World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers



Forum: Start | Profile | Search |         Website: Start | The List | Community |
Top 50 Missing www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / Top 50 Missing /  
 

Top 50 Missing - Voting 2014

 
 
Page  Page 8 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#106 | Posted: 4 Mar 2014 11:06 | Edited by: winterkjm 
hubert:
I guess there might be some interesting proposals, which we (the active forum members) do not consider.
kkanekahn

Solivagant:
after every election in a democratic country it is perfectly normal to try to identify why the result was what it was

Both thoughtful posts. In reply to Hubert, I think the proposal period is very important. We had some great suggestions and discussion, but it was limited to 16 people. Certainly, our Top 50 missing would have benefited greatly from even more participation and alternative perspectives on world heritage.

Concerning Solivagant, thank you for clarifying my thoughts better than myself! I am actually very happy with the whole process and voting result. I am just trying to analyze some of the results, and minor discrepancies from my perspective.

There is a lot of data from this list. (Expanding from Solivagants a - c)

d. The list seems to indicate that monumental "iconic" sites, which have millions of visitors yearly did overall very well. Example: Neuschwanstein Castle, Golden Gate Bridge, Mount Rushmore. This may indicate users preference to vote for nominations they visited, no? Yes, all three sites are stunning, but these type of sites may indicate a more "Western" perspective of iconic or classic "world class" sites. Looking on our voting population, this may be substantiated by the data. (I do not consider a vote for these nominations as essentially wrong or unjustified)

Author hubert
Partaker
#107 | Posted: 4 Mar 2014 11:32 
I don't want to be misunderstood. I did not say that the results are not respected or regarded as unjustified. And 'unhappy' is probably the wrong word.
My point is: One reason for the result may be that some voter voted for popular sites and did not take into account criteria such as authenticity, integrity, filling-a-gap. But we (those who have made ​​the proposals) also did not follow consequently and strictly these criteria.

Author Khuft
Partaker
#108 | Posted: 4 Mar 2014 12:06 
hubert:
did not take into account criteria such as authenticity, integrity, filling-a-gap. But we (those who have made ​​the proposals) also did not follow consequently and strictly these criteria


Indeed. But let's not forget that also among our group there are divergent opinions on these criteria. As people may have noticed, I am a fan of a broad interpretation of these criteria, and of a broad WHL - thus all these iconic sites (Mt Rushmore, Golden Gate Bridge, Neuschwanstein) have a place in my personal WHL. Others of course see this differently.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#109 | Posted: 4 Mar 2014 12:57 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Khuft:
I am a fan of a broad interpretation of these criteria,


So presumably Neuschwanstein would be "authentic" for a "2nd half of 19C Romanesque Revival" Palace? I would have no problem with that!
But I did mark Babylon down compared with Ur on the basis of it having been messed about with so much by Saddam Hussain such that it apparently hardly justifies the term "authentic" unless it is inscribed as being an authentic "Pastiche by a late 20c megalomaniac"!

Perhaps we could have a little competition for devising a term describing what Mt Rushmore is "authentic" as?
"Early 20C Imperial Monument"?

Author Khuft
Partaker
#110 | Posted: 4 Mar 2014 13:33 | Edited by: Khuft 
On Neuschwanstein - exactly! Indeed, 19th century revival is already featured on list - eg in the cultural landscape of Sintra, which features a similarly fantastic royal palace.

I agree with you on Babylon - the reconstructed Ishtar Gate is not authentic at all, but the other remains of babylon (possibly still unexcavated) would probably be.

Mount Rushmore is for me the new Madara Rider - monumental sculpture for the praise of past leaders (this time in a democratic context).

I know Mt Rushmore is unloved by many here, but is it really any different from eg the Sphinx (giant sculpture of pharaoh Chephren's head)? Is it any more megalomaniac than the Terracotta Army? Did it not inspire other countries to start carving/building giant effigies of past leaders?

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#111 | Posted: 4 Mar 2014 16:15 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Solivagant:
Early 20C Imperial Monument
Khuft:
(this time in a democratic context)

I have been to Mt. Rushmore, it truly is a beautiful monument, and the process to carve/blast/chisel the granite is nothing short of remarkable.

My problem with Mt. Rushmore is that is was constructed in an area sacred to the Lakota people. the mountain used to be called "six grandfathers". Carving American presidents into a granite mountain considered important to Native Americans certainly fits into Solivagant's conception of the monument as a Early 20th Century Imperial Monument.

Now, I am certainly not advocating the destruction of the monument! Nor am I arguing against preservation, but in my mind it has more place on a National heritage list then with UNESCO.

Many Egyptian, Chinese, or other ancient cultures have numerous giant sculptures or effigies, but by in large these represent cultures that no longer exist and often represent the pinnacle of that civilizations technology, artistry, or power. Does Mt. Rushmore represent this for the United States? Mt. Rushmore includes a President that died in 1919, less than 100 years ago. This is very different than the Statue of Liberty, which is linked to ideals and principles just as much or more than a specific nation. Mt. Rushmore is a memorial to American Presidents.

Despite my enjoyment of visiting Mt. Rushmore, and the stunning landscape of the monument, it is one of those iconic sites that just might not justify world heritage consideration. When the monument was originally created it was met with strong opposition from Native Americans, and today it still insights some controversy.

Author meltwaterfalls
Partaker
#112 | Posted: 4 Mar 2014 18:15 
Just to chime in I think the debate is rather healthy on this, and is a very valuable part of the whole process. It is interesting to pick apart how the results were arrived at.

In fairness to Mt Rushmore I think it has a fairly decent case for inscription on the basis of a
Solivagant:
Early 20C Imperial Monument

Perhaps this phase of US history is well covered already (Independence Hall, Monticello, Statue of Liberty) but it is basically a grander, modern era version of already inscribed sites such as Bisotun and the Madara Rider*. And surely its role in North by North West can justify criteria (vi) to be directly or tangibly associated with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance. I say that only partially in jest.

One that stood out for me that hasn't been commented on yet is Alexandria. Whilst I understand the appeal of a place that plays such an important role historically is there really much there?
I know there are some underwater relics but I wouldn't have thought enough for a Top 20 placing.
Or is the concept surrounding the library enough to merit a place, as architecturally the new library is nice but not outstanding.

*sorry Khuft I wrote the Madara rider comparison before realising you had already said the same thing

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#113 | Posted: 4 Mar 2014 18:37 | Edited by: winterkjm 
winterkjm:
constructed in an area sacred to the Lakota people

This fact will prevent Mt. Rushmore from becoming a world heritage site or even being considered any time soon. Indeed, the Pine Ridge Reservation is located nearby and traditionally the Black Hills was part of Lakota territory and even guaranteed by treaties with the United States. This means there will (likely) be considerable opposition by nearby tribes of a Mt. Rushmore WHS.

This region has a sensitive and abhorrent history of massacres (Wounded Knee), forced relocation, and cultural genocide. "The monument also provokes controversy because some allege that underlying it is the theme of racial superiority legitimized by the idea of Manifest Destiny." URL

Indeed, the United Nations has suggested returning some areas of the Black Hills to the various Native American claimants. Therefore, for a Mt. Rushmore nomination to ever be considered, there would have to be Native American support, which as it stands today is fairly unlikely.

One interesting and perhaps positive note, the previous Park Superintendent of Mt. Rushmore is Native American (The first to hold this post). "With the appointment of a Native American to the superintendent position, the National Park Service opened the door for an official reexamination of the cultural biases inherent in the Mount Rushmore memorial." URL

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#114 | Posted: 5 Mar 2014 03:44 | Edited by: Solivagant 
meltwaterfalls:
Whilst I understand the appeal of a place that plays such an important role historically is there really much there?
I know there are some underwater relics but I wouldn't have thought enough for a Top 20 placing.


There has been a fair deal of publicity about the underwater remains and some impressive photos/movies of "timeless" statues surrounded by fish etc. As I understand it 2 significant remains have been discovered - Cleopatra's Palace and the Pharos of Alexandria. The whole idea of uncovering and preserving in situ underwater remains is both worthwhile and catches people's imagination. UNESCO supports it too via its "Convention for the Protection of Underwater Heritage". I was a bit surprised it got as high as it did but I can understand it. I didn't vote for it but I have no problems with it being among the "top 50 missing". The library is another matter.

Author Euloroo
Partaker
#115 | Posted: 5 Mar 2014 07:26 | Edited by: Euloroo 
meltwaterfalls:
Alexandria... is there really much there?

The TL description is perhaps over-egged but there is significant authenticity and integrity with:
- The Serapeum of Alexandria and Pompey's Pillar
- Kom el-Dikka - 4Ha roman site including ampitheatre
- Catacombs of Kom el Shoqafa

Author meltwaterfalls
Partaker
#116 | Posted: 5 Mar 2014 10:27 
Hmm, I must admit I had always been of the impression that there was nothing of interest in Alexandria, seems I may need to revisit that assumption. Thanks for the pointers.

It seems that it really should be inscribed under criteria (vi) to be directly or tangibly associated with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance.
Portsmouth is famous city and a football team. It is also called Pompey because of the following reasons.

* reliable evidence records a group of Portsmouth-based sailors, who scaled Pompey's Pillar near Alexandria, Egypt, in 1781 and became known as the 'Pompey Boys'.

Justification for a Top 20 spot for me then :)

Page  Page 8 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
Top 50 Missing www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / Top 50 Missing /
 Top 50 Missing - Voting 2014

Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message


 ?
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first.

 
 
 
www.worldheritagesite.org Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®
 ⇑