Mutual Heritage, Shared Heritage

The research presented in this thesis is about the mutuality of mutual heritage. Mutual heritage, heritage with a Dutch connection, mostly in other countries than the Netherlands, is one of the priorities of the Dutch international cultural policy. This heritage is defined by the Netherlands in coöperation with the involved country. Several projects were initiated under this policy between 1997 and 2006. But how mutual is the experience of this heritage in the other countries? The theory of dissonant heritage, formulated by J.E. Tunbridge en G.J. Ashworth is used as the theoretical framework to research this. They define heritage as something which is created by interpretation which implies the existence of a message. This message can
be a source for dissonance when the projected messages conflict with each other or the message is projected to a changed society. There can also be dissonance when parts of society are excluded from the message or when the heritage message contains an undesirable history, a message society rather not hears. Is mutual heritage dissonant heritage? This thesis compares the Dutch interpretations of mutual cultural heritage projects with the interpretations of the other countries. These are: South Africa, Sri Lanka, India, Indonesia, Ghana and Suriname. These countries are priority countries for the Dutch mutual heritage policy.

I argue that there is dissonance between the interpretations of mutual heritage. In South Africa this is a result of the apartheid period. The presented case, Cape Castle at Cape town, is not associated with the Dutch
period but wears the mark of the cruelties of Apartheid. In Sri Lanka there is not a clash of interpretations but can the mutuality be questioned by the lack of Sri Lankese in the historical message which is presented. In India the mutual heritage is not defined as heritage. In Indonesia there is a growing concern for the colonial heritage. This colonial heritage is an opportunity for revitalisation of the city centres, more than it is part of national
history. The mutual heritage between Ghana and the Netherlands are the castles and forts at the gold coast. These castles are major tourist attractions for Afro-American pilgrims who are searching for their roots. For that matter, the castles are extremely important for Ghana. The local population however sees this as a part of the government and therefore not as part of their collective property. The last country in this research is Suriname. Because of the strong ties between this country and the Netherlands, it is almost impossible to shift the Dutch and the Surinamese visions on mutual heritage. Therefore it is possible to say that there is mutual heritage between these two countries.

The Dutch government argues mutual heritage is mutual because it is part of
our history and identity and part of the history and identity of the other involved country. My research nuances this assumption. Besides that, Dutch government to become aware of their role as a creator of heritage. Their policy implies not only a change of use but also a change of meaning of the involved object.

OBJECTIVES
Research the mutuality of mutual heritage

RESULTS
MA thesis, Master Heritage Studies