Interpretive evaluation and archaeological heritage. The Lessons from the Journey to the Beginnings Project (original) (raw)

2020, Hungarian archaeology

As heritage managers and interpretation experts, we increasingly have the opportunity to contribute to projects focusing on showcasing heritage values and audience development. Thereby, our work involves most of the time collaborative learning about the possible role of interpretation in presenting cultural heritage. Notably, not all presentations are necessarily interpretive too, and the task of heritage interpreters is not only to present archaeological heritage to audiences in comprehensible and exciting ways. Helping to establish a bond between heritage and the people is among our most important missions, thus preserving heritage. However, we also have to 'value' heritage, not simply 'evaluate', or 'assess'. As unusual as the interpretive practice seems in the Hungarian heritage scene, the more necessary it is. Why? This is what we are trying to highlight in regard to a particular project. Archaeologists can make a significant impact on culture by discovering lost phenomena and related meanings or creating new meanings in connection to specific sites. Inherently, their work may disrupt the already established ways of engagement people had towards heritage; this may rejuvenate existing connections, confront others and create new ones. Problems arise when one faces the following questions regarding cultural phenomena in connection to particular places: by whom and how far are local phenomena considered significant? Who should care for them and why? In other words: whose heritage are we talking about? This is when the role of interpretation comes into the picture, which can be best described in the following way: there is a need for designing a communication process, which creates meaningful links between the people and the given place, and there is also a need for interactions, which influence what we hold valuable about places, how we appreciate these values and what we do with them. The most important tool to influence such connections is interpretation, the success of which lies in providing first-hand experience, while also enabling individuals to live through different types and qualities of experiences. Its function and message is not about presenting a large amount of data, but rather the essence of the place, conveyed in a focused and coherent way. At the same time, the interpretive message can and should be relevant (both comprehensible and interesting) to its target audiences, in a way that a communication channel opens, through which past and present realities meet and collide. This latter we find important, as providing clues-or referential points-for individual and collective identities is central to the concept of heritage. Based on this, one should underline that interpretation is much more than experiential presentation. It has a mission-just like heritage sites do. Interpretive evaluation is partly about the investigation into how far this mission is fulfilled. On the other hand, it is instrumental for getting to know the potential 'heirs.' In order to appropriately consider them in relation to any particular place, one has to value them, to know who they are, why they come to visit, and what experiences they would bring home.