|
This paper discuss the paradigm shift of Australian Indigenous cultural heritage management and its inspiration to the Taiwanese society. In Australian settings, the notion of “landscape” is critical in cultural heritage-identity-history matrix. This paper argues that the paradigm shift of “landscape” narratives in the Australian history can be categorized into three phases: wildness, bush and country. In each periods, the predominant “landscape” narrative represents ethnic relations at that certain period of time. Furthermore, ethnic relations was institutionalized into regulations of Indigenous cultural heritage management. Through discussions, this paper argues (1) the dichotomy of tangible/intangible cultural heritage does not reflect the Indigenous peoples’ ontological understandings of heritage; (2) acknowledgement of the importance of contemporary history in Indigenous cultural heritage management instead of fossilization of Indigenous culture; (3) Indigenous peoples’ participation is critical in sustainable Indigenous cultural heritage management. |
