Monumentality in ‘Capital’ Cities and Its Implications for Tourism Marketing

Abstract

Monuments and monumental architecture are established vehicles for communicating capital city status. The need to reduce complex cities into simplified images also means they can be very effective destination marketing tools. This paper assesses the relationship between monuments, capital city status and tourism marketing.Monumental developments in Barcelona during two periods; 1888-1929 and 1982-present are used to explore this relationship. Barcelona provides an interesting example, because of the city's attempts to reassert its historic status as the capital of Catalunya and of the SW Mediterranean. Despite some noted variances in the scope of, and rationale for, monumentality, the paper concludes that in both eras, attempts to monumentalise the city have assisted political and tourism ambitions. Operational implications are also identified.

The consumption of cultural experiences in city tourism

“…Cultural heritage is often thought to be an important ingredient of city tourism ‘products’ consumed by tourists in search of the ‘authentic’ other (Tunbridge and Ashworth, 1996; Wickens, 2000; Smith, 2007). Much has been written on the economic logic which places a destination’s culture on the market, on the ‘gentrification’ of inner city areas, and the consumption of ‘symbolic’ experiences produced by the tourism and heritage industries (Alvarez Sainz, 2012; Dann, 1996; Evans, 2003; Hewison, 1987; Hooper-Greenhill, 1992; Maitland and Newman, 2004).…”

Fatal attraction: explaining variation in the attractiveness of Islamic State propaganda

“…This suggests a connection between locations, broadly defined, and product attractiveness. For example, research has shown that the presentation of capital cities can be an important factor in attracting tourism, particularly because of the fact that these cities are symbols of what a country stands for (Hall, 2002; Huang and Lee, 2009; Smith, 2007). Another reason that some scholars have posited for the attractive value of capital cities is that they play an important role in conveying political power, both domestically and internationally.…”

Exploring the contribution of public art to the tourist experience in Istanbul, Ravenna and New York

“…Hagia Sophia was built between 532 AD and 537 AD as the chief church of the city, located adjacent to the Great Palace. It could be understood as an example of monumentality in public art, in that it symbolises the power of the church, but also of the original rulers (Smith, 2007). Destructive forces provided the opportunity to rebuild the city, but not as a replica of the original.…”

“…This drive towards monumentality in public art is often aimed at making a political statement (Lippard, 1999;Miles, 1997;Sharp et al, 2005;Sudjic, 2005). This was particularly prevalent in the nineteenth century when many of these capitals were transformed into modern urban spaces, exemplified by Haussmann's Paris (Olsen, 1986;Smith, 2007) and the desire to 'display the majesty of the nation state' (Smith, 2007, p. 80). Others are a legacy of commemorations, and help to build national identity and collective memory (Frost & Laing, 2013;Smith, 2007).…”

“…This was particularly prevalent in the nineteenth century when many of these capitals were transformed into modern urban spaces, exemplified by Haussmann's Paris (Olsen, 1986;Smith, 2007) and the desire to 'display the majesty of the nation state' (Smith, 2007, p. 80). Others are a legacy of commemorations, and help to build national identity and collective memory (Frost & Laing, 2013;Smith, 2007). Recent examples include the geometric splendour of the Glass Pyramid at the Louvre and the Grand Arche at La Défense, built to commemorate the anniversary of the French Revolution, but also a symbol of President François Mitterrand's 'strategy to make the city the undisputed capital of a modern Europe' (Sudjic, 2005, p. 11).…”