INTERPRETING SLAVERY TOURISM

Christine N. Buzinde
The Pennsylvania State University, USA
Carla Almeida Santos
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA
Abstract: This inquiry explores the manner in which tourists endow a former slave plantation
with meaning by promoting or demoting its cultural authority. Drawing on the encoding/
decoding model, this study utilizes interviews to examine the ways in which tourists decode
the plantation by acquiescing or negating the preferred cultural text through the adoption
of dominant, negotiated or oppositional readings. The ndings indicate that as active recip-
ients of the preferred reading tourists interpreted/decoded the plantation in dichotomous
polarized ways based on the meaning structures and knowledge frameworks of the interpre-
tive communities within which they are situated. In essence, the decoding process, much like
the encoding process is viewed as constituting an array of dominant ideologies. Keywords:
decoding/encoding model, interpretative communities, slavery. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
INTRODUCTION
Slavery heritage tourism sites function within discourses of authority
wherein memory and illusion coalesce to shape a romanticized recol-
lection of the contentious plantation past; these tourable mnemonic
locales are intricately linked to the history of chattel bondage (Dann
and Seaton 2001). They are not apolitical spatialities, equally hospita-
ble to any form of cultural expression but rather consist of culturally
specic values which utilize discursive lenses to inuence how histori-
cal events are understood and interpreted. Like many heritage sites,
they serve as locales of pedagogical power wherein the state disciplines
history, knowledge, and ultimately the populace (Foucault 1977). One
of their key roles has been to preserve history and to educate genera-
tions about the plantation past vis a` vis noble tales describing the lives
of the plantation owners and the architectural intricacies of their
homes (Buzinde and Santos 2008). Another role has been to inspire
pride and inculcate nationalistic ideologies, albeit through state engi-
neered amnesia by trivializing or annihilating the institution of slavery
within the heritage metanarratives (Buzinde 2007; Eichstedt and Small
Christine Buzinde is an assistant professor in the Department of Recreation, Park and
Tourism Management at The Pennsylvania State University (University Park, PA 16802, USA.
E-mail: <cbuzinde@psu.edu>). Her research focuses on the socio-political dynamics of
tourism as they pertain to ethno-representation. Carla Almeida Santos is an assistant professor
in the Department of Recreation, Sport and Tourism at the University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign. Her research interests focus on the areas of representational politics and socio-
cultural aspects of tourism.
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 439458, 2009
0160-7383/$ - see front matter. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Printed in Great Britain
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.02.003
www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures
439
2002). In essence, they are not innocent edications but rather repre-
sentations of thoroughly ideological narratives bound up within polit-
ical discourses that tacitly endorse dominant societal values.
As much as slave heritage tourism sites are demonized within aca-
demic discourse for their inescapable authority or their impossible mis-
sion to show the American plantation past through cosmopolitan
representational tactics, one has to acknowledge that there is no uni-
ed power bloc or conspiratorial heritage system to blame or defeat.
It is rather a tangled skein of complicitous human interactions that
promote the cultural authority of these sites. After all, the authority
and meaning of heritage sites is, in part, determined by how other
voices, that is, those of tourists, talk them into being. Slave heritage
sites gain their credibility not from the onsite magically-imbued objects
that are portrayed through carefully crafted metanarratives but rather
by the power vested in them by the visiting populations. Thus, rather
than refer to heritage sites as instruments of institutional oppression,
it is far more benecial to view them as contested sites wherein mean-
ing is constructed, reconstructed and negotiated.
The symbiotic relationship between slave heritage sites and tourists,
much like most historic sites, is undoubtedly characterized by dialo-
gism whereby, the former constructs a preferred reading of a site while
the latter brings varying socio-cultural experiences to bear on the pro-
cess of interpreting the preferred reading. This symbiotic relationship
calls attention to the polysemous ways of reading/interpreting cultural
texts, in the broadest sense of the term. Describing how individuals
construct meaning through their symbolic interactions with cultural
texts, Stuart Hall (1980) maintains that audiences consume the con-
noted dominant meanings and decode them using the encoders hege-
monic belief that the crafted message ought to be societys point of
view. It follows that the audience accepts the encoding and utilizes it
as a reference point for how they subsequently read the text; the dom-
inant text thus, acts as a benchmark on which their decision to acqui-
esce or contest the message is based. Hall (1980), states that the way in
which the audience reads or views the encoded text manifests in one of
three ways: a dominant-hegemonic view, a negotiated view or an oppo-
sitional view. Audiences who decode a text as a dominant view accept
the connoted meanings, reconstruct the preferred view and conse-
quently, operate within the dominant code (Hall 1980:136). Alter-
natively, audiences who decode a text through a negotiated reading
acknowledge the legitimacy of the hegemonic denition (Hall
1980:137) while operating outside those denitions by concurrently
negating the dominant reading; such decodings are characterized by
signicant contradictions. Lastly, audiences who decode a text through
oppositional readings comprehend the preferred reading but oppose
its dominant code due to their espousal of alternate frames of refer-
ence. Therefore, by reading the text, be it in a preferred, negotiated
or oppositional manner, audiences are inevitably developing and utiliz-
ing frameworks that enable them to render the world intelligible.
Within heritage tourism studies, the dialogic meaning making rela-
tionship between producers and consumers has remained relatively
440 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458
under researched as scholars have predominantly focused on manage-
ment attributes (Halewood and Hannam 2001; Garrod and Fyall 2000).
Relatively few examinations have explored tourists in relation to heri-
tage sites; those who have embarked on this trajectory have focused
on notions of motivation, satisfaction and market segmentation (see
Herbert 2001; Poria, Butler, and Airey 2004). Therefore, despite some
notable exceptions (Bruner 1993; Chronis 2005; Palmer 2005; Prentice
and Andersen 2007; Pretes 2003), not enough attention has been paid
to the processes by which tourists symbolically interact with a preferred
reading of a site to endow it with meaning; particularly, readings of
contested slavery heritage sites, such as former slave plantations, which
are linked to unresolved, contentious pasts deeply connected to cur-
rent social debates on slavery, race and racism. Indeed, while scholars
have been instrumental in documenting the didactic and hegemonic
role enacted by heritage sites in annihilating slave histories (see
Alderman and Modlin 2008; Dann and Seaton 2001; Buzinde 2007;
Buzinde and Santos 2008), inquiries into how audiences decode such
preferred readings have remained scarce.
It would be presumptuous to assume that the tourist body is homog-
enous and that they all espouse interpretations well aligned with the
preferred reading of the site; especially given that, in the age of glob-
alization, individuals draw from an array of ideological predispositions.
Furthermore, they are exposed to a plethora of popular cultural texts
such as Hollywood movies (e.g., Roots and Gone with the Wind), Public
Broadcasting Service (PBS) documentaries on slavery in America and
novels on antebellum life, all of which inuence their interpretation
of the plantations cultural text. Tourists thus bring an eclectic set of
preconceptions to the meaning making process that (dis)engages the
past of depravity and the present social order. Comprehending the
manner in which contemporary society renders heritage plantations
intelligible is necessary given that the global community is celebrating
the 200
th
anniversary since the abolition of slavery for Britain, in 2007,
and America, in 2008. Numerous commemorative efforts, such as the
opening of Americas rst National Slavery Museum and the UNESCO
Slave Route Project, are marking this historical zenith through the
adoption of inclusive messages that foster dialogue, educate the mass
populace and promote national healing. This anniversary has also
spurred numerous academic investigations which although different
in their disciplinary approaches, share the belief that slavery, both in
its historical and modern commemorative forms, continues to be a
matter of undiminished political and social relevance. The current in-
quiry joins these global efforts by drawing from Halls seminal work
and building on extant tourism studies to explore the varying ways in
which tourists endow a former slave plantation with meaning. Speci-
cally, through the use of on-site interviews, the study examines the ways
in which tourists decode the plantations preferred encoding through
the adoption of dominant, negotiated or oppositional readings. This is
an important undertaking because it is through sustained dialog and
continued understanding of societys symbolic interaction with
C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458 441
constructions of Americas slavery past that our nation can hope at
long last to become free of its legacy (Wilder 2006:11).
INTERPRETING REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PAST
The interaction between the tourist and the plantation is mediated
through textual representations; however, it is important to note that
tourists are not passive recipients of cultural texts. They approach
the heritage text by drawing on certain value systems that enable them
to render the site intelligible. Scholars examining this phenomenon
have been instrumental in illustrating the active role enacted by recip-
ients as they engage with the preferred text constructed by heritage
ofcials. For instance, drawing on ethnographic work at the New Salem
Historic Site, Bruner (1993) describes the relationship between visitors
and the cultural producers of the text as being characterized by com-
petition. There exists a contest between the museum professionals
and scholars on the one hand who seek historical accuracy and
authenticity versus the peoples own popular interpretation of
Abraham Lincolns heritage (Bruner 1993:15). Acknowledging the
complex relationship between producers and consumers, Bruner as-
serts that the scientic views espoused and promoted by the heritage
professionals are contradicted and suppressed by how the recon-
structed village is produced and by how it is interpreted and experi-
enced by the visitors (1993:14). Hence, despite efforts undertaken
by heritage site managers to craft a preferred reading, tourists ulti-
mately rearticulate it as they see t.
The active role enacted by tourists is also evidenced in Chroniss
(2005) work on Gettysburg where he illustrates that tourists utilize
their pre-established knowledge, negotiation mechanism, and imagina-
tion to dialogically engage marketers in the co-construction of mean-
ing. Notions of socio-historical demarcations of place further
complicate the interpretation process. According to Chronis, both ser-
vice providers and tourists utilize historical spatialities to dene and
strengthen social values of patriotism and national unity (2005:386)
as they are understood within the present sociopolitical order. In fact,
accounts of nation and nationalism resonate within most examinations
of tourists construction of meaning. For example, through the investi-
gation of three heritage sites in South DakotaMount Rushmore
National Memorial, Wall Drug Store, and Rapid City Dinosaur Park,
Pretes (2003) states that historic sites, which conceive of nationalism
as an imagined community, often offer tourists a venue within which
to afrm and maintain a form of national identity. Such representa-
tional strategies that focus on a social imaginary draw on national
essentialisms to inuence levels of consumption; especially as they ap-
ply to nationals who imbue the site with familiarity (Prentice and
Andersen 2007). In their exploration of visitor motivations and experi-
ences of Old Town, Prentice and Anderson discovered that Danes
were much more likely to associate the site with their family history
whereas non-Danes consumed the locale as an insight into a common
442 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458
humanity (2007:675). The numerous ways in which sites are decoded
pose numerous challenges for heritage site managers as they aim to de-
liver coherent and inclusionary metanarratives that resonate interna-
tionally. Such efforts are further problematized when the site in
question is associated with a history of depravity and oppression, such
as slavery.
Examining the Elmina Castle, a former slavery trading seaport in
Ghana, Bruner (1996) explores the manner in which tourists ascribe
meaning to the site. Extending his notion of contested meanings as
they pertain to historic sites, his investigation indicated that there were
dissonant interpretations of the same site between two cohorts of visi-
tors; namely, African and African American tourists. The former asso-
ciated the site with King Asantehene, a historical gure who was
imprisoned in the dungeon rooms after the defeat of Ashanti forces
by the British army (Bruner 1996:294). For this particular cultural
group the site symbolically represents colonial resistance. The latter
however, viewed the castle as a symbolic memorial to their enslaved
ancestors who endured bondage under the Dutch; thus, for this partic-
ular cultural group the site was a key location on the transnational map
of the African diaspora. A commonality within the aforementioned re-
search is the understanding that when tourists engage cultural texts
they compete for the construction of relevant meanings that afrm
their sense of being. Consequently, based on their social situatedness
they render certain elements intelligible while rendering others
obsolete.
Encoding the Hampton Plantation
A prerequisite for comprehending tourists interpretations of a given
heritage site is the understanding of the encoded or preferred meta-
narrative promoted by site managers. As such, prior to presenting
the methods adopted in the current inquiry, a synopsis of the Hamp-
ton Plantation and State Historic Park wherein this research was con-
ducted ensues. During the 18
th
and 19
th
century the Hampton,
located in McClellanville, South Carolina, was an active slave plantation
(SCSPS 2006). In 1971 it was sold to South Carolina State Park Service
(SCSPS) by Archibald Rutledge, a poet laureate whose ancestors had
owned the site (SCSPS 2006). A stately metal gate beckons tourists to
the site and guides them through the majestic grounds along an entry-
way beautifully adorned with a canopy of lush trees. Half a mile down
this path, the greenery that envelops the passageway is replaced with a
stark image of a clear cut plot in which hundreds of multicolored, syn-
thetic owers are dispersed. There are no commemorative inscriptions
in sight describing this monument; however, when asked tourists are
informed that the area is a gravesite for those who were enslaved at
the Hampton and their descendants. There are hundreds of unmarked
graves identied only by the numerous oblong protrusions in the
ground that are occasionally accompanied by displays of crucix-
shaped bouquets. One notable exception is Sue Alstons grave which
C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458 443
showcases a tombstone identifying her as the angel of Hampton and
descendant of slaves. Sue Alston is a former slave who, after the aboli-
tion of slavery, chose to remain at the Hampton as a cook for Archibald
Rutledge. Remnants of her cabin, which encompass a chimney and a
partial wall, are on display. Unlike other plantations, the Hampton
has no intact slave cabins to showcase; in fact, the area wherein they
were once located currently houses the public bathrooms and guest
parking lots.
Through commemorative inscriptions and docent narratives, the
tourist gaze is directed towards objects that invoke pleasurable planta-
tion experiences (Buzinde 2007; Buzinde and Santos 2008). The con-
stant discursive placement of the sitess past within narratives of local
and regional wealth reinforces the importance of this theme to the
state endorsed meaning of the site. Prevalent within brochures, com-
memorative inscriptions and docent narratives are statements such
as: cultivation of rice . . . created economic prosperity; the system
of rice cultivation . . . transformed the entire South Carolina Coastal
Plain bringing immense wealth to planters; Carolinians were export-
ing 160 million pounds of rice per year. Examined in isolation such
accounts have little signicance; however, a contextual examination
elicits that the accumulation of riches is celebrated without mentioning
the inhumane manner in which the wealth was amassed. Within this
matrix of erasures (Ebron 2000:920), accounts of the Other evanes-
cently appear under the disguise of terminological inconsistencies such
as servants or laborers; implying consented participation in the labor
market as opposed to chattel bondage.
Measures are taken to enable tourists to relate to the sites celebra-
tory message by knitting them into the fabric of the metanarrative
through phrases such as you would have sat here and you would
have come in through this door. These selected phrases invite tourists
to imagine themselves enacting the privileged roles of the elite and in-
voke an individual sense of belonging and understanding of collective
roots (Palmer 2005:14). The tour occurs in the purposefully unfur-
nished mansion which highlights the structures architectural and con-
struction details. The docent narratives encompass accounts of
accumulated wealth, descriptions of hunting and building accoutre-
ments and humorous tales of misdemeanors. Artifacts within the man-
sion encompass a poster of a family tree and a log book of famous
recipes created by the Hampton women. Notably, the recipe log book
also catalogues the existence of the thousands enslaved at the Hamp-
ton and documents their monetary value based on assigned tasks; how-
ever, docents only make reference to the log book in relation to the
recipes. The site also exhibits a dilapidated kitchen building wherein
the enslaved prepared meals. The sites revered image is further an-
chored within institutional discourses which have elevated it to Na-
tional Historic Landmark status particularly because it exhibits a
mansion which is a centerpiece and monument to South Carolinas
glorious rice age (South Carolina State Park Brochure); this national
tribute encapsulates the core tenets of the sites preferred reading.
444 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458
Study Methods
Tourists interpretations of Hampton were explored through semi-
structured interviews. Twenty-seven on-site exit interviews were con-
ducted with a purposeful sample of tourists during February of 2006.
There are various sampling strategies used for purposefully selecting
information within naturalistic inquiry; the activity focused strategy
was adopted because the goal of the study was to sample individuals
based on their engagement in the activity (i.e., site visitation rather
than geographical origin). Given this directive, the sample resulted
in 27 Caucasian participants, sixteen of whom were American while ele-
ven were internationalsCanadians and 1 Englishman (the site is sel-
dom frequented by ethnic minority). Twelve of the participants were
females and fteen were males; the number of participants was guided
by the attainment of theoretical saturation (Patton 2002). They ranged
between the ages of 45 and 60 and possessed a high school and above
educational level. Although several of the American participants were
repeat tourists there was no apparent difference in interpretation or
signicance attributed to the site in comparison to the new comers.
Tourists were interviewed after touring the site to ensure they had a
holistic view of the produced representations including the masternar-
rative offered by the state ofciated docents. Interview questions
encompassed: What does this site represent to you? What signicance
does it possess? Why should it be commemorated? Are there other ele-
ments that should be added to the overall narrative? If so, what are
they, and in what ways would these additions be benecial? To ensure
trustworthiness of the data, measures were taken to seek clarication
during the interview, immediately after the interview and/or after
participants had completed the second sightseeing activity.
Narrative analysis was employed to aid the comprehension of the
interpretive processes entailed within the interview context. This ap-
proach allowed for the revelation of the narrative structures entailed
within social agents meaning making processes and the identication
of the narrative devices employed by individuals in recounting their
experiences (Polkinghorne 1988). The analysis commenced with a pro-
longed review of the interview transcripts with the goal of gaining an
understanding of the overall meanings while concurrently preserving
a holistic image (Hall 1975). This stage entailed identifying narrative
structures that aided participants in making sense of their experiences
and it also enabled the documentation of recurrent elements. All the
transcripts were iteratively reviewed from numerous horizontal passes,
which required not only (re)reading the interviews from beginning to
end, but also the assembling of narratives by themes (Coffey and
Atkinson 1996).
The coding procedure described by Miles and Huberman (1994) was
employed to identify emergent themes; within the theme identication
process, words, phrases, sentences, or paragraphs that were afliated
with the same theme were clustered together, facilitating the classica-
tion of the theme. Thus, via a thorough review and coding process, key
emergent themes were identied. Two overarching themes emerged:
C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458 445
Slavery as a Municent Institution and Slavery as a Lesson for
Humanity. Sub-themes for the former were Architectural Contribu-
tion to History and Altruistic Relationships, while sub-themes for
the latter were Hegemonic Relationships and Pedagogical Respon-
sibility. These overarching themes and sub-themes are important gi-
ven their ability to provide insight into the differential ways tourists
ascribe meaning to the site. For instance, phrases such as they wanted
to be a Rutledge servant, they were good to their servants and
there was a better relationship here, guided the categorization of
narratives afliated with the sub-theme Altruistic Relationships while
expressions such as to show for societys mistakes, shows how
things really are in this country today and should help people reect
upon the past steered the sorting of narratives associated with the sub-
theme Pedagogical Responsibility. Intercoder reliability was attained
through the efforts of two independent coders who coded each unit
based on the previously identied decoding categories with the expec-
tation that coders would add to the preexisting categories if they
encountered data that suggested the creation of new ones. However,
as the analysis progressed coders encountered no additional decoding
categories, in fact, they discovered the absence of the negotiated view
(an aspect discussed in the discussion section); this coding procedure
resulted in strong coder agreement.
The approach to interviewing was one that emphasized co-produc-
tion and co-authorship through the interaction between researchers
and participants as co-creators of meaning (Holstein and Gubrium
1995). The researchers acknowledge that their varying lived experi-
ences, values, belief systems and social localities have in a plethora of
ways shaped their approach to this inquiry (Pritchard and Morgan
2003). Given their racial classication, black and white respectively, it
is can be argued that the latter writes from the center from within
those ideological, discourses and material structures that form the cen-
tered structures of power and knowledge (Pritchard and Morgan
2003:121) while the former writes from the periphery. However, such
a simplistic binary analysis is complicated, rstly, by the equal academic
status from which both authors write and secondly, by the various hy-
brid identities that they embody as Afro-Canadian and Portuguese-
American individuals whose formative years were in Cyprus and Portu-
gal, respectively. Thus, to attribute their knowingness to race/ethnicity
or nationality would not only be misleading but erroneous because
they inhabit various geopolitical spatialities that inuence their
embodiment of the constructs in question and inform the manner in
which they render their surroundings intelligible. Consequently, a
more appropriate account of their positionalities would view their
identities as evolving and their writing location as not so much cen-
tered or marginalized but a place in motion (Pritchard and Morgan
2003:121). Such reexive actions not only enable the researchers to re-
ect on ways in which they come to interact with their interlocutors but
also ways in which they draw on their lived experiences to render the
object of research intelligible (Pritchard and Morgan 2003).
446 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458
Decoding the Hampton Plantation
Two distinct decoding practices were adopted by participants,
namely dominant hegemonic and oppositional. Participants who
espoused a dominant hegemonic position shared the sites preferred
text and discursively constructed the plantation by acquiescing to the
projected message. They justied their views on slavery based on the
perception that the institution of slavery was municent; hence, the
plantation was articulated within the realm of its historical architec-
tural signicance and its altruistic relationships between the enslavers
and their enslaved. Participants who adhered to an oppositional/coun-
ter hegemonic position negated the preferred textual code and drew
upon different frames of reference (Hall 1980). This group viewed
the site as a lesson for humanity and an exemplar of hegemonic rela-
tionships between past and present racial groups in America. A discus-
sion of the emergent discursive frames follows.
Slavery as a Municent Institution: Architectural Contribution to History
A common perspective amongst individuals who acquiesced to the
preferred text was the view that the mansion, as a national historical
landmark, justied the commemoration of the plantation. The conu-
ence of the mansion with commemorable history is described by Rob-
ert, one of the participants, who states: . . . we always appreciate the
history of a house like this, this house is history, there is a history lesson
here. Similarly, albeit exhibiting a nostalgic yearning for the life expe-
riences of the denizens of the big house, Betty mentions that the man-
sion is so special because . . . if [it] could talk it would probably tell a
lot of stories. The notion that the plantation represented a signicant
contribution to historical architecture resonated with numerous partic-
ipants. Some described the architectural characteristics as distinct in
contrast to other historic sites in the area. For instance, one participant
commented on the mansion in comparison to similar structures at
other historical plantations such as Drayton Hall. Unlike the previous
accounts, which refer to the plantation as generally representing his-
tory, Charlie specically refers to the architectural design as the main
contribution to history.
One thing I see about this house that is similar with other ones that
we have seen like Drayton Hall is that this one actually shows some
architecture . . . an important (emphasis by speaker) part of the history
of this area.
In the above excerpt, Charlie makes reference to the interpretation
strategy adopted by the site that allows tourists to see through various
layers of the mansions construction process. This is a practice wel-
comed by tourists who have an appreciation for architectural detailing.
Acknowledging the importance of the architectural design, Rose states:
The big thing about this house is showing how the thing was built. Its
different from the normal site that you would go to. Its really neat. It
teaches you something about history.
C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458 447
Arguably, the site was successful in mobilizing familiar symbols,
images and narratives that help shape the subjectivities of the tourists
(Ebron 2000). It constructed and produced a longing for place and
identity that the tourists were able to relate to because it invoked a
sense of home. These dominant readings were well aligned with the
preferred message because they presented the mansion as an iconogra-
phy of collective memory; collective memory in this sense refers to a
masternarrative wherein the dominant value systems are celebrated
while subaltern histories are marginalized (Buzinde and Santos 2008).
Slavery as a Municent Institution: Altruistic Relationships
Participants were asked to delineate other aspects that were entailed
in the representation of the plantation. Some participants mentioned
the well kept grounds and/or the historical horticultural designs, as as-
pects that also warranted preservation while others were unable to
identify any additional commemorable elements. To further delineate
whether they espoused the preferred reading participants were asked
whether the institution of slavery was an historical element entailed
in the interpretation of the site. Those who offered the preferred view
responded to this question through statements that implicitly mini-
mized the problematic nature of the plantations past and presented
it as a benevolent institution. For instance, Joes discussion of the
municent nature of the chattel bondage is captured in the following
excerpt:
But people were well here because I read books that stated that they
wanted to be a Rutledge servant as opposed to someone else. I mean
some of them were mean to their slaves . . . but they didnt do that
here. Some days they showed up for work some days they didnt,
ummm and it was okay.
Joe, as well as other participants, substantiated their claims based on
books they had read. Notably, these books were in many cases authored
by descendents of planter families who themselves were justifying the
involvement of their kin in slavery and, concurrently, romanticizing
the era.
Joe acknowledges the existence of chattel bondage but views it as
something many aspired to be a part of. The association with freewill
and gainful employment is explicit in Joes account as he makes refer-
ence to servants and work; implying they were part of a paid work-
force. Similarly, Gloria also claims life was better at Hampton as
compared to other plantations.
I think because of the history that we have read about this place, this
one, I mean dont get me wrong, we havent been to lots of places but
it seems that maybe there was a better relationship between the ser-
vants and their owners here than a lot of places.
Gloria, juxtaposing the plantation to others in the area, argues that
the Hampton abided by leaner regulations that favored positive inter-
actions between the enslaved and their enslavers. Charlie also concurs
448 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458
that the Hampton slaves were better off. He, however, views the ceme-
terylocated at the entrance of the propertyas a prime illustration
of the generosity that characterized the relationship between enslaved
and their enslavers.
. . . from what we heard Archibalds ancestors were nice folk . . . they
were good to their servants, they tried to treat them well. Did yaall
see the cemetery at the entrance, they gave up the huge prop-
erty . . . gave it to their workers so they could all be buried there. Nice
people like that were hard to come by in those days . . . and Archie
writes a lot about Sue [a former slave] nd how nice she was.
The cemetery in question was donated by Archibalds ancestors
to the Hampton slave community. Descendants of slaves are no
longer buried in the area and rather choose a cemetery located in
Germain Townan original former slave community (personal
communication).
The allusion to the pleasantness of the enslavers is a narrative strat-
egy well aligned and legitimized by written accounts offered by Archi-
bald, a denizen of the Hampton, who revered the plantation and
nostalgically described its glorious days. Participants who are familiar
with these cultural texts draw on the offered popular tropes to render
the locale intelligible. John believes that slaves were better off at the
Hampton but argues that the preferential treatment at this site is attrib-
utable to their cultivated cash crops. He states:
It interested me how the blacks had or created their own little com-
munity how they worked . . . Rice planters were much nicer than cot-
ton planters.
Unlike Charlie, John does not make any reference to written docu-
ments to justify his stance but argues that enslavers on rice plantations
were more pleasant compared to those on cotton plantations. He fur-
ther legitimates slavery as municent in his allusion that it led to the
creation of a unique black community. In general, the discourse struc-
ture adopted by participants in this category strategically avoided dis-
cussions of the contentions past, subsequently justifying its existence
based on its creation of a key historical artifactthe plantation; as well
as, the development of an African American culture which emerged
from the alleged municent relationships between enslaved and
enslavers.
These participants articulated the site through narratives of wealth
and benevolence consequently drawing upon cogent images of collec-
tive memory. Furthermore, through nostalgic yearnings, they devised
discursive strategies which defended their American identity and
strengthened their link to the past. Their nostalgic motives can be
attributed to the uncertainty instigated by modernity (particular with
regards to issues of identity politics) which pushes social beings to seek
a certain level of stability, safety and originality from which to base their
sense of self (Halewood and Hannam 2001; Hewison 1987; Lowenthal
1985).
C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458 449
Slavery as a Lesson for Humanity: Hegemonic Relationships
A common perspective amongst participants who adopted an oppo-
sitional reading was the view that the site epitomized the apogee in les-
sons of human existence. To them, it represented a signicant
historical contribution owing to its link to racial issues in America.
For instance, Eliza refers to racial history in relation to plantations:
I think that plantations like the one here show the public the devel-
opment over a couple of hundred years both black and white, African
Americans and white Americans and red too . . . you know the First
Nations people, how they lived and worked together on this land.
Eliza views the site as a portrayal of not only the ills of chattel bond-
age but also as a life lesson on how peoples of various races coexisted
whether amicably or not. She opposes the preferred reading which
claims there is only one story to recountthat of the white enslavers
and their mansionand rather acknowledges the fact that there are
numerous stories that constitute the sites past. Jake also agrees that
the site is an exemplar of racial issues in America. He, however, ex-
plains the dominant ideology of the enslavers and describes the plan-
tation as a place:
. . . where people that believed blacks were inferior to whites . . . Well,
now they have this [points to the mansion] to show for societys mis-
takes, just like the holocaust you see, we need to learn a lesson
here . . .
Jakes allusion to a similar blunder within human history, the holo-
caust, is an interesting juxtaposition which he utilizes to justify his ped-
agogically based argument. Positioning the site as exemplar of past
accounts of white supremacism, he argues that it represents a social les-
son for todays society. Similarly, Bob draws on advice provided to him
by a local friend to frame the site as illustrative of the racial dynamics in
America: my buddy said if you want to know about race in this country
go visit the plantation, youll understand where it all stems from.
Thus, to members of this group, the site was not merely about a syn-
chronous history but a continual construction of the past in the pres-
ent. Some had read about issues of race in America while others had
been introduced to the topic through popular docudramas such as
Roots. For instance, drawing on popular culture, Lou states:
Wed only seen movies, like Roots, and Gone With the Wind. . . .we
wanted to see how . . . how the slaves[trails off] . . . really how the
African American blacks and whites lived in this place . . . The house
is nice but the relationship here between blacks and whites is grand
in American history, wouldnt you say?
Lou moves his gaze past the house to the more intangible and invis-
ible aspects of the plantation, race relations. Likewise, Eunice also dis-
cusses her interest in racial issues.
. . . this peaked our interest in the history of the black people in Amer-
ica and their existence under white rule, under slavery. We dont have
a history like this in Canada . . . I mean our experience with the First
450 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458
Nations people wasnt the best but it cant be compared to this with
the plantations and all. We were hoping to nd out how the Africans
that were brought from Africa were, you know, treated and how they
helped build the place.
Given her relative lack of knowledge about American slave history,
Eunice sought to augment her awareness through the plantation visit
but was disappointed to discover that the issues she was interested in
and thought relevant were in fact not addressed. Overall, slavery and
race cognizance were not only lters through which participants viewed
the site, but also key motivators for travel. It should be noted that the
ease with which some visitors critiqued the sites representation can
be attributed to their foreign status, as the following section illustrates.
Slavery as a Lesson for Humanity: Pedagogical Responsibility
Discussing elements that were lacking within the metanarrative,
Dean reects on the overall landscape and tour narrative, and notes
the reluctance to incorporate the institution of slavery:
But I was thinking, the thing here is that there is nothing left of how
the slaves lived nor do they talk about them . . . the plantation is just
about the house, and . . . oh of course Archibald Rutledge. Dont
get me wrong, I think he is interesting too for history and all. He
was what poet Laureate of the area, right? . . . but what about his
ancestors and their connection to slavery, what about slavery and this
place or province? . . . just that it would have been an interesting thing
to include . . . how many slaves were here, how they were treated here,
what they did, you know. Mhhh . . . maybe its a Canadian thing,
maybe America sees it different . . . who knows.
Dean is mystied by the annihilation of slavery in the masternarra-
tive; attributing his perplexity to the fact that he is a foreigner. He views
accounts of the white residents and the mansion as legitimate historical
events but points to a major aspect of the plantation that is missing
from the masternarrative. Likewise, Bob also reects on the lack of fo-
cus on the African American experience within the tour narrative:
I thought that the . . . I dont know, but I felt that the treatment of the
enormous riches that were gotten through slavery was not treated as
forcefully or strongly as I would hope it be.
In essence, Hamptons discursive strategy of trivialization was de-
tected by foreign tourists who arguably are not conned by the local
socio-political order. To them, the site was unequivocally linked to
the history of chattel bondage; a historical lesson for humanity. Trudy
concurs with Bob:
Well . . . there wasnt a whole lot said about slavery . . . But thats an
important part of letting people know how the slaves were treated . . .
what would they have typically been provided with? You know and
things like that could have been incorporated a little bit into this tour
a little bit more, you know. This needs to be here regardless of how
bad it was.
C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458 451
Interestingly, while issues of slavery, within slavery heritage metanar-
ratives, have been excised based on the argument that tourists would
be offended (Dann and Seaton 2001), this group of participants wel-
comed its incorporation. They were aware of the abhorrent nature of
the issue but viewed it as an important message to convey to the public.
For instance, Patrick, a British social scientist, provides insight into how
slavery could be represented:
The main thing is to give information that is correct, that is accurate
that is not romanticized one way or another. Too many times the
point of view is slanted and I dont know how you make such a hor-
rible thing objective anyway. It doesnt matter how well slaves were
well treated [quotes indicated by speaker] it doesnt alter the fact that
they were slaves. Its morally repulsive. So you know, its a ne man-
sion, its a beautiful plantation but founded on an immoral concept.
I think you just have to try and present it honestly . . .
Some constructed meanings of the site in tandem with socio-political
issues in America. They felt their understanding of the plantation
would illuminate current issues of race in America. For instance,
Andrew mentions:
Were not sure about this but we kindah thought that this . . . shows
how things really are in this country today eh, between the blacks
and whites. I thought I would learn more on relationship between
the slaves and their owners . . . but I think I learnt more about the
relationship between blacks and whites now that still has some sore
wounds from the past.
Similarly, linking race politics to economic injustices, Gerard states:
I would have liked to see more about the slaves and their enslav-
ers . . . I dont know it [the lack of focus on the institution of slavery]
explains a lot of things in terms of current attitudes and what the rela-
tionships are . . . you can see that . . . these kinds of places should help
people reect upon the past and then address the current economic
and social inequities because they are valuable.
The Hampton, in Gerards view, should have enacted a didactic role
to help society heal past wounds and thus, facilitate the resolution of
contemporary social problems that emerged from the plantation era.
Much like others, Bob also refers to the link between past racial ineq-
uities and present racial biases in America:
I detect a layer of attitudes that existed two or three hundred years
ago, I detect them in 2006. Now being here I understand it more.
In Canada too, some of the things we did with the indigenous society
were quite bad too. So its good to see this and bring it into a current
state of affairs.
Discussing the implication for such selective and celebratory repre-
sentations, Patrick mentions that the issues have to be explicitly ad-
dressed in order to invoke positive and meaningful societal changes.
You cannot exercise present race relations in America from what you
see here on the plantation. This is just a continuation of a long racial
452 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458
saga. How can they overcome racism when American history still over-
looks the contribution of the blacks that were enslaved on this soil?
Overall, the ndings indicate that foreign tourists, albeit mostly from
a neighboring country, viewed the site as a locale within which a dialog
on race and racial issues in America ought to take place. Furthermore,
they viewed it as a lesson to humanity, a perspective addressed in
Ashworths (2002) discussion of the reasons why society commemo-
rates historical events. Notably, the understanding that the plantation
era is a didactic moment in the nations history resonates with many
Americans. Such perspectives provide fertile ground on which to sow
cosmopolitan ideals such as the construction of the nations rst mu-
seum on slaverythe United States National Slavery Museum in Fred-
ericksburg, Virginia. Even politicians, who once veered away from this
taboo topic, are incorporating it in campaign speeches, as was the case
with President Barack Obama. Numerous positive changes have indeed
occurred in America and continue to break ground however, reecting
on the lapsed time since the abolition of slavery juxtaposed against the
present socio-political order, one is forced to reckon with the fact that
there is still a lot for society to collectively accomplish. Change can
commence within slavery tourism sites wherein open dialog has the
powerful ability to foster national and global healing.
INTERPRETIVE COMMUNITIES AND THE DECODING PROCESS
The preferred reading at the Hampton Plantation summoned tour-
ists to celebrate the culture of the planter families and their traditions
as symbols of national heritage. However, as active recipients of the
preferred reading, they interpreted the site in dichotomous polarized
ways; juxtaposing the dominant text to other socio-political discourses
and constructing their own meanings. They can be broadly sorted into
dominant publics and resistant publics; the former, decoded the site by
acquiescing to the preferred reading through a dominant view, while
the latter adopted an oppositional view. Notably, the negotiated view
did not resonate within the data; this is attributed to the transient nat-
ure of the participants and their relative social distance from the local
socio-political nexus that constitutes the site. In other words, the partic-
ipants were reasonably removed from the deep, socio-political nexus
that envelops the resident community of McClellanville in which the
plantation emerged and wherein locals (both white and black) are con-
stantly reminded of their contentious past and are faced with efforts to
harmoniously move forward. Had the locals been interviewed for this
study, the resonance of this socio-political complexity would likely have
emerged in the form of a negotiated decoding.
The emergence of the two key themes, is not unrelated to Ashworths
(2002) work wherein he proposes that heritage audiences theoretically
entail perpetrators, victims and cosmopolitans, however empirical evi-
dence often adheres to the latter two constructs; arguably, American
tourists can be viewed as victims in search of a sense of belonging and
purpose that has been destabilized by modernity while foreign tourists
C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458 453
can be classied as cosmopolitans, in search of lessons for humanity.
Members within each group constructed symbolic meanings based on
their expectations, judgments, assumptions and projections; all aligned
with the interpretive communities within which they are situated
(McQuail 2000). Interpretive communities share understandings of so-
cial reality and mediated content (Fish 1980). They share common
assumptions about how a given cultural text should be read or decoded
and adopt similar ideological predispositions needed in interpreting
their social settings (Zelizer 1993). Within this inquiry, the two interpre-
tive communitiesdominant and oppositionaladopted distinct inter-
pretive strategies that rendered the plantation intelligible. They were,
nonetheless, similar in their adoption of interpretations endorsing a
certain dialogic social performance which built on intersubjective
meanings particular to their respective imagined communities (Fish
1980). Individual members possessed agency in that they shared a cer-
tain set of common values or beliefs that enabled them to decode the
Hampton in ways similar to their cohort, but also allowed minor per-
sonal variations based on their lived experiences.
The narratives adopted by the resistant publics drew on ima-
ges . . . that seem to express the fundamental beliefs that Canadians
hold about themselves (Francis 1997:10). By adopting these truisms,
these tourists provided continuity to the Canadian experience and
identity. Additionally, they incorporated the discursive strategy of mul-
ticulturalism which has differentiated them from their southern neigh-
bors (Francis 1997). At rst, the sensitivity to issues of race and racism
exhibited can be viewed as an innocent yet virtuous act characteristic of
all progressive approaches; however, an in-depth look elicits that it is a
discursive strategy that evokes various virtues of Canadianism in reac-
tion to the American presence. Such strategic discursive constructions
of self are contingent upon the deciencies of others and are referred
to as negative nationalism (Francis 1997). Another discursive strategy
adopted was that of humanitarianism in which participants displayed
an interest in memorialisation to prevent the reoccurrence of similar
atrocity (Ashworth 2002:363). The ideological predispositions that
underpin these established interpretive narratives of multiculturalism
and humanitarianism provide comfort, convenience, and familiarity;
facilitating the afrmation and maintenance of self-denition.
Conversely, the dominant publics drew upon shared discourses
founded upon tropes of American memory and nationalism. They in-
voked public imaginings to reunite with the past through warm
thoughts of home and heritage. They fantasized about the past and
reconstructed nostalgic, mythical narratives that enabled them to main-
tain a positive and memorable suture to their ancestral ties; one that
was unmarred by the contentious past of slavery. Interestingly, one
can draw parallels between the nature of their interpretations and
those of African Americans journeying on the Diaspora route. Both
groups are in search of a pristine and nurturing home which they
articulate by rendering any socio-political ills irrelevant, even antithet-
ical, to [their] voyage of self discovery and nurturance (Ebron
2000:920). For instance, as is illustrated in Ebrons (2000) work, the
454 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458
diasporic imaginings espoused by some African Americans exclude any
accounts of poverty or political instability as they pertain to the African
continent; this is not unlike the imaginings of the dominant publics
who invoked memories that silenced the slavery past. These groups
might differ in their recollections of the slavery past but by travelling
home, be it to the plantation or though a transatlantic journey to Afri-
ca, both reunite with their pastnot factually, but through con-
structed memory, fantasy, narrative and myth (Hall 1996:226).
In decoding the plantation, participants engaged in dialogism as
they drew upon common assumptions, thoughts, value systems, prac-
tices and traditions characteristic of their interpretive communities
(Bakhtin 1981). They constructed their own meanings of the planta-
tion through discursive strategies of presencing/absencing and, as
such, endorsed certain discourses while disenfranchising the possibility
of others. The variance both within and outside the groups was attrib-
utable to the argument that all texts function as a response to texts that
have gone before, and in anticipation of a response from texts that will
be created in the future (Bakhtin 1981). In essence, the Hampton was
part of a larger cognitive backdrop which inuenced the construction
of meaning as participants carried with them previous experiences
(Bruner 1994; Chronis 2005) while anticipating future occurrences.
CONCLUSION
This study sought to understand how preferred readings encoded
during production processes were decoded. Within this framework,
decodings were categorized as dominant, negotiated or oppositional
based on the degree of divergence from the original encoding (Hall
1980). The ndings revealed evidence in support of the dominant
and oppositional frames. The absence of the negotiated frame is attrib-
uted to the fact that the participants were relatively removed from the
intricate socio-political nexus that denes the Hampton and its sur-
rounding community. Tourists who adopted a dominant frame acqui-
esced to the preferred reading while those who espoused an
oppositional approach opposed the dominant text. The site as a cul-
tural text was decoded by tourists based on the varying meaning struc-
tures and knowledge frameworks within which they were respectively
situated. In this sense, members within each group were viewed as
belonging to the same interpretive community wherein certain ele-
ments of a given cultural object or event were rendered meaningful
(Berkowitz and Terkeurst 1999). Each public was united through
shared mnemonic socialization, discursive strategies and collective
interpretations of the plantation and/or slavery.
In addition to the dominant ideologies promoted by various inter-
pretive communities, the act of interpretation is further complicated
by the notion of identity because, to be a member of any human com-
munity is to situate oneself with regard to ones past, if only by rejecting
it (Olick and Robbins 1998:122). In fact, the articulation of a certain
cultural identity is often a key factor in the consumption of heritage
C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458 455
tourism (Breathnach 2006). Moreover, when tourists decide to visit a
site, they are choosing to partake in an experience that often becomes
a continuation of their psycho-social selves. It therefore follows that
individuals, be they dominant or resistant publics, construct meanings
which serve as a foundation on which to base their identities. These
meanings of the past are not static as they are constantly adjusted to
t the needs of those who espouse them, while rejecting counter mean-
ings that could potentially threaten group identity (Breathnach 2006).
Slavery related sites are increasing enacting the role of representing
the past in inclusive ways which challenge the use of metannaratives to
deect discussions of slavery (Alderman and Campbell 2008:353). This
task has been challenging as sites try to remove themselves from their
legacy of colonialism. This legacy has entailed amongst other things,
the unequal power relation between majority and ethnic minority
groups within society, a relation affected by colonial history, western
domination of non-westerners and by the discourse of Self and
Other (Lagerkvist 2006:52). As heritage audiences become increas-
ingly international and multicultural, slave related sites ought to craft
metanarratives that incorporate pluralistic perspectives. Representa-
tions focused on a tourist-centered ethos will allow for portrayals that
lure diverse populations and facilitate wider voice resonance within
depictions (Buzinde, Santos, and Smith 2006). Subsequent investiga-
tions are necessary to augment knowledge on how societies commem-
orate the plantation era. Such endeavors can commence by posing
questions such as: How do locals interpret plantation sites? And, how
are commemorated plantations constructing healing and holistic mes-
sages? These are important issues that could contribute to the global
dialogue on consumption of slavery related heritage.
AcknowledgementsThe authors thank Edward Bruner, Cameron McCarthy and William
Stewart for their assistance on the earlier part of this project as well as the ofcials at
Hampton Plantation for access to the site.
REFERENCES
Alderman, D. H., and R. M. Campbell
2008 Symbolic Excavation and the Artifact Politics of Remembering Slavery in
the American South. Southeastern Geographer 48(3):338353.
Alderman, D. H., and E. A. Modlin
2008 (In)Visibility of the Enslaved Within Online Plantation Tourism Market-
ing: Textual Analysis of North Carolina Websites. Journal of Travel and
Tourism Marketing 25(3/4):265281.
Ashworth, G.
2002 Holocaust Tourism: The Experience of KrakowKazimierz. International
Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 11:363367.
Bakhtin, M.,
1981. The Dialogic Imagination. Translated by C. Emerson and M. Holquist.
Austin: University of Texas Press.
Berkowitz, D., and J. Terkeurst
1999 Community as Interpretive Community: Rethinking the Journalist-Source
Relationship. Journal of Communication 49(3):125136.
456 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458
Breathnach, T.
2006 Looking For the Real Me: Locating the Self in Heritage Tourism. Journal
of Heritage Tourism 1(2):101120.
Bruner, E.
1993 Lincolns New Salem as a Contested Site. Museum Anthropology
17(3):1425.
1994 Abraham Lincoln as Authentic Reproduction: A Critique of Postmodern-
ism. American Anthropologist 96(2):397415.
1996 Tourism in Ghana: The Representation of Slavery and the Return of the
Black Diaspora. American Anthropologist 98(2):290304.
Buzinde, C.
2007 Representational Politics of Plantation Heritage: The Contemporary
Plantation as a Social Imaginary. In Globalizing Cultural Studies: Ethno-
graphic Interventions in Theory, Method and Policy, C. McCarthy, A. Durham,
L. Engel, A. Filmer, M. Giardina and M. Malagreca, eds., pp. 229252. New
York: Peter Lang.
Buzinde, C., and C. Santos
2008 Representations of Slavery. Annals of Tourism Research 35(2):
469488.
Buzinde, C., C. Santos, and S. Smith
2006 Ethnic Representations: Destination Imagery. Annals of Tourism Research
33:707728.
Chronis, A.
2005 Coconstructing Heritage at the Gettysburg Storyscape. Annals of Tourism
Research 32(2):386406.
Coffey, A., and P. Atkinson
1996 Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Commentary Research Strategies.
London: Sage Publications.
Dann, G., and A. Seaton
2001 Slavery, Contested Heritage and Thanatourism. In Slavery, Contested
Heritage and Thanatourism, G. Dann and A. Seaton, eds., pp. 130.
Binghamton: Haworth Hospitality Press.
Ebron, P.
2000 Tourists as Pilgrims: Commercial Fashioning of Transatlantic Politics.
American Ethnologist 26(4):910932.
Eichstedt, J. L., and S. Small
2002 Representations of Slavery: Race and Ideology in Southern Plantation
Museums. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Fish, S.
1980 Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Foucault, M.,
1977 Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated by A. Sheridan.
New York: Vintage Books.
Francis, D.
1997 National Dreams: Myth, Memory and Canadian History. Vancouver:
Arsenal Pulp Press.
Garrod, B., and A. Fyall
2000 Managing Heritage Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 27:682708.
Halewood, C., and K. Hannam
2001 Viking Heritage Tourism: Authenticity and Commodication. Annals of
Tourism Research 28:565580.
Hall, S.
1996 Introduction: Who Identity? In Questions of Cultural Identity, H. Stuart
and P. du Gay, eds., pp. 222236. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
1980 Encoding and Decoding. In Culture, Media, Language, S. Hall, D. Hobson,
A. Lowe and P. Willis, eds., pp. 117127. London: Hutchinson.
1975 Introduction. In Paper Voices: The Popular Press and Social Change 1935
1965, A. Smith, ed., pp. 1124. London: Chatto and Windus.
C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458 457
Herbert, D.
2001 Literary Places, Tourism and the Heritage Experience. Annals of Tourism
Research 28:312333.
Hewison, R.
1987 The Heritage Industry: Britain in a Climate of Decline. London: Methuen.
Holstein, J. A., and J. F. Gubrium
1995 The Active Interview. Qualitative Research Methods. London: Sage
Publications.
Lagerkvist, C.
2006 Empowerment and Anger: Learning How to Share Ownership of the
Museum. Museum and Society 4(2):5268.
Lowenthal, D.
1985 The Past is a Foreign Country. New York: Cambridge University Press.
McQuail, D.
2000 McQuails Mass Communication Theory (4
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Miles, M. B., and A. M. Huberman
1994 Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Olick, J. K., and J. Robbins
1998 Social Memory Studies: From Collective Memory to the Historical
Sociology of Mnemonic Practices. Annual Review of Sociology 25:105140.
Palmer, C.
2005 An Ethnography of Englishness: Experiencing Identity Through Tourism.
Annals of Tourism Research 32:727.
Patton, M. Q.
2002 Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Polkinghorne, D. E.
1988 Narrative Knowing and Human Sciences. New York: State University of
New York Press.
Poria, Y., R. Butler, and D. Airey
2004 Links between Tourists, Heritage, and Reasons for Visiting Heritage Sites.
Journal of Travel Research 43:1928.
Prentice, R., and V. Andersen
2007 Interpreting Heritage Essentialisms: Familiarity and Felt History. Tourism
Management 28:661676.
Pretes, M.
2003 Tourism and Nationalism. Annals of Tourism Research 30(1):125142.
Pritchard, A., and N. Morgan
2003 Mythic Geographies of Representation and Identity: Contemporary
Postcards of Wales. Tourism and Cultural Change 1(2):111130.
SCSPSSouth Carolina State Park Service
2006 State Park Service <http://www.southcarolinaparks.com>.
Wilder, D. L.
2006 Commemorating, Understanding and Overcoming. <http://www.
usnationalslaverymuseum.org/pdf/caseStatement.pdf>.
Zelizer, B.
1993 Journalists as Interpretive Communities. Critical Studies in Mass Commu-
nication 10:219237.
Submitted 4 June 2008. Resubmitted 11 October 2008. Resubmitted 29 January 2009. Final
Version 25 February 2009. Accepted 26 February 2009. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating
Editor: Lee Jolliffe
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
458 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439458