Great blog post! After reading it I am trying to decide how I feel about the staged experience that is being sold to me. As Cissy mentioned we are actively participating in the transaction as paying tourists. If these experiences were truly 'authentic' would we pay to see them? And if we lacked interest, does the host country miss out on opportunity for economic growth and the formation of a cohesive cultural identity? I don't know the answers but these are things I've been thinking about. I must say I was "wowed" at the initial sight of Machu Picchu, but my amazement diminished slightly after the repeatedly told us how ordinary the site was compared to Cusco sites. Side note, my highlight was definitely the hike up to Huayna Picchu. The views were incredible!
I think that little by little we are becoming more suspicious of the "authenticity" of what we see, hear and explore, but above all of what we participate in. The interesting thing, as you say, is to realize to what extent our own performativity adapts, due to our habitus. Do we expect greatness and purity, for example? Is it possible that both coexist in the ruins? Cissy's idea is also very correct, "After all, tourism is also transactive and we are the consumers."
Thank you for the great post on the concept of staged authenticity! Throughout our past four weeks in Peru, we've been constantly encouraged to think critically and question the information we're being given as tourists. Though I've been trying to do this, it's very difficult because I recognize that we are not objective observers either. As you've pointed out in your post, we come with a lot of assumptions and preconceived notions that we can't simply dispel in order to "objectively" evaluate what we are being told. Is it then perhaps our job as tourists to accept what we've paid for? After all, tourism is also transactive and we are the consumers.
Hey Emily:)
Great blog post! After reading it I am trying to decide how I feel about the staged experience that is being sold to me. As Cissy mentioned we are actively participating in the transaction as paying tourists. If these experiences were truly 'authentic' would we pay to see them? And if we lacked interest, does the host country miss out on opportunity for economic growth and the formation of a cohesive cultural identity? I don't know the answers but these are things I've been thinking about. I must say I was "wowed" at the initial sight of Machu Picchu, but my amazement diminished slightly after the repeatedly told us how ordinary the site was compared to Cusco sites. Side note, my highlight was definitely the hike up to Huayna Picchu. The views were incredible!
I think that little by little we are becoming more suspicious of the "authenticity" of what we see, hear and explore, but above all of what we participate in. The interesting thing, as you say, is to realize to what extent our own performativity adapts, due to our habitus. Do we expect greatness and purity, for example? Is it possible that both coexist in the ruins? Cissy's idea is also very correct, "After all, tourism is also transactive and we are the consumers."
Hi Emily,
Thank you for the great post on the concept of staged authenticity! Throughout our past four weeks in Peru, we've been constantly encouraged to think critically and question the information we're being given as tourists. Though I've been trying to do this, it's very difficult because I recognize that we are not objective observers either. As you've pointed out in your post, we come with a lot of assumptions and preconceived notions that we can't simply dispel in order to "objectively" evaluate what we are being told. Is it then perhaps our job as tourists to accept what we've paid for? After all, tourism is also transactive and we are the consumers.
Take care,
Cissy