Gazing through the sepia lens: critical considerations of tourism's nostalgic construction of the small town [Paper in themed section: Shifting Cultures. George, Jodie; Pacella, Jessica and Roberts, Rosie (eds).]
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
As an industry, tourism has commodified 'place', turning the situated experience into a saleable product by framing landscapes as desirable archetypes through language. Research suggests the small town may be strategically positioned as a 'timeless' place, a contemporary haven embodying a 'golden age' the past may be used to make sense of the present. Yet such calculated positioning denies the constructed nature of these descriptions and the identities they may force upon small town residents. This research seeks to examine how the experience of place may be commodified and how this commodification may impact upon those who live there. Introduction Place' is widely recognised as an important area of research by many scholars (e.g. Jackson 1994; Relph 1976, 1981; Tuan 1992; Urry 1995, 2002) because of the situated nature of the lived experience. Yet the shared meanings of particular places are not neutral or inherent. Instead, they may be influenced both by the residents whose cultural practices shape the everyday experience and, more broadly, by the industries that utilise particular linguistic tropes to construct wider understandings of these locales. Because of its economic potential, the tourism industry may be particularly influential in constructing situated meaning (Campbell 2007, 222). Specifically, tourism represents one of the world's largest industries, generating over one trillion dollars annually; 10% of the world's GDP, and one in 12 jobs (WTTC 2007; Campbell 2007, 222). Despite this, there currently exist few studies into the cultural significance of the small town as a specific, Western-centric site of tourism. In this article I attempt to address that gap, critically analysing the appropriation and reconstruction of the 'small town' for the purposes of tourism, and the problematic outcomes that may result. Evolving Cultural and Social Practices of Tourism Contemporary tourism no longer relies primarily on what has been much derided as 'mass tourism', or pre-packaged holidays designed to provide a 'taste' of local cultures through the mediated itineraries of tourist companies (Uriely 2005, 208). Instead, there has been a shift towards consumer preferences, tailoring experiences to individual needs by incorporating greater specialisation, independence and flexibility (Shaw and Williams 2004, 115). This focus on the individual is particularly significant as the growing intensity of place promotions in the segmented market increasingly requires the alteration and idealisation of place to meet the desires of the target audience. Experiences, a tourism toolkit put out by the Canadian Tourism Commission, has adopted this selective approach, creating a new imperative for all tourism sites to help 're-imag[e] Canada's position as a global destination' (n.d., 2) by 'focusing onthewhy' in Canada -not just the where (n.d., 8). Specifically, Canada's tourism 'brand' is one of experience, designed to make 'an emotional connection with travellers. The idea of Canada. Keep Exploring(TM) speaks to the hearts and minds of curious travellers, inviting them to experience a land and culture defined by a spirit of geographic, cultural and personal exploration' (n.d., 7). According to the authors, this emotional connection is most effectively accomplished by shifting the focus from 'product' to 'experience', the first is understood as something the individual simply buys, the second as something the individual remembers (n.d., 8). To clarify, the toolkit outlines the differences through examples, suggesting that descriptions of a tourism 'product' are informational only: The Calgary Stampede takes place every July' or The CN Tower is one of the world's tallest buildings'. In contrast, descriptions of the 'experience' are understood to be embodied, or felt through every sense. For example: Shucking 101/Keep on Shucking in Prince Edward Island: Learn, prepare and taste all aspects of the oyster from a world-champion oyster shucker. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,023 | 0,053 |
| Communication savante | 0,016 | 0,010 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».