HIST3441 Museum and Heritage

本課程分析博物館和文化遺產概念和理論的歷史變革過程；以及當代博物館和文化遺產的多元化定義。透過個案研究及實地考察，本課程旨在讓學生了解博物館及文化遺產保育工作的實際情況以及分析它們在現代社會所發揮的角色。通過分析各項國際文化遺產國際公約及守則的歷史發展，勾勒出國際及地區性合作對於達致可持續文化遺產保育和管理的重要性。

本課程共設三部。

第一部：博物館及文化遺產的概念和理論

1. 博物館概念的源起、發展和擴充。
2. 博物館策展以及文物展示的基本概念和知識。
3. 東亞地區包括中國內地和香港博物館的發展歷史。
4. 文化遺產概念的源起及發展。
5. 東亞地區對於文化遺產概念的理解和演繹。

第二部：博物館及文化遺產的社會角色與公眾參與

1. 博物館及文化遺產社會角色的歷史演變。
2. 博物館及文化遺產的教育功能和角色。
3. 博物館及文化遺產與不同社群公眾的關係和連結。
4. 文化遺產在當代社會的活化和再利用。

第三部：國際及地區性合作與可持續的文化遺產管理

1. 有關文化遺產保育和管理的國際性公約和守則。
2. 聯合國世界文化遺產的運作及管理機制；以及其可持續發展目標。
3. 國際及地區性合作在文化遺產保育上所面對挑戰及機遇。

此外，本課將安排兩次實地考察。

1. 薄鳧林牧場（16:30-18:00 pm, 10月10日）；
2. 大館（16:30-18:00 pm, 11月14日）。

     學生需選擇其中一次實地考察作一報告。

**本課程大綱只供參考，各項課程內容及評核安排以在課堂上及Blackboard公佈為準。**

課程評核：

期終論文 40%

導修表現及報告 30%

實地考察及報告 20%

課堂表現及參與 10%

*具體課業要求如題目、形式、實地考察安排等將會容後公佈，請密切留意課堂上的公佈。

導修課安排：

導修課安排將容後公佈。

參考書目：

下列書目屬於基礎參考書目，個別課題的參考書目將適時公佈，請經常留意Blackboard系統的更新和公佈。

Smith, L. (2006a). Authorised heritage. In L. Smith (Ed.), Uses of heritage (pp. 84-191). Oxon: Routledge.

Smith, L. (2006b). Response to authorised heritage. In L. Smith (Ed.), Uses of heritage (pp. 192-297). Oxon: Routledge.

Smith, L. (2006c). Use of heritage (1. publ. ed.). London u.a.: Routledge.

Su, X. (2014). Urban entrepreneurialism and the commodification of heritage in China. Urban Studies, 52.

Harrison, R. (2008). The politics of the past: Conflict in the use of heritage in the modern world. In G. J. Fairclough (Ed.), The heritage reader (pp. 177-190). London: London: Routledge.

Harrison, R. (2012). Heritage: Critical approaches. London: Routledge.

Babou, I. (2019). Natural heritage, participatory democracy, and UNESCO: A structure of disillusionment?

Chiang, M., Huang, L., Huang, S., & Hsiao, H. M. (2017). Policy formation and civil society engagement in heritage-making in Taiwan: A historical examination. In H. M. Hsiao, Y. Hui & P. Payam (Eds.), Citizens, civil society, and heritage-making in Asia (pp. 232-250). SG: ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute.

Chih-yu Shih. (2020). From “Asia’s east” to “East Asia”: Aborted decolonisation of Taiwan in the cold-war discourse. Asian Perspective, 44(2), 279-302.

Hall, S. (1999). Whose heritage? Un-settling ‘the heritage’, re-imagining the post-nation. Third Text, 13(49), 3.

Hsiao, H. M., Hui, Y., & Peycam, P. (2017). Citizens, civil society, and heritage-making in Asia. SG: ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute.

Lin, F. C. (2015). Heteroglossia Asia: The transformation of urban Taiwan. Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.

Lu, T. L. -. (2009). Heritage conservation in postcolonial Hong Kong. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 15(2), 258-272.

Matsuda, A., & Mengoni, E. (2016). Introduction: Reconsidering cultural heritage in East Asia. In A. Matsuda, & E. Mengoni (Eds.), Reconsidering cultural heritage in East Asia (pp. 31-46). London: Ubiquity Press.

Tien, C. (2010). The formation and impact of museum clusters: Two case studies in Taiwan. Museum Management and Curatorship, 25(1), 69-85.

Trifu, I. (2018). Dealing with a difficult past: Japan, South Korea, and the UNESCO world heritage list. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Walsh, K. (1992). The representation of the past: Museums and heritage in the post-modern world (1st ed.). GB: Routledge Ltd.

Waterton, E., & Watson, S. (2010). Heritage and community engagement: Collaboration or contestation? London: Routledge.

Zhu, Y. (2020). In Maags C. (Ed.), Heritage politics in China: The power of the past. London; New York, New York: Routledge.

Attention is drawn to University policy and regulations on honesty in academic work, and to the disciplinary guidelines and procedures applicable to breaches of such policy and regulations. Details may be found at http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/policy/academichonesty/.

With each assignment, students will be required to submit a signed declaration that they are aware of these policies, regulations, guidelines and procedures.

• In the case of group projects, all members of the group should be asked to sign the declaration, each of whom is responsible and liable to disciplinary actions, irrespective of whether he/she has signed the declaration and whether he/she has contributed, directly or indirectly, to the problematic contents.
• For assignments in the form of a computer-generated document that is principally text-based and submitted via VeriGuide, the statement, in the form of a receipt, will be issued by the system upon students’ uploading of the soft copy of the assignment.

Assignments without the properly signed declaration will not be graded by teachers.

Only the final version of the assignment should be submitted via VeriGuide.

The submission of a piece of work, or a part of a piece of work, for more than one purpose (e.g. to satisfy the requirements in two different courses) without declaration to this effect shall be regarded as having committed undeclared multiple submissions. It is common and acceptable to reuse a turn of phrase or a sentence or two from one’s own work; but wholesale reuse is problematic. In any case, agreement from the course teacher(s) concerned should be obtained prior to the submission of the piece of work.