Science&Research, vol.

4, 2012, Sofia

INTERPRETATIONS OF AUTHENTICITY IN TOURISM Ilinka Terziyska, PhD SWU Neofit Rislki e-mail: terziyska@swu.bg

Abstract: Ever since MacCannell1 first emphasized the key role authenticity plays in tourism, it has been an important topic in sociologic studies, resulting in various theories attempting to explain the term in the context of the tourism science. It became even more central with the emergence of the experience economy. Companies of various sectors are trying to brand their products as authentic (Authentic Watches, Annette the authentic Moroccan restaurant in Sofia, Vans Authentic). The trend is most evident in tourism, with a huge number of destinations being branded as authentic. This paper tries to outline the basic developments, as well as the recent trends in authenticity as manifested in tourism theory and practice. Key words: authenticity, tourism, postmodernism, constructivism JEL code: Z13 - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Social and Economic Stratification Defining authenticity The main difficulty in defining authenticity is that it is what Austin calls a substantive-hungry word, one whose meaning remains uncertain unless its referent is clear.2 This has given rise to an abundance of interpretations, depending not only on the perspective, but also on the object of research. Etymologically, the word authenticity has its roots in the ancient Greek authentikos, meaning original, genuine, principal", which on its turn can be traced back to authentes - "one acting on one's own authority"3. These original meanings form the basis for the contemporary interpretations of the concept. Authenticity has been discussed in two major scientific fields. In psychology and existentialist philosophy, it is associated with a persons ability to remain true to their own personality, spirit, or character, which is questioned and impeded by external pressures. This interpretation of authenticity is connected with the relation between a person and society. The most prominent authors who set the grounds of a more than a century long debate are Kierkegaard, Heidegger and Sartre. Authenticity in art, on the other hand, relates to the set of qualities that a work of art or an artistic performance should possess to be considered authentic. Two basic types of authenticity are distinguished: nominal and expressive. Nominal authenticity can be defined as the correct identification of the origins, authorship, or provenance of an object, ensuring, as the term implies, that an object of aesthetic experience is

MacCannell, D. (1976) The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class, Schocken Books Inc., New York. Austin, J.L. (1964) Sense and Sensibilia. Ed. G. J. Warnock. Oxford: Oxford UP, p.68 3 http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=authentic
2

Science&Research, vol. 4, 2012, Sofia properly named. 4 This meaning is objective in nature and is quite frequently used in tourism to describe the qualities of museum artifacts, ethnographic objects (or traditions), or historic, archaeological and architectural sites. The other fundamental sense of authenticity, as used in art, is expressive authenticity. It is much closer to the existentialist sense of the word, as it is derived from the fifth definition of the Merriam Webster dictionary: true to one's own personality, spirit, or character5. Dutton points out that unlike nominal authenticity, which is empirically tested and based on facts, expressive authenticity connotes something else, having to do with an objects character as a true expression of an individuals or a societys values and beliefs.6 If focused on an individual performance, it is of little interest to tourism, but if referred to society, expressive authenticity becomes an important issue in tourism, especially when sustainability is considered. The term then, denotes conformity with a communitys values, attitudes and traditions, and is sometimes also linked with two major aspects: continuity and audience. To be defined as authentic in this sense, the product should express the true identity of the host community, it should be still extant, while at the same time its content and meaning (and this is the audience element) ought to be properly conveyed so that the tourist can fully appreciate its value. There is one more feature of the concept of authenticity which should be explored in order to obtain a more comprehensive understanding. In Austins terms, authenticity may also be defined as a trouser-word7. This suggests that by calling something authentic, we bear in mind the possibility of it not being authentic. As Austin claims, the pair of trousers in this case is the negative, the antonym, and it is what defines the word most precisely. The most obvious opposite is fakery. It corresponds to the nominal definition in art and suggests that anything that is deceptive in terms of origin, or method and material of production is not authentic. The major field of application of this meaning in tourism is for assessment and conservation purposes. For example, authenticity as a requirement for inscription in the UNESCO World Heritage List can be expressed through 'form and design; materials and substance; use and function; traditions and techniques; location and setting; spirit and feeling; and other internal and external factors. 8 This definition contains elements of the other juxtaposition, as far as authenticity is concerned commoditization. The term has its origin in the Marxist theory, where it was used to describe the process of assigning a market value to something that is typically thought not to have one. In the most extreme theories, usually supported by anthropologists, the sole shift in the purpose of production and mode of usage destroys authenticity9. With the emergence of constructivist theories of authenticity this was to a great extent rejected. Another pair refers to authenticity as seen in existential philosophy. As already mentioned, the authentic state of being in this case is the one that corresponds to

Dutton, Denis (2003). "Authenticity in Art". In Jerrold Levinson. The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics. New York: Oxford University Press, p. 259 5 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authentic 6 Dutton, Denis (2003), p. 259 7 Austin, J.L. (1964), p. 70 8 Larsen, Knut Einar, ed. (1995). Nara Conference on Authenticity, Japan 1994: Proceedings. UNESCO/ICCROM/ICOMOS. ISBN 82-519-1416-7. 9 Cornet, J. (1975) African Art and Authenticity, African Art 9 (1):52-55.

Science&Research, vol. 4, 2012, Sofia ones true self and can be produced or pursued through tourism activities 10. In tourism studies, existential authenticity is most frequently linked to creativity and involvement and focuses on the importance of activity rather than passive reflection11. Therefore, the implied negative of authentic when referred to a tourist experience (focused on the tourist himself) could be said to be passive. As far as tourism is regarded, however, existential authenticity (or inauthenticity) may also refer to the host community.12 There are at least two different views on this issue expressed in literature. According to Taylor, hosts are authentic in their involvement in tourism activities as long as they are acting sincerely13, so the opposite of authentic in this pair is insincere. A more common perception states that authenticity of the receiving community can be maintained through empowerment14, by enabling local people to choose the ways to present their culture and control the tourist development of the destination. All these aspects of authenticity are just elements of the whole system of tourism relations that has not been fully examined yet. One more possible perspective, which encompasses everything mentioned so far, is that of the way the tourism product is communicated. Any tourism travel can be viewed as a communication event and its examination should include all participants the local people, local, regional and state authorities, providers of tourism services, specialists in heritage, and, of course tourists. We could then speak of authenticity of tourism communication, which has to do with the proper conveyance of the message from the receiving community to the tourists visiting the destination. A communication breakdown would be the reverse state that replaces authenticity of host-tourist relation. In addition to these perspectives, there is a typology applicable specifically to heritage tourism. Revising the theories of some of the most prominent postmodernists, Bruner defines 4 types of authenticity, based on a case study of New Salem an authentic reproduction of the 1930s historic town. 15 The first one refers to authenticity of verisimilitude the object resembles the original to an extent that will make the nowadays visitor think it looks like the original. The second type is based on genuineness the village would appear true in substance, real16. In the third sense (the strictest one), authenticity means being original, which excludes reproduction. In historic towns this is manifested by individual original objects. The last sense is related to authority. The site is authentic, because an authority has declared it authentic. It is clear that authenticity is a difficult term to define and interpretations differ depending on the studied object or the chosen perspective. Maybe the most comprehensive list of alternative definitions is provided by Cohen (as cited in
10

Steiner, J.L. and Yv. Reisinger (2004) Understanding existential authenticity, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 299318 11 Ibid., p. 301 12 Boorstin, D.J. (1964) The Image: A Guide to Ps udo-events in American Society, New York: Harper & Row 13 Taylor, J.(2001) Authenticity and Sincerity in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 28:7 26. 14 Steiner, J.L. and Yv. Reisinger (2004) Understanding existential authenticity, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 299318 15 Bruner, E. M. (1994) Abraham Lincoln as authentic reproduction: A critique of postmodernism. American Anthropologist 96(2):397. http://mysite.du.edu/~lavita/anth_3070_10f/docs/bruner_abraham_lincoln.pdf, accessed on 05.06.2011 16 Ibid., p. 401

Science&Research, vol. 4, 2012, Sofia Hillman), who speaks of authenticity as customary practice or long usage; authenticity as genuineness in the sense of an unaltered product; authenticity as sincerity when applied to relationships; authenticity as creativity with special relevance to cultural performances including dance and music; and, authenticity as the flow of life in the sense that there is no interference with the setting by the tourism industry or other managers17. A review of the main approaches to studying authenticity in tourism through the years will provide more insight into the content of the concept. Approaches to studying authenticity in tourism Authenticity in tourism has long been a topic of interest, and one the most controversial ones indeed. The three main approaches since the issue appeared in scientific literature in the 1960 have been the ones based on objectivism, constructivism and postmodernism. The objectivist theory states that reality is mind-independent; hence authenticity is inherent to the toured object and is not linked with the perceptions of the tourist. Thus, the object and the tourist are detached and authenticity is seen as an absolute objective quality. The most prominent scholars who reviewed authenticity in the light of this theory were Boorstin and MacCanell. They started the debate in the 1970s, by discussing tourist motivation or what the tourist really seeks the inauthentic (Boorstin18) or authenticity (MacCanell)19. In Boorstins view, modern tourists do not seek authenticity. On the contrary, they are absolutely aware that they are presented with a pseudo-event, deliberately created for them and inauthentic, so what the modern tourist actually seeks is inauthenticity. In his book, the modern tourist is contrasted to the traveler of the past, the latter seeking and achieving authentic experience, while expectations of the former are for something that is no different from the superficiality and inauthenticity of everyday life and such is the nature of their actual tourist experience too. MacCannell opposed this statement, arguing that the main tourist motivator is the quest for authenticity. He declared the quest for authenticity the central driving force for tourist travel: The alienated modern tourist in quest of authenticity hence looks for the pristine, the primitive, the natural, that which is as yet untouched by modernity20. He also states that All tourists desire this deeper involvement with society and culture to some degree; it is a basic component of their motivation to travel21. Tourism is not seen as another instance of the inauthentic modern life, it is perceived as an opportunity to experience the real. MacCannel goes even further, calling the tourist in search for authenticity the modern embodiment of the religious pilgrim. Similar to Boorstin, however, MacCannell claims that what tourists actually receive is not authentic. He introduces the term of staged authenticity22 space
17
18
19

Hillman, W. (n.d.) Revisiting the concept of (objective) authenticity, retrieved from: http://www.tasa.org.au/conferences/conferencepapers07/papers/26.pdf
Boorstin, D.J. (1964) The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-events in American Society, New York: Harper & Row. MacCannell, D. (1976) The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class, Schocken Books Inc., New York. 20 Ibid., p. 384 21 Ibid., p.10 22 MacCannell, D. (1973) 'Staged authenticity: arrangements of social space in tourist settings', American Journal of Sociology 79(3): 589-603.

Science&Research, vol. 4, 2012, Sofia developed especially for tourists and therefore false, inauthentic. Borrowing the terms from Goffmans dramaturgic sociology, he coined the concepts of frontstage and backstage, denoting, respectively, the areas, developed especially for tourist s, and the true local areas, where the hosts live and to which tourist usually have no access. It is the backstage where authenticity actually resides; frontstage areas are considered totally inauthentic by MacCannel. Although the physical environment is important for this division, the author emphasizes that it is much more based on social roles, and tourists are seen as the audience. Most tourists are content with what the frontstage offers (partly because of the safety they feel there), yet the backstage has its important role for tourism too. First of all it provides the mystery, the sense of intimacy, which creates the feeling of the real. Recognizing this importance, providers of tourism services often construct false backstage areas to imitate authenticity. Thus a continuum between the two extremes is created, described by MacCannell in the following way: 1) 2) Stage 1: coincides with Goffmans front region; tourists often try to go beyond it; Stage 2: front region that has been manipulated to resemble a back region; changes are mostly cosmetic, only some of the elements of the back region are imbedded to create authentic atmosphere. Stage 3: front region that has been changed in such a way that it totally looks like a back region. Stage 4: back region which is opened for tourists. Stage 5: back region, slightly altered and occasionally visited by tourists. Stage 6: the ultimate backstage. Almost never reached by tourists.

3) 4) 5) 6)

Stages three and four are often indistinguishable, and indicate the transitional zone between the two extremes. Which of the stages a tourist will reach, highly depends on their motivation and the extent to which they are ready to give up the environmental bubble most tourists need during their travel to unfamiliar places and cultures. A major problem with the objectivist approach to authenticity is that toured sites and cultures are viewed as static, while this is not true. Constructivism, whose main representative in the sociology of tourism is Erik Cohen, overcomes this. Although it is still object-focused, the relation tourist-object is reconsidered. It is founded on the idea that there is no absolute, objective truth; similarly, authenticity is a socially constructed, negotiated concept and is not a permanent property of the toured object. Thus, the same object could have different authenticity, depending on the person and his or her beliefs, knowledge etc. Based on this theory he introduced the term of emergent authenticity23, explaining how through the process of cultural change even a contrived event, a fakery is gradually accepted as authentic. According to Urry, the consumers perception of authenticity is constructed and maintained by modern mass media through an extreme form of time-space compression24. In contrast to MacCannell, Urry argues that authenticity is not the
23 24

Cohen, E. (1988) Authenticity and Commoditization in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 15:371-86. Urry, J. (2002). The Tourist Gaze. 2nd edition. London: Sage Publications.

Science&Research, vol. 4, 2012, Sofia main driver for tourism. According to him, it is the opposition familiar-far away which forms the basis of tourist motivation and authenticity is secondary as only certain authentic elements are sought by tourists. The third basic approach is the one defined by Wang as existential authenticity25. He also calls it activity-based authenticity, in contrast with the objectbased approach of MacCannell and Cohen, for example, as it refers only to the tourist experience and not to the toured object: Existential authenticity refers to a potential existential state of Being that is to be activated by tourist activities. Correspondingly, authentic experiences in tourism are to achieve this activated existential state of Being within the liminal process of tourism. Existential authenticity can have nothing to do with the authenticity of toured objects.26 This approach is based on the postmodern movement in anthropology and sociology. Postmodernists claim that authenticity can be totally detached from any existing object bearing the qualities of the real, original or true. As Baudrillard (cited in Bruner) explains: In the Renaissance we had originals and counterfeits; in the industrial period we had serial reproduction of the same object; but in postmodern phase we have simulation, without origins, referential values, or beginnings, where the simulacrum becomes the true.27 Authenticity of the object has almost no significance in the postmodern society. Even themed parks as Walt Disney, which were conceived as entirely inauthentic, become authentic in the postmodern view. There is however a contradiction that Engler points out although objectivism has become nearly pass in theory, it still dominates practice28. Authenticity is being used as a strong selling point for both destinations and attractions: Authentic Bulgaria, Authentic Australia vacation package, The Other Port Arthur An Authentic Tasmanian Adventure, Authentic Hotels: The finest authentic luxury and charming hotel collection examples are numerous. Expensive private or small group tours focused on authentic experiences are tailor-made for tourists looking for deeper insight of the visited destinations and cultures. Engler lists the following possible reasons for this seemingly contradictory phenomenon: moral energy (the duty to truth dictated by Christian concept of guilt); class affiliation (staged experiences are defamed as kitsch by the higher social class); tourism marketing (a consequence of the previous two). In addition, there are certain types of tourism, such as heritage tourism, in which objective authenticity is not likely to loose importance because of the character of the main resources and the interests of historians, ethnologists and other specialists concerned with the preservation of the their original form.

25

Wang, N. (1999) Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 349-370

26 27

Ibid., p.352 Bruner, E. M. (1994) Abraham Lincoln as authentic reproduction: A critique of postmodernism. American Anthropologist 96(2):397. http://mysite.du.edu/~lavita/anth_3070_10f/docs/bruner_abraham_lincoln.pdf, accessed on 05.06.2011 28 Engler, C. (n.d.) Authenticity vs. Staged experiences, retrieved from: http://themedattraction.com/authenticity.htm on 02.06.2012

Science&Research, vol. 4, 2012, Sofia Conclusion and implications for future research Authenticity was raised as a topic of debate in tourism studies after the emergence of mass tourism in the 1950s. Since then, two main dimensions have been discussed its strength and role as a motivator for travel, and its manifestation in tourism activities. Opinions on the first issue significantly vary from total rejection of the importance of authenticity as a motif for travel to defining it as the major push factor. Definitions of authenticity in tourism are even more diverse and differences could be divided into two general groups: 1) arising from the referent and 2) depending on the theory they are based on. In the first case a useful tool to apply is Austins trouser-word concept. Studying the possible referents of authenticity in tourism, the following opposing pairs were identified: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Authenticity fakery (heritage sites and artifacts, art); Authenticity commoditization (traditions, crafts, art); Authenticity insincerity (local community) Authenticity disempowerment (local community) Authenticity passiveness (tourists) Authenticity uncreativity (tourists) Authenticity communication breakdown (holistic approach)

The last dimension, focused on authenticity of the whole process of interactions between guests and hosts is arguably the least studied. At the same time, it is the one that would provide the most comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon, as it includes all stakeholders, giving account of the complex relations between them. A striking contradiction between theory and practice is seen with regard to the nature of authenticity. Although the constructivist existential view is predominant in scientific literature, practice still seems to be more focused on objective authenticity. A more detailed analysis targeted at specific forms of tourism and types of tourists will add to the explanations offered so far. It is evident, that authenticity will not be of the same character if referred to a theme park or a heritage site, mass tourism or creative tourism.

References: Austin, J.L. (1964) Sense and Sensibilia. Ed. G. J. Warnock. Oxford: Oxford UP, p.68 Boorstin, D.J. (1964) The Image: A Guide to Ps udo-events in American Society, New York: Harper & Row Bruner, E. M. (1994) Abraham Lincoln as authentic reproduction: A critique of postmodernism. American Anthropologist 96(2):397. http://mysite.du.edu/~lavita/anth_3070_10f/docs/bruner_abraham_lincoln.pdf, accessed on 05.06.2011 Cohen, E. (1988) Authenticity and Commoditization in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 15:371-86.

Science&Research, vol. 4, 2012, Sofia Cornet, J. (1975) African Art and Authenticity, African Art 9 (1):52-55. Dutton, Denis (2003). "Authenticity in Art". In Jerrold Levinson. The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics. New York: Oxford University Press, p. 259 Engler, C. (n.d.) Authenticity vs. Staged experiences, retrieved from: http://themedattraction.com/authenticity.htm on 02.06.2012 Hillman, W. (n.d.) Revisiting the concept of (objective) authenticity, retrieved from: http://www.tasa.org.au/conferences/conferencepapers07/papers/26.pdf Larsen, Knut Einar, ed. (1995). Nara Conference on Authenticity, Japan 1994: Proceedings. UNESCO/ICCROM/ICOMOS. ISBN 82-519-1416-7. MacCannell, D. (1973) 'Staged authenticity: arrangements of social space in tourist settings', American Journal of Sociology 79(3): 589-603. MacCannell, D. (1976) The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class, Schocken Books Inc., New York. Steiner, J.L. and Yv. Reisinger (2004) Understanding existential authenticity, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 299318 Taylor, J.(2001) Authenticity and Sincerity in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 28:726. Urry, J. (2002). The Tourist Gaze. 2nd edition. London: Sage Publications. Wang, N. (1999) Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 349-370 http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=authentic http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authentic