving these objects (Breen et al 2015). Greer (2014, p.59) would liken this to a processual way of thinking about heritage and the role of archaeology in developing the narrative of the 'objects and sites on which the scientific discourse is focused'.…”

“…However, in order to enable the local voice to develop there needs to be an acknowledgement that the heritage expert is in fact the community in which the archaeologist is working (Stephens and Tiwari 2015). This raises issues around the politics of identity (Breen et al 2015) and the type of leadership required.…”

“…Jackson et al (2014) also point to the notion that communities are not something that people or places have; they are what people do in the place they value. For example, there is a danger that the government focus on the 'Big Society' will create projects carefully managed by experts with a passive community voice (Breen et al 2015). What is required is for the 'expert-voice' to become mediators and advocates for knowledge, providing the tools not the information for communities to explore their own ideas and reach their own conclusions (Perkin 2010).…”

“…The data was identified through publicly available information and reports on the first two community projects, and interviews with the primary project managers of the previous two projects and the forthcoming project. Table 3-2 identifies features which engaged with inclusivity, the postprocessual (Greer 2014: Breen et al 2015 understanding of landscape and artefacts which takes into account all voices involved in the interpretation. Another major assumption was that the local community would want to be involved.…”