Introduction: The state and historic buildings: preserving ‘the national past’

Abstract

Historic buildings are important in nationalism through their roles in building and reinforcing national identity. As part of the expanding ‘heritage industry’, they are also of growing economic and political importance. Despite their physical existence, historic buildings are ‘created’ – they must be constructed as ‘historic’ through processes of choice and the attachment of significance. The state can perform these functions through policies that define and select buildings for protection, by ownership and funding, and by its uses of buildings for nationalistic purposes. Yet state actors can have good reasons – nationalistic and economic – to destroy or fail to preserve historic buildings. The paper examines why, when and how state actors pursue policies to protect historic buildings. It offers arguments about patterns of state action that part of state strategies to promote national identity and cultural nationalism.

When East Meets West: International Change and Its Effects on Domestic Cultural Institutions

“…Cultural heritage has been an object of Western political discourses and administration since at least the nineteenth century (Swenson , 1‐4). Closely tied to the historical emergence and development of nation states, the preservation and promotion of cultural heritage has been aimed at fostering a national identity (Thatcher , 24). Many European governments institutionalized the protection of their “national heritage” by adopting laws and policies and establishing museums, libraries, and archives.…”

Portugal dos Pequenitos as an urban laboratory for rehearsing national identity

“…This study had a significant impact on Branco's architectural work, and it can be said that the commission of the park was a turning point in his career. In the context of Estado Novo nationalism, Branco and Bissaya Barreto may be considered important ‘societal actors’, as defined by Thatcher (: 39), i.e. non‐state actors who contributed to the creation of a national identity through their work.…”

Re‐imagining the ‘Taiwanese’ nation in the interpretation of the Chinese‐oriented heritage

“…The production of heritage, as scholars of both nationalism (Anderson, 2006, Ch. 10; McCrone et al, 1995; Thatcher, 2018) and heritage study (Graham, 2002; Harvey, 2001) have discussed, is a process of constructing the collective remembrance and forgotten for the present by ‘selecting’ resources for the meaning‐making of artefacts, mythologies, memories and traditions (Harrison, 2013). This strategy of ‘heritagisation’ is also a matter Anderson discussed regarding the design of exhibitions inside a museum through the imperial lens and hegemonic discourses, in which unearthed antiquities are listed chronologically (Anderson, 2006, Ch.…”