Freedom of expression is making way for ‘feardom’ of expression in every area of our lives, and heritage interpretation isn’t exempt. Some fields have been pointing to issues such as self-censorship, commercial pressure, societal sensitivity, cancel culture, backlash, neutrality, and audience alienation, even though they still don’t offer real solutions. Heritage interpretation communities haven’t even started this discussion. Review-based environment, self-censorship and their sister phenomena have crept into the work of heritage interpreters, taming their creative aspirations and neutralising their output. This affects both interpreters and society.

Anyone who deals with audiences is bound to face reviews, and the very notion of it will influence their work. The influence can be very direct, with management looking for highly rated personnel, or it can result from adapting what you deliver to anything that will gain five stars. There are several problems here. For starters, you cannot please everyone, but that doesn’t mean a bad review doesn’t hurt a venue, a business, or a person. On the other hand, if an experience is praised by the majority, with constant fabulous ratings, it might have already turned to the dark side of people-pleasing. 

There is a limitation to value-based heritage interpretation in practice, as interpreters need to check many boxes. They should be enthusiastic about the heritage they’re presenting and, at the same time, ready to lead a fruitful and meaningful discussion that challenges harmful views. People who are enthusiastic about anything are often passionate, and it’s hard to be diplomatic when a fire is burning within you. Interpreters should also show significant empathy while resisting the urge to be too accommodating. As interpreters, we are well aware of potentially provocative situations, and we might, because we are only human, decide to tone down or even dismiss topics that promote tolerance, inclusion, antifascism, and everything that should be at the core of our shared European values. If we are honest, we sometimes don’t dare to openly criticise the practices that run against our own values, simply because of the very human feeling of fear.  

This short article is just food for thought and an invitation to read the full paper on this subject in the Interpret Europe Conference Proceedings. I presented it at the 2026 conference in Faro, Portugal. I’m normally good with time management in presentations, but I barely managed to cover one-third of what I had planned to share due to the room’s immediate response. Everyone had questions and wanted to share their stories and views. Up until the end of the conference, people kept coming up to me to share their experiences dealing with unfair reviews, management expectations, and all the topics mentioned above. There is an apparent need for exchange.  

The full paper includes my own experience, insightful resources, raises more questions, and is enriched by the honest contributions of two interesting women who shared their stories. I would love to hear from you, too, whether you simply wish to share your thoughts or have an idea on how to approach all this actively and constructively. 

The full paper will be published in the 2026 conference proceedings, available on the IE website: 

https://interpret-europe.net/material/

Iva Silla is an experience designer and the owner of the creative tourism brands Secret Zagreb and Croatia Underrated. She is an active Interpret Europe trainer. Contact her at: iva@questoftales.com.

To cite this article: Silla, Iva (2026) “Bow your views to reviews”, Interpret Europe Newsletter Summer 2026, pp. 19–20. Available online: Interpret Europe Newsletter Summer 2026

I’m writing to you, even though we keep insisting you are ‘non-human’. As if that word solved anything. We invent terms to manage the distance. Maybe distance is just a narrative we keep repeating.

Anyway. That’s not why I’m writing.

There’s a phrase being used: people-centred. Some hear humans above everything. Again. But others might see it less threateningly, as bringing us closer to the heart of the matter — the way John Muir read the mountains, the way we interpret stones and rivers, framing nature and culture so we can begin to understand them.

Some might say it’s old wine in new bottles, the same interpreter still in charge. Why add another term if it’s all already there? Maybe that’s exactly the point. Some things are so obvious we stop seeing them. Naming them doesn’t invent something new. It simply helps us pay attention.

And then there’s the one who quietly asks: Where is nature in all of this?

That’s you, isn’t it?

I know, dear Nature. It sounds like we’re putting ourselves at the centre again, in that modern sense shaped by the industrial revolution. That was the moment when the division hardened, the idea that you are separate from us, a resource to be exploited. A modern narrative that slowly turned distance into doctrine. Anthropologists like Philippe Descola remind us that not all cultures accepted this split. For many, the divide between ‘nature’ and ‘society’ simply never existed.

As if everything, even you, exists for us.

But what if it’s not that? What if people-centred is not about dominance, but about recognition? About connection?

What if, instead of society, we saw you and us as part of many collectives — different places, different ways of belonging? We are the ones who name, who feel, who care. Without us, you would still be you, vast, wild, complete, but would you be recognised as heritage?

You don’t need us for that. But maybe we need you.

And here’s a question I keep coming back to: Aren’t we also you?

Not separate. Not above. Not outside. Just you, in another form, walking, wondering, trying to make sense, to interpret (that’s what we do).

Freeman Tilden spent years in forests, mountains, wild places, and still he wrote: People are interested in people. Not instead of you. Through you.

Because even in the middle of a forest, we don’t stop being human. We meet you with our minds and our bodies, with our emotions, with one another, and sometimes with that quiet inner landscape where meaning settles. We bring our stories, our questions, our need to connect – to a place, to each other, to those who walked here before and those who will come after. That’s not a distraction. That’s often where meaning begins for us.

So, where are you in all of this?

Everywhere. In the stone. In the story. In the silence between words. But, also in the person who stops, looks, and begins to care.

Maybe people-centred isn’t a turning away from you. Maybe it’s the only way we learn to love you.

So maybe we’re part of the same whole. And maybe that changes something. I don’t know. But it feels like it could.

Yours,
Someone who’s trying

Dubravko Max Fijačko is a licensed trainer and IE Certified Interpretive Writer from Croatia. As IE Outreach Coordinator, he contributes to expanding the reach of the interpretive approach and to strengthening its integration into professional practice, increasing its availability through learning initiatives. You can contact him at: dubravko.fijacko@interpret-europe.net.

To cite this article: Fijačko, Dubravko Max (2026) “Dear Nature”, Interpret Europe Newsletter Spring 2026, p. 3–4.
Available online: Interpret Europe Newsletter Spring 2026.

South of Ilidža in Bosnia and Herzegovina, below the famous Olympic mountain Igman, lies the suburban settlement of Hrasnica. It was first mentioned in the Ottoman census of 1455 as a village of 40 households. The area was known as home to a number of residences of prominent Sarajevo families. Among them, two notable houses have survived to this day: Hasanbegovića Kula and the Semizova Kula, locally known as kule.

Old houses are some of the last material witnesses of the social fabric that once characterised this area. Their architectural form and spatial organisation embody traditional Bosnian ways of living, while also reflecting the values and norms of past communities. From a heritological perspective, such houses are not merely physical structures; they are carriers of memory and identity. Although modest in scale, they form part of a wider cultural landscape that deserves both recognition and protection. Safeguarding them is, therefore, not only a matter of architectural preservation, but also of affirming continuity and cultural pride. These houses remind us that heritage is a continuum: others lived before us, and others will live after us. In this way, they speak not only of the past, but also of our place within a much larger historical chain.

The first house, the Kula Hasanbegovića, was most likely erected at the turn of the 18th to the 19th century. Archival records confirm its existence in 1817, when the estate of mula Abdulah Burek was inventoried after his death. Oral tradition from the Hasanbegović family recalls that the house originally belonged to the Rustembegović family before passing into Hasanbegović ownership in the late 19th century. Architecturally, it was an almost square structure, consisting of a ground floor and two upper levels. The ground floor served as a storeroom (magaza). Above it were living quarters, including a halvat (main room), a kitchen, and storage spaces. The upper floor featured spacious wooden balconies (čardaks) and a high pyramidal roof once covered with wooden shingles. Built of dressed stone bound with lime mortar and reinforced with oak beams (hatule), the house displayed both strength and refinement. A semi-circular stone arch crowned its large wooden entrance doors, while carved inscriptions (tarih) once recorded its construction.

A short distance from the first house stands the Semizova Kula (formerly Turhanija House). Historical records note it in 1889 as part of the estate of hadži Mustafabeg Turhanija of Sarajevo. In 1896, the property changed hands several times before it was acquired by the Semiz family, who maintained it throughout the 20th century. This house also demonstrates a mix of residential and practical functions. Its massive ground floor of cobbled stone, open space with few windows, and stabling facilities highlights its practical role, while the upper floors contained living rooms with wooden cupboards (musandare), built-in shelves, seating platforms (minderi), and even early heating systems with clay stoves. A wooden veranda (kamerija) on the second floor, together with large windows and Austro-Hungarian style doors introduced during later renovations, reflects changing architectural influences. The Semizova Kula is recognised as a National Monument of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Today, these houses stand as some of the oldest surviving structures in Hrasnica. Once symbols of status, security, and adaptation to the local environment, they are now silent witnesses of social history. Weathered walls and traces of graffiti reveal the challenges of heritage preservation, while their endurance illustrates resilience. Interpreting them does not only mean recounting their architecture or owners. It is about recognising how such houses embody the transition from feudal estates to modern communities, how they mirror the shifts in land ownership, and how they illustrate resilience within a turbulent historical context.

These houses of Hrasnica, among the oldest, if not the oldest, surviving residential buildings in the area, represent a rare and tangible link to Sarajevo’s historical and social development. Their preservation is crucial not only for architectural study but also for understanding patterns of land ownership, family lineage, and daily life in the region from the Ottoman period through the 19th century. As scarce examples of this building typology, they provide invaluable insights into local craftsmanship, construction techniques, and adaptive strategies to the environment. Protecting and interpreting such structures underscores the broader significance of heritage: to maintain continuity of memory, foster identity, and inspire appreciation for cultural landscapes that are increasingly vulnerable to urban expansion and neglect.

Edo Mesic is former Country Coordinator Bosnia for Interpret Europe. Currently, he is a freelance archeologist, interested in GIS, heritage interpretation, heritology, landscape archeology and cultural landscape. Edo can be contacted at: edomesic0@gmail.com.

To cite this article: Mesic, Edo (2025) ‘Kula Hasanbegovića and Semizova Kula’ in Interpret Europe Newsletter 3-2025, pp. 4–5.
Available online: Newsletter autumn 2025

Maybe it’s because I’m approaching my 50th year, or because I will soon celebrate ten years of working freelance since I left full-time guaranteed employment, but I have been feeling reflective lately.

I also realised that it is ten years since I agreed to help Thorsten Ludwig, our former IE Managing Director, with the newsletter and am still here as your News Coordinator all this time later. Maybe it is time I let someone else have a go?! Feel free to get in touch if you see yourself being more active in the news/communication role to support IE.

I feel incredibly lucky in my work life, having accidentally fallen into interpretation more than 25 years ago and have worked on a huge variety of subjects and in more countries than I can count. My recent work trips have included a project for a client that I started working for 18 years ago. It is such a pleasure to still support them and it feels like ‘coming home’ when I visit. There is a Welsh word that has no direct English translation – ‘Hiraeth’ – which means such a strong sense of belonging that you feel homesick for a place. I feel privileged to have developed strong relationships with other lovely people in the HI field to the extent that I am welcomed to feel at home at their sites. Current and former staff members are definitely in the category of friends rather than just colleagues after all this time. The same trip allowed me to visit three other IE members who are now friends after meeting at IE conferences in the past. Another recent project re-ignited contact with a friend and former colleague from 21 years ago when we realised our old skills were still the perfect fit for a collaboration.

25 years since the opening of the first visitor attraction I worked for, and with some amazing projects under my belt including everything from a single graphic panel or the tiniest little community-run visitor centre to the largest museum in the world in Kuwait, and a real mixture of content, such as script-writing for David Tennant to voiceover about the Loch Ness Monster, engaging schools with water conservation or offshore wind energy, snippets of the Roman Empire, and lots of wildlife and biodiversity conservation, including for UNESCO World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves, I like to think that my skills and attitude towards HI implementation have improved and my perspectives have broadened. I’ll certainly look forward to continuing to develop and work with more heritage sites and communities over the coming years.

My conclusion …working in HI is good for the soul if not always the bank balance!

Looking back on the anniversary of supporting IE, in those ten years the stories we have shared on the pages of these newsletters are just as diverse and rich. It is an absolute pleasure to hear from and work with so many of you, members and non-members, to spread your news and experiences to the wider membership and beyond. It has been an enriching experience for me to support and collaborate with authors from more than 55 countries. Where will the next ten years take us? Don’t forget to get in touch if you’d like to join the team!

Marie Banks is a freelance interpretation specialist, copywriter and editor, trading under www.zebraproof.uk. Prior to this, she spent more than 15 years in the museums sector as an Exhibition Manager and then as an international consultant. Marie is IE’s News Coordinator and can be contacted at: marie.banks@interpret-europe.net. 

To cite this article: Banks, Marie (2025)  ‘Reflecting on milestones‘  in Interpret Europe Newsletter 2-2025, pg.4.
Available online: Newsletter summer 2025

Non-formal education plays a crucial role in lifelong learning, especially in the context of historical memory and democratic citizenship. The Council of Europe has been a fundamental actor in promoting cultural diversity, human rights, and peacebuilding since its creation in the aftermath of WW2. The European Cultural Convention of 1954 and the Faro Convention of 2005 are examples of efforts to safeguard and promote European cultural heritage, fostering mutual understanding and appreciation of cultural diversity.

The Faro Convention introduces a new way of considering cultural heritage, focusing on its value for local communities and their cultural identity. This convention highlights the importance of cultural heritage in sustainable socio-economic development and the promotion of democratic values, cultural diversity, and cultural identity. It recognises that cultural heritage is a resource for developing dialogue, democratic debate, and openness between cultures.

In the current context, with the political and societal challenges of the 21st century, the Council of Europe’s action in the field of culture and heritage focuses on promoting diversity and dialogue to cultivate a sense of identity, collective memory, and mutual understanding. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has recognised the important role of museums as resources for human development and citizen engagement. 

Since 1977, awards have been given to European museums that have demonstrated exemplary practices and stimulated innovation in the sector.

Education for democratic citizenship and human rights has always been a priority for the Council of Europe. This is why it has promoted the inclusion of sensitive and controversial parts of history in school curricula as it can reinforce democratic culture within a society and respect for different opinions, pluralism, tolerance, and diversity. However, we must be aware that delivering quality history education in schools can be challenging due to overloaded curricula, traditional teaching practices, and, in many instances, highly centralised education systems.
The Council of Europe has developed its work on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights for decades, providing a model of competences for democratic culture. In 2016, the Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture (RFCDC) was approved, including knowledge and critical understanding of oneself, society, and the world. 

Nowadays, there is a necessity to put it into practice, and this requires for the member States a serious compromise in their educational systems, together with the implementation of the new initiative of the Council of Europe: The European Space for Citizenship Education, which seeks to reinforce democratic culture through education and remembrance. 

Teaching history and memory is essential for understanding historical events constructively and openly, developing the competences needed for democratic citizenship. The inclusion of sensitive and controversial issues in history lessons enhances democratic culture, as the critical understanding of controversy facilitates respect for different opinions and promotes tolerance of ambiguity.

The world outside the classroom – whether real or virtual – can restore many victims of historical atrocities to historical significance and recognition and send powerful messages of inclusion and respect for diversity. Openness to cultural otherness and to other beliefs, world views and practices help young people to make sense of the world they live in. Therefore, it is highly recommended to bridge the gap between formal and non-formal education by ‘using’ remembrance sites, museums, cultural routes and promoting dialogue about history in Europe, establishing partnerships between research centres, public institutions, and non-governmental organisations to commemorate sensitive historical events networks.

There can be many views and interpretations of the same historical events and there is validity in a multi-perspective approach that assists and encourages students to respect diversity and cultural difference, instead of conventional history teaching.

This is the case with the understanding and interpretation of heroes and villains in history. In Spain, contemporary history has been marked by the coup d’état of 1936, the Civil War, and Franco’s dictatorship for 40 years. Franco, the dictator, was a villain for the people who were killed, for the political prisoners, for the millions of citizens who did not enjoy liberty, for those who hardly had social and civil rights, for the losers. On the contrary, for the winners, Franco was seen as a hero, a vision that goes on. Even nowadays his death is commemorated every year by his followers, the extreme right and very conservative political groups. The arrival of democracy in 1975 was a milestone in the country’s history. This year is the 50th anniversary of his death and, funnily enough, his death is commemorated by the defenders of democracy and by the ones who don’t believe in democracy.

In 2006, an educational reform was approved that included the subject of Education for Citizenship and Human Rights, aiming to promote self-esteem, personal dignity, freedom, and responsibility. However, in 2013, this subject was suppressed as a full school subject. In 2014, the UN Rapporteur urged the extension of recognition and coverage of reparation programmes, highlighting the need to consolidate efforts in historical and human rights education. Memory and tools for the interpretation of the past require legislation to guarantee the inclusion of these topics in school curricula and restore dignity to the victims.

The 2022 Spanish Democratic Memory Law focuses on the recovery, safeguarding, and dissemination of Spain’s democratic memory, promoting knowledge of Spanish democratic history and the struggle for democratic freedoms. Memory sites play an important role as physical materialisations of the past, helping to rationalise and soothe the emotions and memories of survivors and victims.

In conclusion, the teaching of history and its relevance for democratic citizenship education are fundamental for strengthening democratic values, combating authoritarianism, and promoting social cohesion. History should be taught in a way that fosters critical thinking and addresses multiple perspectives, allowing students to understand the complexity of the past and its relevance to the present. This is a key issue, considering the evolution and extension of ideologies that are against shared values that we have built as a European society for decades.

The organisations that were born after the horrors of WW2, such as the Council of Europe, are compromised with the defence of human rights. We must never forget that those atrocities that happened in the past due to totalitarian regimes started with hate speeches, violation of human rights, racism, intolerance… the same atmosphere as is dangerously spread all over Europe by extreme groups. 

Therefore, Education for Democratic Citizenship should be a compulsory subject at all stages of formal education and form part of vocational training and non-formal education. It is more important than ever before. Democracy cannot be taken for granted, as we saw in the past, and we see now.

Luz Martínez Seijo is a Member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and a Member of the Spanish Congress. She delivered a keynote at iecon25 in Poland on this topic.

To cite this article: Seijo, Martínez Luz  (2025)  ‘Interpreting heroes and villains in history‘ in Interpret Europe Newsletter 1-2025, pg. 4-5.
Available online: PDF Newsletter Spring 2025 

Whatever your thoughts on AI, the article below by Manuel Charr is an interesting amuse-bouche ahead of our IE conference in April where we will explore the theme of ‘Heroes, anti-heroes and villains: How we (re)create, use and dismantle them’. This article is reproduced with permission from MuseumNext.

The City Museum of Aarau in Switzerland has always embraced innovation. Their latest digital initiative uses Artificial Intelligence technology to enhance visitor experience with a playful interactive, AI Hero. Laura Schuppli, Digital Curator and Deputy Director of the museum, shared insights into this pioneering project during a recent presentation at the Digital Exhibitions Summit.

A historic museum with a modern vision

Situated in the capital of the canton of Aargau, the museum itself is a blend of history and modernity. Its original structure, a former city castle, dates back centuries and has housed the museum since 1939. In 2015, a modern extension was added, complementing its extensive collection of 60,000 objects and a permanent exhibition dedicated to the city’s rich history. The museum also curates special exhibitions addressing contemporary societal issues, with a strong focus on digital innovation.

Digital transformation and the AI Hero project

Since 2022, the museum has had an approved digital concept, affirming its mission to guide the public through the digital age. AI Hero, a highlight of the museum’s current special exhibition titled Loved, Praised, and Type, explores themes of heroes, idols, and role models. Opened in April, this exhibition examines the function of heroes across five chapters, ranging from childhood heroes to influencers, while posing the question of whether society needs heroes at all.

How can AI enhance visitor experience?

At the heart of AI Hero is a playful AI-powered interactive museum experience where visitors embark on their own hero’s journey, guided by artificial intelligence. This unique tour was developed in collaboration with a data scientist, an author, and a game design studio. Visitors interact with AGTA and Indigo, two AI-generated voices that narrate and guide participants through five stations equipped with computers, microphones, and headphones.

Personalised AI experiences for every museum visitor

Participants begin their journey by discovering their superhero name and powers, co-writing their hero story with the artificial intelligence, which can transform the narrative into a poem, rap, or summary. Visitors’ progress is tracked using an NFC-enabled hero ID card, storing key moments of the journey. At the end, they receive a personalised hero portrait, complete with a haiku summarising their adventure.

For younger visitors, the museum offers a tailored children’s tour. This adaptation addresses the technical limitations of AI in processing children’s voices and uses a more visual, multiple-choice format to enhance accessibility.

Artificial Intelligence innovation backed by research

The project’s technical foundation stems from a research initiative by the University of Applied Sciences in Northern Switzerland, which developed a speech synthesis model capable of translating Swiss German speech into text and linking it with text- and image-based artificial intelligence models. Privacy is a key consideration in AI Hero. Visitors’ interactions are anonymous, with no personal data collected, and any data stored on the NFC cards is deleted after an hour. The photo station, while optional, allows users to conceal their identity if preferred.

Engaging with the ethics of AI

AI Hero goes beyond entertainment to engage audiences in critical discussions about artificial intelligence. An accompanying programme for schools, teachers, and interested individuals explores the opportunities and risks of integrating AI into daily life. Workshops examine stereotypes in AI-generated images, encouraging participants to think critically about the technology shaping the future.

Shaping the future of AI in museums

By blending creativity, education, and cutting-edge technology, the museum invites visitors to reflect on the evolving role of heroes in a digital world. And through the use of AI, the City Museum of Aarau is fostering meaningful dialogue about its implications.

You can find more examples of how museums are using AI here: www.museumnext.com/article/artificial-intelligence-and-the-future-of-museums/ 

This article was originally published on the MuseumNext platform and is reproduced for Interpret Europe with thanks: 

https://www.museumnext.com/article/how-can-ai-enhance-museum-visitor-experience/

What do you think? Could AI challenge historical and societal norms and become your hero? Let us know what you think! Join us at #iecon25 in April for more lively discussion on heroes and villains!

To cite this article: IE News Team & Charr, Manuel (2024) ‘Can AI enhance the museum visitor experience?‘ in Interpret Europe Newsletter 4-2024, pg.4-5.
Available online: https://interpret-europe.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Newsletter-2024_4.pdf

“Where the Past Meets the Future” was the motto of the 2018 European Year of Cultural Heritage. But where does this meeting truly occur? Is it in the grand museums, ancient ruins, or perhaps in the silent pages of history books? The answer is more personal and profound — it happens in the moments of interpretation, when we engage with heritage, extract its values, and allow them to shape our future.
Heritage is not just a relic of the past; it is a living dialogue between what was, what is, and what will be. This dialogue occurs when we engage with heritage in a way that allows us to reflect on the values that we, personally, recognise, shaping our present actions and our vision for the future.
When we encounter heritage, we are not merely observing objects, sites, or traditions; we are engaging with the essence of human experience across time. This engagement is where the past meets the future — in the moments of interpretation and personal or collective realisation. Through this personal interpretive process, we decide what is valuable, what is worth preserving, and what lessons can guide us forward.
The value-based interpretive approach is particularly significant in this context. It encourages us to delve into the deeper meanings and principles that heritage represents to us. By recognising and internalising these values, we do more than honor the past; we use it as a foundation to build a better future.
For example, a historic site may tell the story of a community that overcame great challenges. By interpreting this story through the lens of resilience, we gain insights that are not only relevant but also vital for addressing contemporary issues. This approach helps us connect with the past on a personal level, seeing it not as a distant memory but as a source of wisdom that can inform our future choices.
Moreover, the act of preserving heritage itself is a forward-looking endeavor. We conserve what we deem valuable, ensuring that future generations can learn from and be inspired by it (at least, we hope so). This process is inherently optimistic — it assumes that the lessons and values of the past are worth carrying into the future. In this way, heritage becomes a bridge between generations, a continuous thread of human experience that binds the past to the future.
In conclusion, the meeting of past and future occurs in the interpretive moment (the moment of mindfulness), when heritage speaks to us and we choose to recognise, listen (yes, interpretation is an art of listening) and learn its values. By engaging with heritage in meaningful way, we are not just custodians of the past; we are also architects of the future.

Max Dubravko Fijačko is an award-wining heritage interpreter and an IE Certified Trainer for interpretive guides. He is IE’s Gastronomic Heritage Coordinator. Max would like to come in exchange with you about any aspect of value-based interpretive approach. You can get in touch with him at: dubravko.fijacko@gmail.com.

To cite this article: Fijačko, Max Dubravko (2024) ‘Where does the past meet the future?‘ in Interpret Europe Newsletter 3-2024, pg.4.
Available online: PDF-Newsletter_2024_3.pdf

When the powerful write history
Normally the spoils of victory go to the winners, but not at the Battle of Little Bighorn, Wyoming, USA. In 1876 Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer led the Seventh Cavalry into a battle with Cheyenne and Sioux warriors without knowing their numbers, without respecting orders to wait, without knowing the landscape, and without reinforcements. According to some historians the brash, impatient, and overconfident Custer could not have mounted a worse battle plan. Yet, despite the complete annihilation of him and his 263 men, it was Custer who reveled posthumously in his idolised “Last Stand” through movies, posters, and even lunchboxes. The battle site itself regaled his name as the Custer Battlefield National Monument. 

The imposed narrative and consequent interpretation of one dominant culture over less powerful ones have replicated like a virus time and again across continents. Time and again local communities find themselves peering helplessly at interpretations that they did not share in creating, that they do not share in telling, and ultimately feel alienated even on their own lands and in the face of their own heritage.

Times are changing, though, and indeed the US National Park Service in 1991 renamed the site of Custer’s bloody ineptitude the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument where now Native American participants, both those who defeated Custer and those who aided him, have been honored and their stories told. While better late than never, the onus on the interpretive community is not to wait until late or never to involve local heritage communities in site interpretation, rather that should be a first step. This article then shares one tool to do precisely that: the community-based interpretive framework.

Community health and heritage
Today, while top-down, science-first, expert-driven interpretation still abounds around the world, awareness of the importance of local ownership for heritage management is growing among interpreters. When local communities feel ownership of their own heritage, they tend to be more active managers, be more deeply engaged, protective, and proud. Indeed, when locals can craft and tell their heritage stories, they may develop a more positive and proactive self-identity, self-reliance, and self-worth, which is precisely what ISIS tried to crush by destroying ancient heritage monuments in Iraq and Syria. But that ownership does not arise from a generous act of government, rather it comes from full involvement in defining heritage meanings that later endow interpretation for the visiting public. As one local leader from Nyanza, Rwanda said about decolonising his own heritage from British rule in an article by anthropologist Annalisa Bolin: “We cannot own what we do not understand… we cannot own [anything] when we are not part of the entire process of management and planning.” Understanding and ownership then first arise when communities assign their meanings to their heritage.

Interpretive framework history
The interpretive framework builds consensus among diverse heritage stakeholders about meanings related to heritage and its core elements to interpret it. Interpreters do not consult communities so that the former can invent themes and meanings, rather they facilitate participatory workshops to arrive at these meanings which they capture in summary form on a single sheet of paper, easy to read and understand. The methodology has been evolving since 1998 when the NGO RARE Center for Tropical Conservation worked with Pico Bonito National Park in Honduras to produce its public use plan. The local park team with RARE facilitators produced seven disconnected themes, becoming the very first interpretive framework. Later, RARE adopted a consensus-building workshop facilitation methodology innovated by the Institute for Cultural Affairs, a global grassroots development non-profit, as part of its Technology of Participation toolbox. As such they hierarchically ordered local themes to a single overarching theme for protected areas in Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, and Indonesia.

After RARE, the NGO PUP Global Heritage Consortium continued to refine the methodology applying it in the US, Costa Rica, Panama, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Colombia where the National Parks agency adopted the methodology nation-wide. It also worked with UNESCO to apply it in World Heritage sites in Vietnam, Portugal, and Kenya.

Later still, PUP added elements taken from Steve Van Matre’s interpretation book in which he argued that true heritage site understanding requires more than themes. So now the interpretive framework uses outstanding heritage attributes (attractions, stories, intangible expressions, and outstanding features) to construct themes and the universal processes and forces that created the heritage and continue to transform it and ultimately the heritage essence.

With the newer version, additional frameworks have been facilitated in Colombia and Costa Rica. 

How to facilitate the interpretive framework
While more detailed steps exist in the recommended Field Guide in the recommended reading list below, the first important one is to work with the local community to sponsor the process. With local leaders, the facilitation team invites a diversity of stakeholders and may need more than one workshop to accommodate everyone´s schedule. As per the Technology of Participation, participants individually write their most important heritage elements on cards. Small groups then choose the best among all the personal selections of their members. Then these groups contribute their choices to a facilitated plenary during which in successive rounds, they pair and group related cards on the wall. They then name groups with the most cards. These names constitute emerging themes. As the number of cards is limited, the workshop necessarily produces 3–7 emerging themes.

Then participants identify universal processes related to each theme. Finally, facilitators guide the group in discovering the essence that flows through all the heritage site data. At night a small writing group transforms emerging themes of 4–7 words into full interpretive themes which are returned to participants for comment. After the workshop the team assembles results into the one-page framework with several pages of detailed description.

What Is an interpretive framework for?
If facilitated correctly, the community feels a collective ownership, even pride, in the results. For many, this is the first time they ever experienced a space for them together to anoint their heritage with deeper meanings rather than with just marketing cliches, without it being imposed by government, academic historians, or other powers. The framework in theory can be held and updated in public trust by a mutually elected institution, whether local government, museum, tourism chamber, or a park management agency. The framework serves as a reference for scholars, tour guides, historians, students, park visitation managers, or others interested in using heritage. It also beats at the heart of an interpretive plan from which all other interpretation flows.

Some uses given so far:

1. Residents outside of El Cocuy National Park, Colombia used the park’s framework to create a local museum
2. On the Pacific coast of Colombia, NGOs and communities used an interpretive framework to design community-based tourism products
3. Colombian National Parks are using interpretive frameworks from Tayrona and Amacayacu National Parks to design park interpretive centres

Interpretive frameworks can be applied equally well to all kinds of heritage sites at any scale from as small as a historic house to an entire galaxy.

You can see an example of one from the Flint Hills Discovery Center, Kansas, USA in the pdf.

New skillset for interpreters
Whether you call it participatory or inclusive interpretation, heritage decolonisation, or ensuring collective ontological security, to work with communities, facilitate consensus-based workshops, honor results, and accompany communities to implement interpretive frameworks requires a skillset much beyond the traditional communicator referred to in most interpretation textbooks. The emerging age of interpretation requires practitioners who see themselves not just as guides of heritage but guides of community development.

Jon Kohl is a writer and practitioner of heritage interpretation in international protected area and community development contexts as well as the director of the PUP Global Heritage Consortium. He lives in Costa Rica. You can see more of his writing at ResearchGate.net. He has been an Interpret Europe member almost since its beginning. Jon can be contacted at: writer@jonkohl.com. 

Further reading
Annalisa Bolin and David Nkusi. 2021. Rwandan solutions to Rwandan problems: Heritage decolonization and community engagement in Nyanza District, Rwanda. Journal of Social Archaeology 22(1). Free online case study.

Jon Kohl. 2018. Interpretive Theme Writer´s Field Guide: A Pocket Companion to Sam Ham´s Interpretation: Making a Different on Purpose: How to Write a Strong Theme from Big Idea to Presentation. National Association of Interpretation. This book reveals in more detail how to facilitate an interpretive framework.

No author. 2017. Controversies Surrounding the Battle of Little Bighorn. https://worldhistory.us/american-history/controversies-surrounding-the-battle-of-the-little-bighorn.php. Discusses Custer´s ineptitude as battle strategist.

Raynald Harvey Lemelin, Kyle Powys Whyte, Kelsey Johansen, Freya Higgins Desbiolles,

Christopher Wilson and Steve Hemming. (2013). Conflicts, battlefields, indigenous peoples and tourism: Addressing dissonant heritage in warfare tourism in Australia and North America in the twenty-first century. International Journal of Culture Tourism and Hospitality Research 7(3):257–271. Contains a Custer case study.

Steve Van Matre. 2008. Interpretive Design and the Dance of Experience. The Institute of Earth Education. Novel yet relatively unknown take on interpretation.

Jon Kohl is a writer and practitioner of heritage interpretation in international protected area and community development contexts as well as the director of the PUP Global Heritage Consortium. He lives in Costa Rica. You can see more of his writing at ResearchGate.net. He has been an Interpret Europe member almost since its beginning. Jon can be contacted at: writer@jonkohl.com.

To cite this article: Kohl, Jon (2024) ‘Bridging heritage communities with interpretive frameworks‘in Interpret Europe Newsletter 1-2024, pg.18-21.
Available online: https://interpret-europe.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/PDF-Newsletter_2024_1-spring.pdf

“We are all eco-terrorists!” The striking message in capital letters in green paint on the concrete road barrier receded in my rear-view mirror as I drove home but it stuck in my mind.

The message was a wry riposte by supporters of the French environmental movement, Les Soulevements de la Terre, to the French Home Office Minister, Gérard Darmanin. He used the term to discredit, even criminalise, the actions of environmental protestors demonstrating against plans to build irrigation mega basins to counter increasing drought in the French farmland.

This prominent message on the roadside got me thinking on two levels. Firstly, we, as a society, are approaching a global climate crisis largely fuelled by the consequences of our attitude to nature since the industrial revolution as a resource to control and exploit. Luminaries from the father of interpretation, Freeman Tilden, to French anthropologist, Philippe Descola, have highlighted this dilemma and echoed the classic mantra, “There is no infinite growth with finite resources”. Despite good intentions and global gatherings such as CoP, there seems little to suggest our approach to the environment is changing. Indeed, mega projects such as the irrigation basins or more recently, Europe’s largest fish factory ship, the Annelies Ilena, suggest we are still set on a course of accelerating unsustainability. Moreover, it is altogether regrettable that we have reached a state where campaigners against such projects are discredited and labelled eco-terrorists by others for daring to say, Stop! Enough is enough. There has to be another way.

My second thought was, am I an eco-terrorist driving by that graffiti in my car? Reappropriating Darmanin’s declaration, it made me reflect on my attitude towards the environment, how I use it, consume it and value it, or not as the case may be. Am I an eco-terrorist in gardening gloves and a hybrid car? It certainly felt healthy to challenge my perceptions and actions on a personal basis even if I find it uncomfortably easy to be a hypocrite. This then took me to wider issues such as the compulsion in western society to divide nature and culture into separate worlds, the concept of an historic environment that is so central to ‘modern’ cultural heritage and identity, or even the motivations behind rewilding projects.

There is plenty to demonstrate that humans are bad for the environment, yet during 4,000 generations of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens until the Anthropocene epoch (the term being a source of provocation in itself), our footprint was relatively restrained. Thereafter, in just over ten generations, we have had a major impact on our environment that is difficult to deny.

Those green painted words made we think about ‘modern’ society’s attitude to nature and to consult various sources to learn more. Can we change it individually and collectively? Is there a willingness to do so? Will our political and economic systems even allow such a change?

Needless to say, “We are all eco-terrorists” has been pressure-washed away now but it served to provoke reflection and challenge my values, which is what all good interpretation should do, even if the subjects are testing and tricky. I would even go as far as to say that in this case it was provocation with a capital P. 

Sandy Colvine is a freelance interpretive and rural development consultant based in southeastern France. As an IE Certified Interpretive Trainer and IE Supervisory Committee.

To cite this article: Colvine, Sandy (2024) ‘Provocation with a capital P’ in Interpret Europe Newsletter 1-2024, pg.4.
Available online: https://interpret-europe.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/PDF-Newsletter_2024_1-spring.pdf

An interpretive strategy aims to connect different heritage sites within a city or region in terms of heritage interpretation. It may also refer to one larger protected area (biosphere reserve, historic city centre, …) that includes several sites.

Together with UNESCO’s Regional Bureau for Science and Culture in Europe, we want to find out what interpretive strategies should look like in the 21st century. Can they create synergies between those involved, and can they complement formal learning? Will they help make heritage more meaningful to people and use interpretation to make people more mindful of our shared future?

If you have your own experiences with interpretive strategies, would like to participate in further development, or would simply like us to keep you up to date, please answer the seven questions online at: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfT0rilWUXg7Js5Ky6nM5HuFRpzCdYgDZgSkJuJwsGIHcQ-Yg/viewform by the end of October.
You can help us develop recommendations that will be pilot-tested as part of the Learning Landscapes initiative and could influence future interpretive planning in Europe.

For background information you may read the paper, ‘Value-based heritage interpretation in UNESCO learning landscapes’. It is part of the proceedings of the IE conference 2023, ‘Creating learning landscapes through heritage interpretation’ that you can find at www.interpret-europe.net/material.

Thorsten Ludwig, a former IE Managing Director, is an interpretive trainer, planner and consultant based in Germany. Since 1993, he has run Bildungswerk Interpretation as his own company. You can get in touch with him at: Th.Ludwig@interp.de.

To cite this article: Ludwig, Thorsten (2023) ‘Towards 21st century guidelines for the development of interpretive strategies ‘in Interpret Europe Newsletter 3-2023, pg. 8.
Available online:  https://interpret-europe.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/PDF-Newsletter-2023_3-autumn.pdf